USA men’s Olympic team fail to qualify again for the Olympic

[usasoccerboy]

For the third straight time the Olympic team has failed to send the USA men to the Olympics. Yet the USSF will continue to proclaim that youth development is better than ever. The USA soccer system does not work. It does not work because our system of rec high school rec college does not produce the quality players we need that should dominate the Honduras and Mexican programs at the Olympic level. Instead, USA teams play down to their competition’s level and lead to desperate comeback attempts against inferior teams. CONCACAF teams continue to thwart USA soccer strategies by continually playing disrupting styles of soccer that we do not seem to be able to contend with. It has been this way for way too long.

This current team lacked the attacking and finishing to get the job done, yet the USA had many opportunities. 2-1 losses to Honduras should not happen, yet our teams lose to them at the younger levels.

I believe it is because the system we use does not provide enough quality matches for development and if teams get to playing at a high level, their seasons usually end so as to start another season with another school or recreational club. At some point, we got to realize that stopping and starting and stopping and starting is NOT the way to go. The USSF loves to preach, yet it refuses to a knowledge that their system is the root of the problem. The USSF has yet to do anything about it and it is over 20 years old.

[loJic]

[usasoccerboy]

Jason Kreis coached like he played. He did fine until he got to the big stage.

[loJic]

[JoshuaC]

There is so much I could say about that performance and the youth system of US Soccer but it would take quite some time to get my feelings out. This disappointment was pretty easy to see coming though.

Jason Kreis is a failed MLS Manager so why was he selected to coach our U-23 team that hasn't made the Olympics since 2008 and the USSF knew whether you qualified for this tournament after failing to qualify for the World Cup was going to be a big deal.

I don't blame the players because they haven't even started pre-season for their respective clubs plus our true U-23 talent was with the Men's National Team, to begin with. That being said the players these MLS Academies and DA Academies should be producing for this team should more than get the job done with the resources we have compared to other Concacaf Countries.

The fact that our leagues don't follow the European league schedule is an embarrassment and the fact that some clubs didn't allow their top U23 players to attend this tournament is also an embarrassment. Even with all that being said you have to beat Honduras even without your best squad of players because you should be good enough.

Another failure. Not sure if the USSF will ever learn. I believe the Men's Team is starting to put it together and I am liking Greg as the coach more and more so they are on the upward trajectory but the youth system has produced failure after failure after failure.

[kevin]

Mar 30, 2021 15:26:39 GMT -6 JoshuaC said:

The fact that our leagues don't follow the European league schedule is an embarrassment

Lots of other countries use a similar calendar. Right now MLS is one of the top 10 soccer leagues in terms of attendance. I'm guessing a lot of people in Toronto or Chicago might not be too keen on attending a midweek fixture in mid-February.

I'd be a lot more worried if the US didn't have a ton of U-23 talent in Europe. I'd much rather see Pulisic, Reyna, Dest, etc. with their club teams than in a U23 tournament. Should we still have qualified? Yes.

[wildcatstriker]

I don’t know how big a deal overall this is. All I know is in business, when you want to beat someone, you don’t try to replicate doing everything they do.

Yes, you want to find those key things, but in the end, it’s about differentiating yourself. Making them adapt. Apple didn’t try to mimic Windows, they improved on it Google didn’t try to mimic iPhone, they did things different.

We will NEVER beat Europe at their game. We must make them play our game. However, we have yet to determine what that is.

[JoshuaC]

Mar 30, 2021 20:09:40 GMT -6 kevin said:

Mar 30, 2021 15:26:39 GMT -6 JoshuaC said:

The fact that our leagues don't follow the European league schedule is an embarrassment

Lots of other countries use a similar calendar. Right now MLS is one of the top 10 soccer leagues in terms of attendance. I'm guessing a lot of people in Toronto or Chicago might not be too keen on attending a midweek fixture in mid-February.

I'd be a lot more worried if the US didn't have a ton of U-23 talent in Europe. I'd much rather see Pulisic, Reyna, Dest, etc. with their club teams than in a U23 tournament. Should we still have qualified? Yes.

I entirely agree with the midweek assessment. Winter games get minimal attendance for high school soccer. Not sure how professional teams would do outside during that time of year

Pulisic, Reyna, Dest shouldn’t be remotely near this tournament unless it was the actual Olympic Games. Just confuses me how the guys behind them from all these academies can’t get the job done. Makes no sense.

[usasoccerboy]

All of you had good comments and I am not directly responding to anyone in particular. I agree with what you guys added to the conversation.

I say the fault is with the USSF and whether that is because of the calendar or leadership, can be argued. I believe we are not doing well, because we continue to do what I had said earlier in this websites history, by still treating soccer in this country, like we treat other sports in this country, and that is why we continue to underperform in the youth levels.

To summarize my previous views stated at laprepsoccer, we continue to languish, because our youth players are constantly starting and stopping seasons. Look at Louisiana how youth soccer is played. You have a fall season with a club, then stop to go play high school season with other players, then stop again to go play club in the spring. Most players do not play during the summer.

So, what happens, teams come together and work through their seasons when towards the end of those seasons, play is stopped and then restarted. The problem with this is, players learn to play soccer better with one another with experience. It doesn’t happen right away and if you are lucky to get on a team that plays well, you are stopped and made to start over again. We need players to keep playing at higher levels and the only way to do this is to continue playing with teams that have advanced in their skills and tactics to play at a higher level.

My belief, is that at the youth level, we need to copy what happens at the international level. What I mean by that, is players should be selected and let go by coaches at any time of the year. Players should have to perform well to stay with their local team much like an international player has to. So take for instance, say a city like Lafayette or Hammond or Houma should field a club team of u14s, they should select from the best players at any given time, not at some try out at the beginning of the season.

Also, at the upper youth levels, if clubs are able to afford it, they should pay their players for performance. Screw amateurism. Leave the old Olympic and NCAA idea of sportsmanship in the closet, because the NCAA nor the LHSAA gives a Crap about developing players for the Olympic or national team development.

[loJic]

Pay youth players?

[upper90]

Make soccer more affordable, beginning at the youth club levels. When soccer is more affordable, more kids will start playing soccer at the club level. When more kids are playing soccer, you're bound to see more kids playing pickup soccer in parks. The day that we start seeing more kids playing soccer than we do basketball at our local parks is when we will start to reach our full potential.

To the topic at hand: it's embarrassing that we can't beat a team like Honduras with our B team. It's a failure for our U-23 team, plain and simple.

The MLS is not the answer, dudes. I hate to break it to you. 20/23 players in the most recent callup were from outside of the MLS. That number should be similar WHEN we qualify for 2022 in Qatar.

[usasoccerboy]

P ay youth players? Yes! Eventually when the clubs they play for are successful in generating income by selling tickets and concessions at their games.

Are we talking million dollar salaries? No. What I mean is they make what their club profits allow. It may take years to get to this level, but the point is, the focus is on the true clubs. After all, the word soccer comes from the root word “association” as in association football. People form association and support the association with fund raisers and community contributions of money and volunteers to field teams.

Instead now, we have high school games where thousands of dollars can be raised through concessions and tickets, but that money goes to a general fund of the athletic department and not necessarily the soccer team.

Hopefully with this competitive environment, clubs can profit and succeed and lead to a higher level of competition which is what I am seeing the void in this country. We have watered down competition. I remember the old high school system in Louisiana when all schools played in the same division. Then it went to two and three and then Private vs non private with the result of good teams playing inferior teams week after week in district and early playoff games.

I would rather see promotion and relegation. So, if say St. Louis and Vanderbilt can hang with the Jesuit’s and Brother Martins, then let them at the moment when it counts the most, district and playoffs. But the LHSAA which could care less about Olympic development, want to divide the state into groups and keep the groups from competing for the same trophies. Also, the seasons are way too short and crammed with too many games in a week’s time.

[lasoccertiger]

The US model rewards up to U23 with an attainable goal - an education.  Our model surely does produce the most educated pool of soccer players in the world. That is the NCAA mission as well. The answer to maximize opportunity for the highly inspired is to create a pathway for the largest pool of players (18-22 yr olds) to proceed with that experience and continue to develop while they are in college. Seems like expansion of resources and ideas in college venues (such as two seasons, even multiple teams) is much more attainable than wishing youth soccer players will go all in towards a direction that does not include the future advantages of college.  The clubs in th US are not supported by the same financing as the EU model. MLS contributions are not comitted to offering to pay for education while playing soccer. The US model doesn't need to be the Euro Model, it just needs to tweak the American Model that recognizes the value in its own backyards. Backyards built with a lot of grassroot support and constantly improving. The success of the men's international program is hardly indicative of the incredible success story of soccer in the US.

[loJic]

Women’s soccer is only successful because the rest of the world didnt have something like the college infrastructure to keep their women playing at that level. That is currently changing. USWNT will not be the power it is in 10 years. But they’ll have an education. So that’s nice 🙂

[loJic]

College soccer is a HUGE hindrance, but hey, it gets kids an education. That is always the argument and to be honest, I'm not going to argue that. Educated folk are needed, but an extremely talented 20 year old is stuck in New Orleans playing Sunday league making $100 a game, up to $500 at times, because school wasn't for him. Why should we look to build a system that gives him a fighting chance? Who cares if he came over to escape a tough situation in his home country and his guardian is doing everything in their power to make it work for the both of them.

But hey, he should have went the college route right?

[kevin]

I don't think anyone should assume that the grass is always greener on the other side. In Europe, these kids are commodities. Sure, there are huge amounts of $$$ going into developing players, but there are dozens of kids going through an academy at any given time and only a small number of them end up as professional players. Have you ever heard the saying (usually referring to social media) that if you're not paying for a service, "You're not the customer, you're the product"? The kids coming up through a youth academy are the product, or, more accurately, the equipment. Like a broken-down car or computer, as soon as they aren't productive anymore, they're discarded. And that wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that these kids might be 14, 15, 16 years old and getting a substandard education. If we were just talking about 18-year-olds forgoing college, fine. But in a lot of cases these academy systems impact the education of younger teenagers.

Here's a few articles I had come across years ago, the first about England, the second about Ajax:

www.theguardian.com/football/2017/oct/06/football-biggest-issue-boys-rejected-academies

www.nytimes.com/2010/06/06/magazine/06Soccer-t.html?pagewanted=all

We all want to see the USMNT play better. Now that the Saints have won a Super Bowl, the USMNT winning the World Cup is the only thing on my sports fan bucket list. But I think we have to be realistic about what we are willing to put thousands and thousands of kids through in order to get there.

We also have to realize that the US is not the same as other countries. I think it would be a mistake to ignore the massive amount of resources that school systems pour into sports. Obviously the HS soccer system is not perfect, in Louisiana or any other state, but there is a huge amount of money & spectator interest that some U-18 club team is not going to be able to generate on its own. The goal should be to harness that in the best way possible, not cast it all aside.

It's the same thing with college. Now, with all the NIL stuff going on I really have no idea what college sports will look like in five years. I think there's a fairly good chance that a lot of schools will shut down many or all of their non-revenue sports teams. Once all the NIL stuff opens up, all the boosters who donate lots of money to schools will use that money to pay endorsement deals to get a big-name recruit to play football or basketball for their school. So the money that might've trickled down to the weight room or travel costs of soccer or swimming or gymnastics is instead going to be in the pocket of the blue-chip QB. (And if you think that's more fair that the current system, I'm not going to argue with you.) But if something like the status quo stays in place, then we need to look at how college soccer can benefit someone who might not want to turn pro at 17. MLS is looking to get to 30 teams in the next few years. That's 900 roster spots, with only 8 spots per team for international players. There are a lot spots for American professional players, and presumably some of them will want to go to college. I'm not saying that college soccer should be the only pathway, but I'd like to see it remain an option. Every professional athlete is one injury away from never playing again. It'd be good for the players who want a good education to be able to get one.

The MLS is not the answer, dudes. I hate to break it to you. 20/23 players in the most recent callup were from outside of the MLS. That number should be similar WHEN we qualify for 2022 in Qatar.

Short term, yes, I would expect something similar. But I think the USMNT's fate is closely linked to the fate of MLS. Right now MLS's attendance is very good. The key is increasing the amount of TV money coming in. More money means a better product on the field, more resources for youth development, more appeal to a multi-sport athlete who right now could make a lot more money in any of the other major American sports leagues. No other league is going to be invested specifically in developing young American players. Many of the American guys who have gone to Europe have had more opportunities because they have a Croatian or Hungarian or Latvian grandparent and they can avoid the hassle of the non-EU player rules. With Brexit I'm hoping that more Americans will have a chance to go to the EPL, but right now that pathway is based on how much you're playing in MLS, and if the quality of the MLS improves it will be better for those players. And a lot of the Euro-based players came through MLS academies, possibly even making it to MLS before moving to Europe.

I think it is hugely important to support MLS. Any Eurosnobs who look down their nose and can't be bothered to tune into an MLS match are part of the problem. I've had the MLS TV package (first via satellite TV, then via the MLS website, and finally via ESPN+) since 2003. I went to Portland for a Timbers-Sounders match and it was an incredible experience (geaux Timbers!). If you want to help soccer in the US, pay your $60/year for ESPN+ and support MLS.

[loJic]

✋🏼 I’m part of the problem then. McSoccer 👎

[loJic]

I don’t have the devotion Chris does to dissecting US $occer, $UM and ML$ relationships, but I like his approach to try and explain it all.

Sorry K dizzle for putting you blast, but I knew Chris would love reading that.

[kevin]

No offense taken. I really don't care if some people on Twitter think I'm wrong. I probably came across that guy's stuff years ago. And I just read through a bunch of it. I think he makes a lot of valid points, especially about how MLS/USSF intertwine in a way that simply doesn't happen in other American sports. I like pro/rel. But the people dropping hundreds of millions to get a team don't want to get relegated.

If MLS disappeared overnight, would American soccer be better off? No. It'd be worse off for years, maybe decades. If you're lucky, something better would eventually replace it. On the other hand, something worse could easily come along.

I think it'd be great if the US just magically had the soccer infrastructure of England or Germany or Spain and we had a pro/rel pyramid 10 or 20 levels deep and every town had a team. But that's not what we have. The top flight of soccer in America is probably going to look like the other American major leagues--30 or so franchises and no pro/rel.

[usasoccerboy]

Again, lots of good comments.

There are a lot of you defending the school systems developing players. As I stated before, schools do not care about player development.

The last thing the USAMNT needs is more college graduates. Going to college is not going to make your country better in soccer. In fact, when it comes to the men's program, college soccer intentionally hampers male soccer development. Louisiana had three Division I men's soccer programs before title 9. Now they have none. This was during the death of soccer days in the eighties and they were successful. Politics, not declining interest, got rid of those programs in Louisiana.

As for players not succeeding in elevated academy systems, then I say that is a good thing. Better to weed out the players not cut out for professional soccer than learn that farther down the road like say in a olympic tournament. That is the point why I say we need club systems. Club systems will foster better and harder competition and the play should allow the cream to rise to the top. None of this constant excuse saying my son was not rich enough to play soccer. You want to be a pro? Prove it on the playing field. Let the results speak for themselves instead of some tryout at the beginning of the season and then no more need to keep up your play to stay on the team. Let the coaches call up players at any time. Open play. if you are the best, prove it on the field. That is how we should be developing players by providing them the most challenging environments we can put them through.