Pulisic's thoughts on the US development system

[LIuconn]

It's lacking, and he hints he may not have broken through had he signed with an MLS club. Truth

1,834 Days | By Christian Pulisic

 

[LIuconn]

Waiting for Don Garber's response on MLSsoccer.com in 3....2.....1...

 

[meyers7]

Read that yesterday, really good article. Impressive, if he actually wrote that himself.

 

[ZooCougar]

Waiting for Don Garber's response on MLSsoccer.com in 3....2.....1...

MLS has to change. The business model and the nature of the competition really does keep the kids from getting minutes. Everyone has seen how this transfers to the national team.

 

[Excalibur]

As Pulisic says, there are two problems -- the U.S. development system failing to foster competition among the best players, and the exclusionary European rules keeping our best players out during key developmental years. We need to find a way to consolidate talent in the U.S. to solve the problem of coddling star players, but we can't afford to wait for that to happen. In an ideal world, we find a way to get our top teenage talent into Europe, and the MLS development system is filled with overlooked guys with huge chips on their shoulders.

 

[LIuconn]

Also need great coaches coaching in the younger ranks. Too often, and by nobody's fault, coaches aim to be among the senior squads - whether it's college or club

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Read that yesterday, really good article. Impressive, if he actually wrote that himself.

Maturity

 

[meyers7]

Hercules goes off on Bruce's "no players are falling through the cracks".

Gomez: I'm the perfect example of why Arena's wrong

 

[Waquoit]

Hercules goes off on Bruce's "no players are falling through the cracks".

Gomez: I'm the perfect example of why Arena's wrong

Gomez is so right. My blood is boiling.

 

[LIuconn]

"I would love to see one of these hotshot teams from Europe come here and play in our CONCACAF qualifying, to really get a taste of this and see what that’s about. This is very challenging. This is like survival of the fittest. They could do one of those TV shows on this. Who will survive in the end? That’s basically what this is."

he's so dense

 

[Chuck]

Gomez is so right. My blood is boiling.

This may be a be controversial, but is the system broken in more ways than argued, or just isn't the kind of system that will best work in the US? My knowledge is primarily based on my kids playing at a competitive town club at the highest level of our regional league (which, from what I'm told would compete with 2nd or 3rd division EDP). My kids are at their ceiling with the teams and their careers will most likely end after 12th grade like mine did.

We have three kids (2 boys and 1 girl) in our town at my kids age that are exceptional talents. All three were pursued by what I believe are top academies. One of them was all-in and actually spent some time in England with his team as a 9 year old. His family moved to California and from what I hear he is not playing at the same level anymore. The other boy just turned 11 (he moved up to my son's team with the age change). He made the top team for his academy. He is planning on dropping down a level or leaving altogether because he loves soccer enough to make it his only sport, but he is burnt out from the constant travel and wants to play with his friends (he used to double card). The girl left her academy team last year because she also likes lacrosse and her soccer team told her she had to give them priority even in spring.

I don't know if any of these kids would've been national-level players, but it seems like having them cut off from that future at age 11 because they wanted a more rounded childhood seems a bit early. I know that kids in Europe and South America basically become full-time soccer players at a young age, while attending school with their academy. Is that the preferred solution here? Would that work? I know some of you on this board have some very talented kids, what do you think would be palatable?

 

[Excalibur]

This may be a be controversial, but is the system broken in more ways than argued, or just isn't the kind of system that will best work in the US? My knowledge is primarily based on my kids playing at a competitive town club at the highest level of our regional league (which, from what I'm told would compete with 2nd or 3rd division EDP). My kids are at their ceiling with the teams and their careers will most likely end after 12th grade like mine did.

We have three kids (2 boys and 1 girl) in our town at my kids age that are exceptional talents. All three were pursued by what I believe are top academies. One of them was all-in and actually spent some time in England with his team as a 9 year old. His family moved to California and from what I hear he is not playing at the same level anymore. The other boy just turned 11 (he moved up to my son's team with the age change). He made the top team for his academy. He is planning on dropping down a level or leaving altogether because he loves soccer enough to make it his only sport, but he is burnt out from the constant travel and wants to play with his friends (he used to double card). The girl left her academy team last year because she also likes lacrosse and her soccer team told her she had to give them priority even in spring.

I don't know if any of these kids would've been national-level players, but it seems like having them cut off from that future at age 11 because they wanted a more rounded childhood seems a bit early. I know that kids in Europe and South America basically become full-time soccer players at a young age, while attending school with their academy. Is that the preferred solution here? Would that work? I know some of you on this board have some very talented kids, what do you think would be palatable?

If Pulisic is right -- and I think he is -- in saying that the 16-18 years are most important, I don't think it really matters. I do think that kids burn out by being asked to specialize too early, but those kids would burn out at 15 instead of 12-13. That said, I don't think forcing kids to do only one sport makes any sense in all but the rarest of circumstances, and forcing them to do it at 9-10 years old is crazy. My son plays with the select team because he doesn't want the year-round commitment of playing with a premier club. I think that's the right decision for all of the reasons cited above.

 

[Waquoit]

This may be a be controversial, but is the system broken in more ways than argued, or just isn't the kind of system that will best work in the US?

I have no idea. I just know that saying "there isn't a problem", is a problem. Arena and all those connected have to go.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Arena and all those connected have to go.

Inexplicably, Gulati appears to sincerely believe he is indispensable. Quite the contrary, cut off the head of the snake and his right-hand (defenders) venom!

 

[ZooCougar]

This may be a be controversial, but is the system broken in more ways than argued, or just isn't the kind of system that will best work in the US? My knowledge is primarily based on my kids playing at a competitive town club at the highest level of our regional league (which, from what I'm told would compete with 2nd or 3rd division EDP). My kids are at their ceiling with the teams and their careers will most likely end after 12th grade like mine did.

We have three kids (2 boys and 1 girl) in our town at my kids age that are exceptional talents. All three were pursued by what I believe are top academies. One of them was all-in and actually spent some time in England with his team as a 9 year old. His family moved to California and from what I hear he is not playing at the same level anymore. The other boy just turned 11 (he moved up to my son's team with the age change). He made the top team for his academy. He is planning on dropping down a level or leaving altogether because he loves soccer enough to make it his only sport, but he is burnt out from the constant travel and wants to play with his friends (he used to double card). The girl left her academy team last year because she also likes lacrosse and her soccer team told her she had to give them priority even in spring.

I don't know if any of these kids would've been national-level players, but it seems like having them cut off from that future at age 11 because they wanted a more rounded childhood seems a bit early. I know that kids in Europe and South America basically become full-time soccer players at a young age, while attending school with their academy. Is that the preferred solution here? Would that work? I know some of you on this board have some very talented kids, what do you think would be palatable?

There are too many layers to this, but the biggest gap we have is when a player turns 16/17. We have to get those top kids into professional environments at that point.

 

[ZooCougar]

I have no idea. I just know that saying "there isn't a problem", is a problem. Arena and all those connected have to go.

Yup, you can’t do nothing and expect a different result.

 

[SAMCRO]

I'm not optimistic anything is going to change in the near or mid term. The majority of decision makers very high up in US Soccer agree with Arena, and there are people (also decision makers) who are lining their pockets with the current set up. Nothing to see here....all is well.

 

[ZooCougar]

I'm not optimistic anything is going to change in the near or mid term. The majority of decision makers very high up in US Soccer agree with Arena, and there are people (also decision makers) who are lining their pockets with the current set up. Nothing to see here....all is well.

Exactly, youth soccer is an effective method of seperating parents from their money.

 

[HuskyHawk]

There are too many layers to this, but the biggest gap we have is when a player turns 16/17. We have to get those top kids into professional environments at that point.

So how do you do this without jeopardizing the future for the kid? I'm going to speculate a bit here, and make some assumptions.

I believe that in much of the world, soccer/football is a sport of the poor. So taking a 16 year old Brazilian with mediocre prospects outside of football, and committing him to soccer, is an easy choice. Even in Europe, I don't think the best players tend to come from wealthy families, although I have no explicit evidence of this.

In the USA, Soccer is a suburban sport played predominantly be people with money. If I'm such a parent (and I am), there is no way in hell all my kid's eggs go in the soccer basket. The University system we've established works to mitigate this risk, parents can see their kid go to college and his athletic training comes with a fail-safe for a non-athletic future. In the U.S., college soccer isn't good enough and happens too late, so this doesn't work. But I believe that you will need to find a way for parents to feel their kid is protected, even if they don't make it as a pro.

Geographic diversity also works against the USA. If we have big camps, with a good private high school as part of the package, that works....if the kid can go there. How often is that the case? How many families would move on the off chance that their teenager becomes a pro soccer player, especially since MLS players don't earn that much anyway. How many moms want their teen to go hundreds of miles away to boarding school? In Europe, you can put on in say, Paris, and cover 1/2 of the population of France. Same with Amsterdam. It becomes feasible. Here? How do you do that? Some kid from suburban St. Louis is going to go to Atlanta? How?

I think the approach the U.S. takes needs to be a bit different. Not sure how we solve these problems.

 

[ZooCougar]

So how do you do this without jeopardizing the future for the kid? I'm going to speculate a bit here, and make some assumptions.

I believe that in much of the world, soccer/football is a sport of the poor. So taking a 16 year old Brazilian with mediocre prospects outside of football, and committing him to soccer, is an easy choice. Even in Europe, I don't think the best players tend to come from wealthy families, although I have no explicit evidence of this.

In the USA, Soccer is a suburban sport played predominantly be people with money. If I'm such a parent (and I am), there is no way in hell all my kid's eggs go in the soccer basket. The University system we've established works to mitigate this risk, parents can see their kid go to college and his athletic training comes with a fail-safe for a non-athletic future. In the U.S., college soccer isn't good enough and happens too late, so this doesn't work. But I believe that you will need to find a way for parents to feel their kid is protected, even if they don't make it as a pro.

Geographic diversity also works against the USA. If we have big camps, with a good private high school as part of the package, that works....if the kid can go there. How often is that the case? How many families would move on the off chance that their teenager becomes a pro soccer player, especially since MLS players don't earn that much anyway. How many moms want their teen to go hundreds of miles away to boarding school? In Europe, you can put on in say, Paris, and cover 1/2 of the population of France. Same with Amsterdam. It becomes feasible. Here? How do you do that? Some kid from suburban St. Louis is going to go to Atlanta? How?

I think the approach the U.S. takes needs to be a bit different. Not sure how we solve these problems.

That’s why I was saying there were multiple layers to this.

But I am pretty sure that our top 20-30 U-17 players want to get to pro environments. And if they don’t, then they should get left behind.

We can’t do Soccer the American way and expect to make that leap.

 

[HuskyHawk]

That’s why I was saying there were multiple layers to this.

But I am pretty sure that our top 20-30 U-17 players want to get to pro environments. And if they don’t, then they should get left behind.

We can’t do Soccer the American way and expect to make that leap.

You think we can actually identify the top 20-30 kids at that age? I’d be surprised if we could pick the top 500 with much precision. If we could identify them this would be easier. My guess is that people would sell 500+ kids on the idea that they were the next Pulisic and parents would be forced into very difficult decisions. I think they need to get into that stronger competition to be effectively weeded out, so we’d have to find a better way to do that.

In any event, agree there is a lot to this.

 

[LIuconn]

U17s are playing in high profile tournaments, participating in regional camps, are in MLS academies, being scouted for college and identified by Euro clubs - so yes, I think we can sift out the top 30-50 per age. There will always be those who fall through the cracks, but that happens everywhere for a variety of reasons. Exhibit A - your MLS goalie of the year, Tim Melia

The NT will always have a few MLSers on the squad, but until we go 2 deep at each position playing with and against the top competition daily, we can't expect to compete with the best.

 

[ZooCougar]

You think we can actually identify the top 20-30 kids at that age? I’d be surprised if we could pick the top 500 with much precision. If we could identify them this would be easier. My guess is that people would sell 500+ kids on the idea that they were the next Pulisic and parents would be forced into very difficult decisions. I think they need to get into that stronger competition to be effectively weeded out, so we’d have to find a better way to do that.

In any event, agree there is a lot to this.

Well, when Pulisic was 14 he was considered one of the top prospects in the world. So yeah I think we get a pretty good handle on it.

We’ve had great junior teams in the U-20s and the U-17s in the past. But after that the players lag their peers worldwide. The missing link is that pro environment from 16-18,19, 20 years old and getting meaningful minutes.

 

[upstater]

Pulisic is really imagining though that other young American players will get much playing time in Europe--but this isn't even the case for many young European stars. Only the top world class players are getting out there early. There are just as many stories of young kids sitting at the end of a bench.

 

[ZooCougar]

Pulisic is really imagining though that other young American players will get much playing time in Europe--but this isn't even the case for many young European stars. Only the top world class players are getting out there early. There are just as many stories of young kids sitting at the end of a bench.

They sit on the bench in MLS too. But at least Europe is a more professional environment.