SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP CESA and the Development Academy

Why haven't CESA and the South Carolina Development Academy tried to merge the CESA U15 - U18 teams with the current U16 and U18 academy? Both clubs, and all of the teams within the clubs, are strong but not dominant. I looked at the Concorde U16 Development Academy roster a team filled with region team, and national team players. South Carolina would have that same talent (if not better) if the top players from each side came together. Just wondering why it hasn't happened.

Control / Ego / Pride

Also, would Spartanburg and Greenville and Anderson parents drive to Columbia to practice 3 nights a week?

There are now a couple of Rock Hill parents doing it. I can't see it....with 2 Charlotte Academies in their backyard.

Thats a lot of driving.

You must be new around here.

Im pretty sure that where the sc academy practices in columbia is closer to greenville than where the charlotte academy teams practice.

Since the main goal of the Academy is identification and development of sound soccer players, it is not imperative that an Academy team be dominant. What is most important is that the Academy program is thriving and competitive versus other Academies so as to provide an environment for good development. In fact I would argue that rather than have CESA and SCUnited Academy merge, CESA should join the academy system and provide academy coverage for the north end of the state. CESA is a great club as it is and adding an Academy option for its u15-u18 players would only make the club that much more successful. This would also reduce the travel times for folks on the north end that have made the decision to pursue the USSDA Academy track.

Why combine? Right now, the two programs offer valid options. It shouldn't be about winning.

Greenville is closer to Columbia than Charlote, for sure. My comment was really geared towards York County parents who drive their kids to Orangeburg or BB&T/Columbia 3 times a week. the Charlotte Academy practice fields are 45 minutes max from Rock Hill.

I think the reason they travel that far from Rock Hill is that they want to play Academy and it will not ,for know,interfere with high school season. NC academies play the lions share of there games in the spring,SC United play most of theres in the fall. So, travel to whatever location, play Academy and get to play HS soccer in spring.

I wonder what the difference in fee structure is between the NC and SC clubs? Perhaps, that is a factor in determining which to play for.

Cost is an important factor......time is just as important, if not more.

If BBT practices run from 6-8pm....a RH kid will need to leave RH by about 415pm and will get home at...930-940? The same practice times for a Charlotte Academy are 5 and 845. Thats an extra 1 1/2 hours per practice day that the kid can use for homework or simply to unwind.

The NC Academies are "all inclusive". We paid between $3500-$3700 for the year. That covers all travel including airfare, meals when traveling, training, uniforms, coach fees, etc.

I don't know about SCU.... but I know some of the Academy programs have club fees and team fees and travel isn't included. So if benchmarking....make sure you are adding all of the cost components, including gas for your car for practices.

SCU does a great job. But being the State program carries a travel burden.....that shouldn' be underestimated.

And did I mention that Academy will probably be year round next year? So HS goes out the window.

The key word there being "probably."

And whatever you interpret that to mean.

I really hate this mindset that there are a finite number of good players and all those players should always play on the same team together. I think this idea very much hampers potential talent and is a great obstacle to development overall. To me it shows an acceptance of the idea that a team cannot be successful unless overflowing with ringers. A big part of the good things about team sports is lost while we look only for the brightest talent at the youngest age. Soccer, as well as all sports, are becoming much less accessible to mostly older players. I don't think that is the right direction. Certainly don't lose the quality and challenge of the Academy and Premier level teams, but let's not assume that those programs contain all the talent either.

If those kids want to join Academy, then let them, but don't force them into that cubbyhole by merger in the name of player development.

AMEN!!!

"Consolidation" and "development," while certainly not mutually exclusive, are very different concepts.

JayJay: I have observed teams of "ringers" not reach their true potential because they didn't gel as a team. I have seen "big clubs" collect talented players who were developed by "smaller clubs" and not focus on player development at the older age groups. Practice consists of constant scrimmaging. Players are placed in one position and forced to play it without ever being given the opportunity to utilize and apply their skills in any other. This, certainly, is not conducive to player development or creativity. The same players take the corner kicks, free kicks, play defense, midfield, offense throughout their club careers. What if a midfielder who is told not to shoot ends up playing forward in college? What if a forward who is taught not to pass ends up playing midfield or defense and a defender who is taught to boot the ball out of bounds or to some random spot on the other end of the field winds up being a midfielder or forward?
I have seen coaches "hide" talented players with the goal of appeasing less talented players and their parents. I have also watched the other extreme where a player who has been identified as "talented" is encouraged to take on the opposing team by themselves without working with their teammates. This, of course, leads to losses and ties that should otherwise be wins.
With that being said, great players yearn to play with and against great players. So, what is the solution?

Taking the aspect of playing collegiately out of the above argument: what if the player wants to join a league or team? What if they have a desire to play throughout their adult lives? Being a versatile player would make this possible at any level!

The problem with the versatility argument i.e the need to develop players who can play anywhere on the field always runs into the practicality wall. It is no longer practical at the teenage level to endeavour to develop all-around players because of the increased need for early specialization. Yes during weekly training sessions all players can participate in non-positional drills that will provide continual development of their soccer skills. However, it is neither practical nor really beneficial for coaches to round-robin players across all positions in practice or in games with the intention of developing abilities for players in all positions. Granted that there will be players who demonstrate a high level of versatility and could be masters of more than one position. But these are the exception not the rule. Now I am not saying that mid-fielders and forwards should not work on defending. They need to because they have to defend while in their positions. Similarly defenders need to be able to pass from the back and outside backs need to be able to attack on the flanks. These positional alternate skills definitely need to be developed. But again this is different from having defenders move to play as forwards in a game for the sake of developing positional versatility. The bottom line is that there is such a need for specialization in the development process that the player needs to spend just about all the time they have in mastering their positional requirements if they are to play the game at a high level.

What are you talking about?

Just because you SEE guys at the highest level (let's say BPL) playing predominantly at one position doesn't mean they haven't played multiple positions throughout their "developmental" careers. Or even now. Time, score, opposition, injuries, red cards,etc., demand in-game versatility. For example ...
Man U. Since August 2011, we've seen Carrick play MF AND center half in the same game. Smalling has played center half, fullback and (even briefly) up top. Valencia has played MF and fullback on BOTH sides. Jones has played MF, fullback and center half. Even Rooney plays variations of his usual "strikers' role, depending on time, score, formation and partners. I could go on. Heck, the whole Dutch system of total football is built on player versatility.
Specialization at an early age stifles player development. Pigeonholing a 14-year-old is the height of stupidity.
That said ... I understand why others see it differently. If the priority is winning, or accumulating meaningless statistics, by all means, create a bunch of highly specialized automatons who can't make in-game adjustments.
Come to think of it, sounds a tad like the USMNT.

Forgive me, since August 2010 ...

I think we agree that specialization is a great idea. Where we seem to differ is the point in a player's development when this specialization should occur.

Having a player specialize in playing a particular position at age 14 is really not stupid at all. Coaches do this all over the world at this age. In general kids are starting to play the game a bit earlier and by the time they are 14 they really need to start focussing their attention on the demands of a specific position or positions.

The BPL examples you cite are interesting observations. I think that coaches end up moving people around as a neccessity and not necessarily by intention. Usually it is due to injuries and sometimes lack of depth in certain positions. The movements are usually natural transitions as well. A defesive mid can easily transition into a centre back role. An outside back could play winger in the modern game. What makes the player able to play the alternate position is rarely because they have "tried out" all the positions on the field. Rather it is because the positions have common core requirements that a player already possesses.

Total Football is a great system that was most successful in the 70s. Its successor Tiki-Taka as demonstrated by Barcelona stresses ball movement as opposed to positional dynamism. I am not aware of a team in the world premier leagues that currently uses a pure Total Football approach. Yes the elements of midfielders covering for outside backs etc are part of the game but these are now expected elements of the midfield positions and should be taught as part of that position.

To be clear, I am not saying that versatility is not important. Specialization doesn't preclude versatility. The really special players of the game are versatile specialists. Let's not confuse specialization with lack of creativity. Those are two orthogonal thoughts. Being a specialist enables the player to play with flair, expression and imagination. It gives one the freedom to be creative.

Good coaches know how to identify players whose skill sets make them good candidates for playing multiple positions and will provide the opportunity to those players. This helps to increase the versatility of the players and to provide the team with more depth. This is also different from having all players try their luck at playing every position on the field.

The USMNT could use more specialists at all positions in my opinion. What if we had a true number 10 with fully developed play making skills? What if our forwards were real specialists at taking on and beating 1 or 2 defenders?
what if we had a real specialist of long range shots who could drive balls into the net from outside the 18? The USMNT team has a few problems but I don't think an over-abundance of specialists is one of them.

To play at the highest level in the modern game, by age 14 or so, a player needs to know where they belong on the field and should be working really hard to master both the technical and tactical skill needed to make them successful in that position.

screen17

Well said, thanks for the post!

Looney: Sure, our USMNT could use the individuals you describe. My question is: How do you best develop them?

Soccer/Football is a "total" game. We don't play 2-platoon, plus special teams, plus situational substitution (like American football). We must be able to play with and without the ball -- offense, defense, set pieces, etc. The game demands intuition and understanding of all roles to best advance in any single role.

Sure, in time, at the highest levels, a group of guys excelling at specialized role can be advantageous. My questions is: Is EARLY-AGE specialization the way to get there?

The majority of the players in the Academy program are 15+ at this point most of them should have an idea of who can defend, who your midfielders are and who your forwards are. For defenders, playing against the best forwards is what makes them better and vice versa for the forwards. Same thing for midfielders with midfielders. And in my opinion the state will not achieve its maximum success or development until the best players from the state can play together and make each other better.