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

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.