Winning v Development - Youth Soccer & the myth of Scholarship Dreams

I'm starting with my last thought. Most kids play soccer because they love it. They live, breath and sleep it. Improving is great, becoming a professional is the dream - but we simply love playing. Most teams who focus on winning in the youth age range alienate players. The question every parent should ask their kid after a game is "how did you play?" - not '"did you win?". There is a gap between what kids want and what parents expect.

Times they are a changing.
 I'll not profess to be the first on this topic and I am confident to predict at what stage youth soccer is during this time of transition - or even how things will work out. Still, a conversation with a friend and an article by Sam Borden in the New York Times put this topic up for discussion again: how youth soccer in the US is developing differently to other US based sports.

This week the US National Teams enjoyed considered success, three wins at National level and most interestingly the Mens' team 1-0 victory versus Italy. With US sports driven and controlled by the high school and college systems, soccer is at that point of looking beyond those institutions to find quality players. It is, of course, not surprising a country struggles to produce players of international quality if those players are only products of the college system. 

In England it is the opposite in many ways. Kids played football in the streets, school playgrounds and local parks. The majority of participation was unstructured, without coaches and often using a couple of trees close enough to be a goal. It always has been a working class sport - which is the same all countries around the world. From the dust bowls of Senegal to the narrow alleys of Argentina - soccer is the peoples' game. If you want a 'good read' and an interesting perspective on how the location, GDP, politics culture impact soccer 'potential' take a look at Kuper & Szymanski's 'Soccernonmics'. 

NY Times review....

Had my family lived in the US I would most likely have not played soccer at all. Firstly, it is a middle class sport requiring significant parental support via funds and transport. Secondly, a typical High School has up to 4,000 students - so no one really gets to play competitively - there are just too many kids for one team. I would have ended up as one of the many who now sit at a bar with a college cap cheering their team in some random NCAA competition. I've always thought it sad that so many people in this great country have never had the opportunity to play competitive sport at any level - and never beyond the age of 13 or 14. 

As a kid, my parents would not have been able to afford the fees to join a club that has 'travel' soccer. This is how I started:
1) Back garden - me v my mum. See early blog for how she broke the rules.
2) School playground - first 2 on the fence picked the teams. Holes in school trousers.
3) Cub Scouts - every Saturday at King Georges Fields, learned to tie knots too.
4) School Team - Sept to March. If you were good you were picked for the District Team.
5) Sunday Club Football - didn't win for 4 months. Hated it. met Trevor Brooking though.
6) Saturday Mens Football - 3pm kick off on a Saturday. The real deal.

The better you get the less you pay and is child centered. Youth Academy players start with around $500 of free training gear. You also cannot play at an academy that is more than 60 minutes drive from your home (below a specific age). Youth Academy Leagues do not produce tables and clubs play regionally to minimize traveling. There is a maximum number of games a player can play each year and the Academy Club has the final say. Also, and most importantly for me, players with injuries are rested. The long term development over short term gains is always the priority. That is how it works at West Ham United's Academy. It just so different to the process kids have been put through here for years. They understand the result is secondary to player development.


The system in the US seems to focus on winning. It also puts a 'college scholarship' as the prize. Or, put another way, if you commit to $2000 - $5000 a year for youth travel soccer you are going to have a shot at a free ride in college. So, what is a more realistic outlook for the future. OK, on this I didn't spend hours research - and I will look into this in more detail. However, here is a summary from a news article in the US News Education page from June 22, 2010. Click here to read it....


1: The odds are remote. Maybe about 1 in 50.
2: The money isn't great. The average is about $8,700
3: The NCAA controls how many scholarships can be offered. So Colleges' split them up to allow more than 10 players access to funding.


So, now I am concerned... I have 4 kids and 3 of them hit college on the same day. My dream of all 4 being eligible for either the US of England at forthcoming FIFA World Cups is looking dodgy!


But in my heart success is a couple of simple things:


For my kids - to the love the game in whatever shape or  form that is.


For soccer in Indiana - to offer soccer to kids who cannot easily afford to pay the big bucks. That is how US Mens' soccer will succeed on the world stage. The rough diamonds that become stars in the NBA were polished on the streets - in pick up games. It's time soccer faced facts and embraced the same concept.