Goodness, they've recruited Shibumi to make an appearance. Are you out of season?

I'll just address the couple of things you said that were related to my posts.

First - I have no recollection of accusing any Heise of anything. Since you didn't clearly say that it was I, I have to assume it was someone else. If you have a quote from me, I'd be interested to see it.

Second - congratulations on knowing the complete Emerson quote. Too many people omit the "foolish" element. I assume then that you know that what Emerson meant by "foolish" was "without regard to facts and reality." So, is my consistency foolish in that sense?

My criticism that has riled was of a coach of 12 year old kids who declined to honor the award ceremony convention of giving out his team medals and saying a few gracious and uplifting words to his team and the opposing 12 year old kids. I was accused of inconsistency (ironic - no?) and hypocrisy on the grounds that I had previously criticized behavior that I considered inimical to the best interests of youth soccer. Say whatever else you want about that argument but you can't say it's intellectually coherent. It's not a question of subjective disagreement with the point. The assertion makes no sense.

Third, I have no idea what "rumors" about kids leaving one club for another you are suggesting I've pedalled. I'm sure I've never commented on any kid leaving CESA for the Academy, as either fact or rumor. Any criticism I've made of CESA and its recruiting (note the absence of "scare quotes") has been made on personal knowledge. I also need to challenge your assertion that I "[criticize] all things CESA." In fact, my criticism has been very narrow and I have had positive and complimentary things to say about the club, coaches and players on many occasions. That takes us to my final, but admittedly long, point.

In your last paragraph you came close to raising an interesting question, but didn't quite. Because I think it is important and incorporates much of the rest of what we're talking about (and have talked about in the past), I'll raise it myself.

The question is this: If recruiting is bad for youth soccer, why is it not bad when the Development Academy does it? The answer boils down to the "why." Let me acknowledge from the top that there is a great deal of subjectivity inherent in what I'm going to say. Some will disagree vehemently with my interpretations - and that's just fine. The Development Academy is a fundamentally different program from USYS/SCYS. The structure is different and the goals are different. The DA exists, essentially, for one purpose - to develop the best individual male youth soccer players in the country. US Soccer has determined that the way to do that is to train intensively and play fewer, and only, highly competitive games. One of the charges on DA clubs is to identify the guys in their area who have the potential to benefit from the program and to develop into national level players. The goal is not to build a team that will beat Concorde Fire or CASL - it is to find individuals who can be developed into a National Team player. When identified, those kids are invited to try out.

Now, contrast that with the "why" of the recruiting I have criticized. (Here come the opinions - based on fact, but opinions nontheless - with which some will hotly disagree). Recruiting for the dual purpose of strengthing my team and weakening the other team, so that my team is more likely to win, is not in anyone's best interests (except perhaps the coach or club - but why should anyone care about that?). Why recruit a kid from 150 miles away and tell him he only has to train with the team once a week or once every two weeks? Is the goal to make that kid a better soccer player, or to have the team win more games? Who is benefitting from that arrangement? I understand that the player is making the final decision, but my interest is in the motivation of the recruiter, not the recruitee. I think that's an important consideration.

I try very hard to be rationally consistent in advocating for practices that are good for youth soccer and criticizing those that aren't. When considering which is which, the only appropriate question, in my opinion, is - what is in the best interest of advancing the goals of the individual player? If I'm asking myself - what will make my team stronger, the other teams weaker, and will improve my/our chances of winning - I'm asking the wrong question. That there are kids and parents who's goal is primarily to play for a winning team/club I have no doubt. That does not mean the original question was the appropriate one.

I am particularly proud of the fact that, when talking to kids and parents about playing in the DA, our coaches, if they conclude that that the individual is not interested in our club, for whatever reason, will always encourage them to tryout for another DA club. Why would we do that? Because we're asking the right question of ourselves - what is in the best interest of the player, not - what is in our best interest as a team or club.

Many, but not all, clubs and coaches have the same view of things. That's why we have kids coming from all over - because most coaches and clubs are proud and pleased to have developed young players who are ready to take the next step in their development, even if it means that the "loss" of the player(s) will make other teams within the club less competitive. I'll point specifically to Dom Wren and Kian Brownlee. They're asking the right question of themselves. I should also point out that I have been very critical of some within the SCUtd family who have been too slow to embrace this attitude - though that has been in private.
------------

While I have no problem having this discussion in public - I'm happy to do it by PM if you think it might be tedious for everyone else to do it here.