- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Potential of the USA in soccer
Posted on 4/23/12 at 10:11 am to WarSlamEagle
Posted on 4/23/12 at 10:11 am to WarSlamEagle
:spoolsh:
1
Posted on 4/23/12 at 10:19 am to EastcoastEER
Americans have an obsession with size, which I don't think would translate particularly well to a sport so focused on a low center of gravity. To put it bluntly, the type of athlete that we need is smaller. The modern international game has never favored physical play, so we wouldn't gain a particular advantage by having a large team.
In truth, we attract pretty good athletes for being so low on the tier of importance for the average American. Michael Bradley is a behemoth, 6-2, 175, and he can run all day. If we get any bigger than that we start sacrificing technique, speed, and workrate. A large player is fine for CB , GK, or striker, but even then they need a superb sense of balance.
This is not to say that Lebron on a soccer pitch isn't a wet dream, but the truth of it is that I'm not confident enough in our youth system to give him the technique which would help his athletic skills shine. The fact of the matter is that we don't do a good job with the athletes we do have, so there are no assurances that with better athletes, their technique would improve.
In truth, we attract pretty good athletes for being so low on the tier of importance for the average American. Michael Bradley is a behemoth, 6-2, 175, and he can run all day. If we get any bigger than that we start sacrificing technique, speed, and workrate. A large player is fine for CB , GK, or striker, but even then they need a superb sense of balance.
This is not to say that Lebron on a soccer pitch isn't a wet dream, but the truth of it is that I'm not confident enough in our youth system to give him the technique which would help his athletic skills shine. The fact of the matter is that we don't do a good job with the athletes we do have, so there are no assurances that with better athletes, their technique would improve.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 10:48 am to crazy4lsu
lol but sadly you are mostly right. At the current time we don't the have the ability to develop talent. I am not entirely convinced that if we HAD the ability to properly develop true top flight WC level talent that would couldn't make a team full of "physical freak" types work. The reason it seems so odd now is because it's never been done - in the past big=slow/uncoordinated.
With modern day athletes we are currently producing, that is simply not the case. Even 10 years ago the idea of 6'-5" and bigger guys, who can move with insane speed, agility, and balance, was unheard of.
And even if you limit the really big bodies to the back line, GK, and strikers - that is still like 2/3's of your team.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 11:36 am to EastcoastEER
The USA had their shot a few years ago, but with emerging countries in Africa and Asia, those players are now filling Euro rosters, and American players on the outside looking in.
Why? I'll tell you why.
My kids were really good soccer players and played club ball until U10 and U12. But they also excelled in other mainstream sports and eventually chose them over soccer. The main reason is this soccer mentality that you better be all-in for soccer or you're out.
The young club teams are full of players who basically aren't any good at any other sport. The multi-sport athletes are just as good just showing up, vs those full time soccer kids. But since the parents of those full time kids are all-in with soccer, they see to it that their kids are pushed up over the kids who just play soccer for fun.
Club soccer teams therefore are very antagonistic towards athletes who choose to play any other sport, forcing the hands of those players. Pretty much any player I knew who was in this position chose football, basketball or baseball over soccer.
Therefore many great athletes are forced out of soccer at an early age. Soccer really cannot afford to do this. We went the baseball/basketball route and while the parents can be meddling, nothing seems to be worse than a soccer mom scorned. Because of soccer's lack of general interest, soccer parents tend to really be defensive about their kids' sport. It's not just a religion among them, it's a fanatical religion.
In a weird way, the club soccer scene grew soccer, but now at the same time, it's holding it back. My kids now and then try to play soccer with friends just for fun, only to get run off of the club fields, even though no practice is going on and basically they are practice fields on public facilities. That's just snobbery, and indicative of their overprotective attitudes toward anyone outside of their little insular world.
Believe me, I have no sour grapes here, I was so glad when they chose to quit soccer. Even though they have excelled in another mainstream sports, they never were discouraged from playing different sports by any coach or program. Try that with club soccer.
The rest of the world has soccer as their number one goal, the mainstream. Competition is great for talent. Whoever is good, plays - you don't need rich parents. Club soccer in USA has too much parental meddling.
Deny it all you want, but how else can you explain the USA being just terrible on the world stage, despite youth soccer being the "number one" organized youth activity, and millions and millions of kids taking part???
Pass the juice boxes and bananas......
Why? I'll tell you why.
My kids were really good soccer players and played club ball until U10 and U12. But they also excelled in other mainstream sports and eventually chose them over soccer. The main reason is this soccer mentality that you better be all-in for soccer or you're out.
The young club teams are full of players who basically aren't any good at any other sport. The multi-sport athletes are just as good just showing up, vs those full time soccer kids. But since the parents of those full time kids are all-in with soccer, they see to it that their kids are pushed up over the kids who just play soccer for fun.
Club soccer teams therefore are very antagonistic towards athletes who choose to play any other sport, forcing the hands of those players. Pretty much any player I knew who was in this position chose football, basketball or baseball over soccer.
Therefore many great athletes are forced out of soccer at an early age. Soccer really cannot afford to do this. We went the baseball/basketball route and while the parents can be meddling, nothing seems to be worse than a soccer mom scorned. Because of soccer's lack of general interest, soccer parents tend to really be defensive about their kids' sport. It's not just a religion among them, it's a fanatical religion.
In a weird way, the club soccer scene grew soccer, but now at the same time, it's holding it back. My kids now and then try to play soccer with friends just for fun, only to get run off of the club fields, even though no practice is going on and basically they are practice fields on public facilities. That's just snobbery, and indicative of their overprotective attitudes toward anyone outside of their little insular world.
Believe me, I have no sour grapes here, I was so glad when they chose to quit soccer. Even though they have excelled in another mainstream sports, they never were discouraged from playing different sports by any coach or program. Try that with club soccer.
The rest of the world has soccer as their number one goal, the mainstream. Competition is great for talent. Whoever is good, plays - you don't need rich parents. Club soccer in USA has too much parental meddling.
Deny it all you want, but how else can you explain the USA being just terrible on the world stage, despite youth soccer being the "number one" organized youth activity, and millions and millions of kids taking part???
Pass the juice boxes and bananas......
Posted on 4/23/12 at 12:24 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
To put it bluntly, the type of athlete that we need is smaller.
the thing is we produce insane guys who are as quick as the prototype you're thinking but can be 6-3+
i mean take lebron. he's 6-9, 270 or so and is faster and quicker than RvP. obviously we can't project a single person's skill development, but nothing PHYSICALLY prohibits him (balance, agility, coordination, etc) from developing soccer skill
that's why it's always a fun game to play. skill is skill. but if we could somehow develop top flight skill (which we don't really do, regardless of athleticism) in our "freaks," it would be a sight to see
quote:
In truth, we attract pretty good athletes for being so low on the tier of importance for the average American
i agree
quote:
If we get any bigger than that we start sacrificing technique, speed, and workrate.
workrate? possibly, but that's a girth/strength issue and not a height issue
skill? skill is skill is skill. it's a learned trait. as long as there is the necessary coordination, it can be learned
speed? not with the mythical "freak" athlete
quote:
The fact of the matter is that we don't do a good job with the athletes we do have, so there are no assurances that with better athletes, their technique would improve.
agreed
our skill development sucks, especially considering how much we invest in total
Posted on 4/23/12 at 12:27 pm to MetTiger
quote:
The main reason is this soccer mentality that you better be all-in for soccer or you're out.
this is taking over other skill-based sports
quote:
Club soccer in USA has too much parental meddling.
i think the problem is American club soccer as an institution
Posted on 4/23/12 at 12:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i think the problem is American club soccer as an institution
Absolutely. Except in the most major of markets, the local club organization is the only club in town. If your kid is getting the raw end because some parent has the coach in his pocket, unless you have a private plane, you're out of luck.
Rewind to Europe. In every country, there is one governing body overseeing all clubs on all levels. Every town has it's own club, and many age and skill levels at that. It's much harder (if not impossible) for parents to get a chokehold on the club. If your kid is getting a raw deal, all he needs to do is drive 5-10 miles away and another club will be more than happy to have him on your team.
Not only that. If a club gets a reputation for those kind of parental hijinks, then they will not be able to attract any kind of talent who want to have a straight up club. I'm sure there are clubs in Europe who wallow in parental involvement, but if you want to win - and avoid relegation - you get the best players you can and you play the best of those players.
Not happy about it? Then find a team in a lower classification be a star there. Players move around all the time over there. Some better players stay with the village team as a "home town discount", but eventually they leave for greener pastures.
Club Soccer USA does not operate this way. The judge and jury are the club, and often, the parental money that goes with it.
Example, the Acme FC U17 team uses a two striker formation, and historical rich parent Player A and Player B have been in those positions since U6. Then a couple of poor kids from Honduras join the program and are light years ahead of A and B. How many think they become the strikers, with A & B going to the bench or other positions?
And if the Hondurans sit the bench, what real alternative do they have in a club program of equal stature? None, because there is only one club in town.
Again, I am not bashing US Soccer for spite. I know quite a bit more about world soccer than most soccer parents. I love to watch it on TV for purely entertainment purposes. My comments are solely on the OP subject title.
MILLIONS of kids in the last 20 years have played organized soccer, probably more than even in baseball or basketball. Many of these players come from well to do families and can afford the best lessons. So again, where are the results on the national stage? Youth soccer is now in the 2nd generation.
Stop drinking the soccer Kool-Aid and open your eyes. The deniers are usually the ones that will provide you with the actual answer as to why. The proof is in the pudding. And the English like pudding, just wait and see in the Olympics - oh, right, where the USA will NOT be because we couldn't do the job against - tiny El Salvador???
The upper level programs may be eventually doing the right thing, but the real politics (and foundations of the eventual programs) are formulated in the U6-U12 years, where the parental politics are at their worst.
This post was edited on 4/23/12 at 1:04 pm
Posted on 4/23/12 at 1:22 pm to MetTiger
quote:
but how else can you explain the USA being just terrible on the world stage
Define "just terrible."
Posted on 4/23/12 at 1:26 pm to MetTiger
quote:
Example, the Acme FC U17 team uses a two striker formation, and historical rich parent Player A and Player B have been in those positions since U6. Then a couple of poor kids from Honduras join the program and are light years ahead of A and B. How many think they become the strikers, with A & B going to the bench or other positions?
You do realize this happens at every level of soccer, right? Where an "undeserving, but connected" player is playing ahead of more skilled players.
You come off as though you (or your Little Johnny) was "wronged" by the evils of club soccer.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 2:23 pm to fightingtigers98
In addition to most that has already been said here, I also think universities may play a big role. If there are more scholarships for the sport, hence a bigger competitive conference at that level, high school students and their parents will be more interested in enrolling at a young age, having long years into the sport.
This post was edited on 4/23/12 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 4/23/12 at 2:37 pm to RollTide4Ever
quote:
Send the best youth overseas.
That will make those individual players better, but the best national teams have their players play in the domestic league. Germany, Spain, France, England, holland, ect have always been top of the line because their players play together professionally. The main difference between Spain and Argentina is that spain's great players play together every day, and argentina's are spread across the globe.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 2:42 pm to Nacho Tigre
Unfortuanetly universities are part of the problem.. Spending 4 years at Akron isn't nearly as productive as playing with your club.. But without the surety of finances a lot of Americans won't take the same path as the euros who get out of high school at 16/17 and go straight to full time soccer
Posted on 4/23/12 at 3:14 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:
universities are part of the problem
This. I would be 100% behind getting rid of the collegiate soccer programs to start up smaller clubs and academies
Posted on 4/23/12 at 3:39 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:
Unfortuanetly universities are part of the problem.. Spending 4 years at Akron isn't nearly as productive as playing with your club.. But without the surety of finances a lot of Americans won't take the same path as the euros who get out of high school at 16/17 and go straight to full time soccer
Never saw it from this perspective, and it does make sense. It might affect those who do not make it in soccer, as in not getting a higher education at the end.
I do see alot more kids now practicing the sport, way more than just 10 years ago. Maybe it's a matter of time an the US is on the right path. I also think being in CONCACAF is not that challenging for the USNMT.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 4:52 pm to Sheep
quote:
You come off as though you (or your Little Johnny) was "wronged" by the evils of club soccer.
I knew it would be a matter of time before the enablers came on here. Did you not read that my kids just wanted to play other sports. They started all the time and were very good. But they didn't want to give up baseball and basketball.
The things I observed only affected me to the extent of not trying to convince them not to give up soccer. I hated seeing some of this stuff as it pertained to other players, and I was all too glad to be done with it.
If any of you soccer apologist parents want to explain why you're satisified with the US getting to a World Cup final eight, and thinking that is a great thing, then maybe you'll understand why soccer basically get zero national attention from the general population.
Americans want winners, not 8th place. And we're in 8th place why? Because the best athletes are NOT playing soccer. And there's a reason for that. I'm just telling you why my kids stopped playing. It wasn't because they weren't having fun, or that they weren't playing. It was because as they got older, club soccer made it totally incompatible to play the other sports.
Until soccer can WANT to make kids play soccer as a primary sport, the US will not go anywhere. It's all about the best athletes. If you can't ultimately field a competitive team amongst millions of players, then you all tell me what is wrong?
Keep your heads in the sand, and keep convincing yourself that the world revolves around soccer in this country among young people. Maybe Latin speaking young people, but oh, looking at club rosters, does it reflect that interest.
If you want success, you have to find a way to change this system, clubs and colleges, to provide a better way to encourage the better athletes to play.
Again, I love to watch the game, but I don't see any more chance of the US winning the World Cup now as I did 15 years ago.
PS: This happens in travel baseball to an extent, but as most teams are not in huge clubs, players can move freely to other teams.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 5:21 pm to MetTiger
quote:
Again, I love to watch the game, but I don't see any more chance of the US winning the World Cup now as I did 15 years ago.
If you don't think that the American game has improved over the past 15 years, then there's no hope for any of us to say anything to you.
...but I'll try anyway.
Runner-up at the 2009 Confederations Cup, including an upset of the mighty Spaniards?
Three straight appearances in the knockout rounds of the World Cup? (Better than not getting out of group stage.)
First-ever win over Italy this year?
Our U-23 team, despite their blunder at Olympic qualifying, is loaded with potential studs.
We are rising. Do I think we can win a World Cup in 2014 or 2018? Probably not. Are we closer to getting than we were before? Of course.
This post was edited on 4/23/12 at 5:24 pm
Posted on 4/23/12 at 5:45 pm to MetTiger
The problem is club soccer costs a good bit of money. The main sports our freak athletes play, btw let's be honest and admit we're mainly referring to black athletes, are basketball and football. Football is all about the high schools, and the high schools provide all the equipment and training. Basketball has AAU, sponsored by all the athlete show companies. Both sports are much easier for african-american athletes from poor income families to play. Plus, soccer doesn't exactly have a reputation for getting people out of the ghetto, like football and basketball do. Funnily enough, a very high proportion of the best players in Europe and South America come from poor income backgrounds. Soccer is their means of escape
Posted on 4/23/12 at 5:54 pm to tigerfan88
quote:
Soccer is their means of escape
It is the "way out" sport of the planet except for a a very small amount of countries. Like the US, Dominican Republic and a handful of others.
Posted on 4/23/12 at 6:36 pm to inelishaitrust
quote:
That will make those individual players better, but the best national teams have their players play in the domestic league. Germany, Spain, France, England, holland, ect have always been top of the line because their players play together professionally. The main difference between Spain and Argentina is that spain's great players play together every day, and argentina's are spread across the globe.
I don't know that I agree with that premise. I agree about Spain's recent advantage but Barca/ Spain almost seems more the exception than the rule even with countries with top domestic leagues + huge international success like Germany and Italy.
A strong domestic league certainly helps development immensely but WC winning Brazilian and French teams had most top players playing in Serie A, La Liga and EPL. Holland hardly has any top players actually in Eredivisie. Italy's been by far the most successful team where almost all the NT play in the domestic league but they've been pretty scattered about the top 4-5 teams.
This post was edited on 4/23/12 at 6:45 pm
Posted on 4/23/12 at 6:47 pm to wm72
quote:
A strong domestic league certainly helps development immensely but WC winning Brazilian and French teams had most top players playing in Serie A, La Liga and EPL. Holland hardly has any top players from Eredivisie. Italy's been by far the most successful team where almost all the NT players in the domestic league but they've been pretty scattered about the top 4-5 teams.
You look at when those national teams were winning world cups, and their domestic league were at all time highs. The super club thing is where it's at as far as the international game is concerned.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News