Quote:

NSF:

High school soccer has just been given the finger - that's not marginalizing it?

US Soccer is effectively saying, "If you're not in our system, we don't have time for you." If they were able to pick the most elite soccer players 100% of the time, this idea would be brilliant. But it's not brilliant because it closes the door to unknown potential.

My point is that I think it's better to have lots of avenues of development open rather than one. It's a better way to grow the sport in the long term. The players that are in the system right now may individually improve from the 10 month season, but there is also the possibility that as these kids age out of the system there will be fewer and fewer to replace them. Make the system more inclusive, rather than exclusive.

Certainly, boys in the Academy can choose the 10 month season or high school. America is all about opportunity. But what if a fantastic player does choose high school - is he still in the running for national pool, or even DI? Should he be? Doesn't that hack away at the elite pool if players choose to leave? When that happens it can water it down as well - does some player not as good get to take his spot? US Soccer may be betting that all players will go with the 10 month season, but if there are defections, this may not work out as planned.

This system may increase individual development, but it does nothing to increase the pool, and individual development has an expiration date.

A rising tide lifts all boats. We need more players to raise the level of all players. To me, that is the biggest difference between the US and other great soccer countries. We need more and more players coming from all directions to drive the development.

Therefore, unless we want to go all the way and totally copy the European system, I don't think we will see the results we are chasing. There is no reason that America should not be an awesome soccer powerhouse. We need to think about this long term and do it in a sustainable way. I fear that this decision makes the path to elite soccer more narrow, and will in the end be self-defeating.



Jay Jay, you are correct that USSF should be focussed on growing the pool of youth players in this country. I wholeheartedly agree with that. But this issue of 10 month Academy has nothing to do with a rising tide lifting all boats.

This issue......is solely their approach towards dealing with the top 1-2% of players, which for sake of argument is the Academy program. There are players outside of that program who are still absolutely in their sights, such as a Cole Seilor. I think they realize that while Academy can cover 85 or 90% of the top 1%....there will still be flyers.

But regardless. This issue is independent of the rising tide argument, which everyone accepts.....them too.

So I think your point, while valid, is irrelevant to the debate of 10 month Academy. If a kid is a great player outside of Academy he will still be found. But for Academy players.....this is what they feel is best suited towards challenging, developing and identifying the top tier player.