SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP What do Clubs owe the community they draw from?

Listening to the XM Radio pre-World Cup broadcast yesterday, the moderators made the point that the US will continue to lag the world so long as soccer remains a middle class, ‘pay to play’ sport, and many of our best natural athletes migrate to other sports. I think that the point is valid. Baseball, football and basketball all have tremendous opportunities for elite player development at minimal cost to the athlete. This is not the case for soccer. My guess is that the average ‘elite’ player in SC spends $2000 to $3000 or more per year in fees, camps, travel etc. This starts at U10.

My question is, how do we (as a State, as coaches or simply as people who love the game) develop players who can’t afford to get a ride to practice let alone come up with $750 for ODP camp. Do clubs play a role?

I heard most of the same radio show you did. Very interesting!

Does this help?
Club Soccer Thread

I know at CESA we have scholarships and then the players can also sell advertising for the RBC Tournament to earn money to offset expenses. We also have ref. positions available to earn money.

Kim

Scholarships are fine, but what do we do beyond that? Don’t get me wrong, that is a huge step in the right direction. I’m not looking for charity, I’m a make your own way kind of guy, but I am wondering how do we get all kids hooked on the game early and improve training and competition at all levels?

One thought…clubs sending elite players to help Recreational coaches in skill training. It might improve the overall talent pool and perhaps gets young kids more fired up Another is to sponsor training sessions for Recreational level coaches. We could offer support and resources to insure that kids are learning the skills they need to succeed in the game.

When I go to South America or Europe I see kids kicking a round ball everywhere. They are playing 1v1 at bus stops using their shoes as goals. In a lot of places soccer boots are a thing kids hope to have one day. So my question remains…Club soccer is where the success is in the US today…how do we infect the rest of the population with the ‘Beautiful Game”?

Like I said before and multiple times. The celebrities of this country will always command the awe of the best atheletes. WHO HONESTLY WANTS TO BE MARCELO BALBOA? Give me a break. That guy is a joke. I'd rather be the least paid NBA player who's never seen 1 second of court time than be an MLS player. Economically speaking it's a better option. If you want Lebron James to play soccer, Michael Jordan should have been in cleats. If America only played the sport of soccer, the world cup wouldn't need exist.

The problem is not getting to play because of the expense it is getting them to play despite the fact that you will never ever earn a multiyear multimillion dollar contract playing soccer in America.

A good example of football over soccer is a recent Dutch Fork player that earned a full ride to a very good college to play football and was only offered a partial ride to play soccer at another instution. He is very good at both but went, rightfully so, with the money to pay for his education.

So I guess it is money at all levels, from what it costs to play and what you could possibly make it you are good enough.

just my thoughts

There are a lot of kids who would want to be Balboa..but could MJ have been a Ronaldino? Is it all about the money?

In response to the initial post: I think clubs do owe the community something. Be it letting scholarship players play, doing clinics for rec leagues other than their own, going into the schools and doing clinics, or what have you. But they do owe something back!

shut^&play

Interesting point about how the World Cup would be unnecessary if soccer was the only/main spot in America. Funnily enough, then, wouldn't you say that Baseball, Basketball, and Football would all be dominated by America?

Football would be won by the US in every dimension because obviously the US is pretty much the only country that does play it, as all of the players in the European League are guys who used to play or are not good enough to play in the NFL.

Basketball and Baseball, however, is a different story. Look at the Olympics. The USA did not win the gold in Athens and then the US did not win the World Baseball Classic. Maybe what you're saying isn't so true?

CRSA has scholarships and is expanding the program this year. It has also conducted training sessions for midlands YMCA coaches.

I believe that offering better training for rec coaches is probably the one thing that could produce the most bang for the buck. Soccer is by far the most accessible sport to very young kids. It would keep more of them if they received decent basic instruction which allows them to improve.When a kid has played 3 or 4 years of rec soccer and is still kicking toe balls, he has been done a disservice. Unfortunately, so many of them receive virtually no instruction, and become frustrated as the game becomes more competitive.

Guys... all clubs offer scholarships. But someone is paying for them. So do not fool yourself into thinking that this will resolve the issue.

The difference between the US and the rest of the world is choice. The US has lots of it the rest of the world very little. In the uS "the way out" through sports rotates against the big $$$ - football/baseball/basketball. Tennis, golf that can get major $$$ is still somewhat of a middle class and up. Soccer has fallen in that category because of interest.

The problem with the major US sports is that you have to have the right genetics. The DF player in question... a very good football player... would not have gather any attention if he was 4 inches smaller.

Soccer will not take over night but slowly it will creep through and the ones that do not have the right size genetics may find that they have the other right stuff and will gravitate towards a sport that is more forgiving. Pele/Maradona?? 5'8" on a good day

First, it is silly to think that soccer in the US doesn't attract natural athletes. Some of the best athletes in the state are on our soccer fields.

But the larger question—which comes up here time and again—involves affluence/poverty and equity. Soccer is simply a mirror held up to our larger US society. Scholarships are wonderful, but they are putting bandaids on gun wounds. Too little, too late.

Since our soccer clubs are working with CHILDREN, I do believe they owe those communities something above other organizations—noting that those clubs are already serving CHILDREN (a gift in itself).

I would add that those who think basketball and football do not consume large amounts of money are sadly mistaken; it is just that the money comes from sources other than directly from any student's pocket (unlike club soccer).

Whether it is soccer or virtually any other aspect of our society, Americans just do not have much of a social conscience.

And why do we continue to lament the quality of soccer in the US, when it is the MEN'S team we feel is inferior to the rest of the world. Our women's team has been dominant for years. Hmm?

Fox Soccer Channel has probably done more to potentially improve the game here in the US than any other factor in the past two years. The kids need Heroes.....Sports Role Models.....someone to emulate.

I'll stop short of saying there is a media conspiracy against soccer here in the US, but guys like Jim Rome and the columnist for the Twin Cities Tribune (see other thread) don't help matters.

The best players in the world, and the best players in the US, don't become great players simply because they play for CESA or CASL or Atlanta Silverbacks, or FC Delco...or any other super club. Sure this training certainly helps, it can make above average players into very good players. But great players become great players because they go outside every day and play/train on their own.

What's their motivation? They see their heroes on TV....they want to play like them. Here in the US the motivation can't be long-term financial gain. They are not going to make NBA or NFL money here. I know a guy who came through the US national team system, played four or five years in MLS, quit and went to work on Wall Street and now makes 10x what he made in his best season in MLS.

It's not financial. If you can afford a TV you can watch your heroes and then go outside and play. If more kids become exposed to this and play every day like kids in other countries do, the talent pool will increase.....and the US will dominate.

Why? Because we have great resources and over 250 million people.

Purpleandyellow,

I think your last question might just illustrate the issue best. There is a big difference, indeed, between men's and women's soccer in the U.S.--could we attribute that to what others have been saying about image, portrayal of heroes, and competition for athletes from other sports? I think one reason women's soccer is more successful is because women's soccer doesn't compete with as many other "billion dollar hero" options as men's soccer.

Try this--name four male athletes you've seen get positive, successful, role-model-creating "face time" in the MAINSTREAM media (interviews, spotlight views, commercials, bios, documentaries, etc.) in the following sports within the last few years--people you think a majority of Americans would recognize:

Football-

Basketball-

Baseball-

Soccer-


Now, try this one on for size; same question, but with female athletes in the following sports:

Soccer-

Softball-

Basketball-

Football-...?

Notice any differences as you were trying to answer the men's and the women's questions? Which sports were easier to answer in each category?

Hurst66—Great point about the great ones. ALL great ones in ALL avenues (sports or not) do the thing they do BY CHOICE and with a real compulsion. Read books about and by Mia Hamm. Kicking a ball alone in the racquetball courts at UNC—yes—alone, for hours. The truly great also need cultures of excellence—in their clubs, in their homes.

Bias alert: I'm biased toward free-market liberterian models.

It's my position that clubs don't "owe" anything to the communities in which they exist. Instead, a club owes it to itself to grow and provide better and more comprehensive services. In other words, clubs should be motivated by their own self-interest in terms of their missions to provide the widest and best services it can.

Any club that wants to offer elite soccer has to recognize that it needs a base foundation of recreation soccer that feeds its more competitive programs. The broader that base, the healthier the club is in terms of all of its services. Broadening that base means increasing the penetration of soccer in the community, which means serving more kids and serving new markets of kids (this is why I like "underserved" versus "underprivileged" in describing new markets for youth soccer clubs -- "underserved" is typically a superset of "underprivileged" kids).

Of course, a club can sit back and try to aggregate from other programs doing the heavy lifting of increasing penetration -- and that makes sense in situations like the Bridge alliance where you have a cooperative venture. It doesn't seem to make sense where you have clubs feeding off of other clubs doing the tough work of increasing the penetration of soccer; I just don't see where in the long-term those clubs doing the tough work can continue the time and effort and expenditures necessary to continue and grow market penetration.