|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 322
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 322 |
I have been reading all the information in this thread about SSC and CESA. The one thing I see missing is how is Pearce and Andrew going to advise SSC and maintain their current duties with CESA. I believe they both coach teams along with their director duties. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3
bench
|
|
bench
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3 |
I appreciate that Tormey and Hyslop have done a good job unifying the upstate region and improving the level of training offered there. We will have to wait and see what their influence will be in the rest of the state. It seems to me that many of the impediments to unified, improved clubs in other parts of the state are more structural and political than a lack of competent and well-intentioned coaches.
While CESA seems to be the current gold standard at the state level, their performances beyond the state level are less impressive. Furthermore, while SC universities have produced a number of national level players, there is a relative dearth of homegrown players at the national level.
My biggest concern with CESA in their mission to elevate the level of SC soccer is their apparent failure to recognize the importance of the new US Soccer Development Academy. The Developmental Academy has issues that need to be resolved, but I can say having observed it closely for the past year I think it is the future of elite American youth soccer and far superior to the ODP model.
One solution to the relatively low population of SC would be affiliations on an elite level. Let the teams battle it out at the local club level U14 and below, then pool their talent (Bridge/Battery/CESA) at the Developmental Academy level.
The Academy model does not apply to the girl's side of the game at this time, but hopefully with the renaissance of the women's league (and our dismal showing at the last Women's World Cup) there will be motivation to develop a girl's Academy program.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 24
bench
|
|
bench
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 24 |
prometheusman,
well said and on target. It is good to see a post on the big picture and the future of soccer rather than smoke and mirrors...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,768
World Cup
|
|
World Cup
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,768 |
Quote:
I appreciate that Tormey and Hyslop have done a good job unifying the upstate region and improving the level of training offered there. We will have to wait and see what their influence will be in the rest of the state. It seems to me that many of the impediments to unified, improved clubs in other parts of the state are more structural and political than a lack of competent and well-intentioned coaches.
While CESA seems to be the current gold standard at the state level, their performances beyond the state level are less impressive. Furthermore, while SC universities have produced a number of national level players, there is a relative dearth of homegrown players at the national level.
My biggest concern with CESA in their mission to elevate the level of SC soccer is their apparent failure to recognize the importance of the new US Soccer Development Academy. The Developmental Academy has issues that need to be resolved, but I can say having observed it closely for the past year I think it is the future of elite American youth soccer and far superior to the ODP model.
One solution to the relatively low population of SC would be affiliations on an elite level. Let the teams battle it out at the local club level U14 and below, then pool their talent (Bridge/Battery/CESA) at the Developmental Academy level.
The Academy model does not apply to the girl's side of the game at this time, but hopefully with the renaissance of the women's league (and our dismal showing at the last Women's World Cup) there will be motivation to develop a girl's Academy program.
So CESA has done more than anyone else in SC, and is more successful at it...yet you still criticize? Has SC as a whole done much past the state level year in year out? Do they take age group after age group beating the best other clubs have to offer...and then somehow lose all coordination and muscle memory once they leave the borders of the Blue Ridge and Savannah?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,429
hat-trick
|
|
hat-trick
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,429 |
Quote:
I appreciate that Tormey and Hyslop have done a good job unifying the upstate region and improving the level of training offered there. We will have to wait and see what their influence will be in the rest of the state. It seems to me that many of the impediments to unified, improved clubs in other parts of the state are more structural and political than a lack of competent and well-intentioned coaches.
While CESA seems to be the current gold standard at the state level, their performances beyond the state level are less impressive. Furthermore, while SC universities have produced a number of national level players, there is a relative dearth of homegrown players at the national level.
My biggest concern with CESA in their mission to elevate the level of SC soccer is their apparent failure to recognize the importance of the new US Soccer Development Academy. The Developmental Academy has issues that need to be resolved, but I can say having observed it closely for the past year I think it is the future of elite American youth soccer and far superior to the ODP model.
One solution to the relatively low population of SC would be affiliations on an elite level. Let the teams battle it out at the local club level U14 and below, then pool their talent (Bridge/Battery/CESA) at the Developmental Academy level.
The Academy model does not apply to the girl's side of the game at this time, but hopefully with the renaissance of the women's league (and our dismal showing at the last Women's World Cup) there will be motivation to develop a girl's Academy program.
Are you proposing a statewide Academy team? That trains 3-4 times per week? How are kids from the lower part of the state, the upstate and the piedmont all supposed to get together that often?
ONly way to do it is to host in Columbia.....then everyone is drving 1-2 hours one way 4 times per week.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 147
goal kick
|
|
goal kick
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 147 |
Quote:
Are you proposing a statewide Academy team? That trains 3-4 times per week? How are kids from the lower part of the state, the upstate and the piedmont all supposed to get together that often?
ONly way to do it is to host in Columbia.....then everyone is drving 1-2 hours one way 4 times per week.
Hey...Columbia then the perfect solution would be CUFC!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 351
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 351 |
Statewide team? Isn't that ODP?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 404
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 404 |
I won't re-hash the wisdom (or lack thereof) of the USSF creating a parallel competitor to its own ODP program. I will take issue with the wisdom of creating one state "super team" designed to better compete on a national level. The primary result of doing such a thing would be to greatly reduce the number of players having the opportunity to compete at a high level and to be exposed to college coaches.
Using my son's U-16 (rising U-17) age group as an example (the prime recruiting age) is instructive. His CUFC team is currently ranked 19 in the nation by Soccer in College, has competed quite successfully at Disney the past two years, is the current Region 3 Premier League Champion and will be competing at Regionals in June. The CESA team in that age group is state champions, finished third in R3PL, competes well at Disney, is ranked a spot or two ahead of CUFC by Soccer In College, and will also be competing at Regionals in June. The Bridge FA Academy team is leading its league and, by all accounts, is a very impressive group, getting lots of exposure to college and national team coaches.
So, we have three teams in this state, at roughly the same age level, competing successfully against the best teams in the country. All three are frequently playing in front of dozens of college coaches and the occasional national team coach. CUFC and CESA frequently play "showcase" friendlies against teams from Ga and NC in front of college coaches.
Why in the world would it be a good idea to reduce the number of kids getting this kind of exposure from roughly 60 to roughly 20? The notion (and I hear/read it frequently from "academy parents") that only the Academy matters anymore is nonsense. My son's team (and CESA) has been seen by scores of college coaches in the past year. They will be seen by scores more this year. Both of those teams play, and often beat, the best teams in the country. Any change in the structure of SC soccer that would take away those experiences for those kids is silly.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3
bench
|
|
bench
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3 |
ODP is a USYSA entity. It is NOT under direct control of USSF. USSF is above USYSA, but does not directly run ODP. It appears that many of the powers that be at the USSF (read MLS)realize that the US system of player development is not getting it done at the elite level.
For example, Christian Gomez has been arguably the best 'number 10' in MLS the past few years and would be a fixture on the US national team if he were an American, but is not among the five best at his position in Argentina a country with one-ninth the population of the US. Why can we not come come close to producing a world class creative midfielder? I think (and others think)some of it has to do with how players are developed 7-10 years of age - too much coaching, too much emphasis on booting the ball up the field, not enough 'street soccer',etc; however, some of it has to do with the way elite players are trained 13-17 years of age. In the best soccer countries players 13-17 are developed primarily by professional clubs who are looking for players for the future. The emphasis is on training, not winning a bunch of rinky-dink cup titles. Players practice with elite players their age, but probably more importantly they train with players who are a little older and better than they are.
ODP is a pretty good system for player ID and they run an excellent camp in the summer - for one week. The week in week out training offered varies dramatically from state to state and my impression is that it is a pretty poor means of player development.
The Developmental Academy has issues, which I would be glad to discuss at another time, but it is clearly where the USSF and MLS are putting their energies. In its first year the exposure to Division 1 coaches, MLS coaches and national team coaches is already greater through the Developmental Academy and it looks to be shifted that way even more in the future.
For a state wide team to work successfully would require the laying down of arms and cooperation among key DOC's. Training would be done locally several times a week and then once a week or so training at a unified location.
The Developmental Academy would involve 50 players at a time - 2 squads plus underage"development players". I don't think there are more than 50 male D-1/pro soccer prospects in the state currently. May be I'm wrong ...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 404
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 404 |
It seems as if your primary goal is the creation of a system that is most likely to result in a MNT that is as good as it can possibly be, whether or not that system is in the best interests of the broader "elite" youth soccer community. That would not be my priority.
The current system allows exposure of many more kids to college coaches (D1,D2,D3) than what you propose. I'm not sure what "rinky dink" cups you're talking about. I do know that our club teams (CUFC and CESA) play some of the best teams in the country, and frequently beat them, and frequently do so in front of lots of college coaches.
I guess we can agree to disagree. I'll end the threadjack here. We can take this up again in another thread.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
