Cybereagles
http://forum.cybereagles.com/

U.S had a pay to play policy?
http://forum.cybereagles.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=283551
Page 2 of 2

Author:  Odas [ Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

Tunisian Gooner wrote:
pay to play massive hindrance and then you have cancer of nepotism.

Even when parents find a way to pay exorbitant prices and you have players with genuine talent time and again you have parents of other kids who are coaches who selfishly force their average kid into their kids favored positions i.e CF and CM. Whilst many of the more truly gifted kids are exiled out of spite into positions such as GK.

Inevitably either the parents get frustrated and decide they're not going to pay top $$ and deal with systemic nepotism or the poor kid loses interest and quits organized soccer all together.

Very true! It happened to me and my twins. At the end, we decided to let it go

Author:  Kabalega [ Wed Oct 11, 2017 11:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

Odas wrote:
Tunisian Gooner wrote:
pay to play massive hindrance and then you have cancer of nepotism.

Even when parents find a way to pay exorbitant prices and you have players with genuine talent time and again you have parents of other kids who are coaches who selfishly force their average kid into their kids favored positions i.e CF and CM. Whilst many of the more truly gifted kids are exiled out of spite into positions such as GK.

Inevitably either the parents get frustrated and decide they're not going to pay top $$ and deal with systemic nepotism or the poor kid loses interest and quits organized soccer all together.

Very true! It happened to me and my twins. At the end, we decided to let it go

Why not just change academies?

Author:  Odas [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

Kabalega wrote:
Odas wrote:
Tunisian Gooner wrote:
pay to play massive hindrance and then you have cancer of nepotism.

Even when parents find a way to pay exorbitant prices and you have players with genuine talent time and again you have parents of other kids who are coaches who selfishly force their average kid into their kids favored positions i.e CF and CM. Whilst many of the more truly gifted kids are exiled out of spite into positions such as GK.

Inevitably either the parents get frustrated and decide they're not going to pay top $$ and deal with systemic nepotism or the poor kid loses interest and quits organized soccer all together.

Very true! It happened to me and my twins. At the end, we decided to let it go

Why not just change academies?

The young men left soccer completely and concentrated on their education

Author:  Enugu II [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

TBH, failure to get to the 2018 World Cup should not be reason to declare that soccer and the system used in the USA have failed. Far from it. USA has been qualifying for WC since 1986. That is not an easy accomplishment. That is a far longer streak than most other countries in the world. Importantly, the USA has also made it to the quarter finals and has beaten most of the major soccer countries at least once. That is better than Nigeria has ever done.

Sure, the pay to play hinders the game but it does lead to access to coaching at a younger age (TBH, I do not agree with this but many do). It also has made it much easier to track players quite early. Overall, the game has improved over the years and it shows in the play of the national team.

Author:  charlie [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

Enugu II wrote:
TBH, failure to get to the 2018 World Cup should not be reason to declare that soccer and the system used in the USA have failed. Far from it. USA has been qualifying for WC since 1986. That is not an easy accomplishment. That is a far longer streak than most other countries in the world. Importantly, the USA has also made it to the quarter finals and has beaten most of the major soccer countries at least once. That is better than Nigeria has ever done.

Sure, the pay to play hinders the game but it does lead to access to coaching at a younger age (TBH, I do not agree with this but many do). It also has made it much easier to track players quite early. Overall, the game has improved over the years and it shows in the play of the national team.


I disagree. When you consider the competition in their conference, and the relative difference in resources they have compared to all their competition combined, the US should be a shoe in by default to qualify in their world cup.

No one is saying US soccer has failed, but it is fair to say there are fundamental grassroot issues in US football that need to be fixed asap if they are to achieve anything on the world stage.

Author:  jette1 [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 5:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

all these una pay to play na yabis; soccer still remains the cheapest team sports for most parents to enroll their kids. Try doing Karate, american football or baseball, swimming, basketball, hockey etc for that matter. you are talking of $1500 per season to get an 8 year old in a team.

Author:  Kabalega [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 6:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

charlie wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
TBH, failure to get to the 2018 World Cup should not be reason to declare that soccer and the system used in the USA have failed. Far from it. USA has been qualifying for WC since 1986. That is not an easy accomplishment. That is a far longer streak than most other countries in the world. Importantly, the USA has also made it to the quarter finals and has beaten most of the major soccer countries at least once. That is better than Nigeria has ever done.

Sure, the pay to play hinders the game but it does lead to access to coaching at a younger age (TBH, I do not agree with this but many do). It also has made it much easier to track players quite early. Overall, the game has improved over the years and it shows in the play of the national team.


I disagree. When you consider the competition in their conference, and the relative difference in resources they have compared to all their competition combined, the US should be a shoe in by default to qualify in their world cup.

No one is saying US soccer has failed, but it is fair to say there are fundamental grassroot issues in US football that need to be fixed asap if they are to achieve anything on the world stage.

I'm sorry, if the USA cannot get a draw against a hapless Trinidad and Tobago, then they have failed!
It's not like they are tearing it up in the FIFA youth tournaments either.

Forget the results for a minute and look at the game on the green grass.
Did you see Altidore's woeful display? What about Woods?
After the game, Altidore and Michael Bradley indirectly blamed Klinsmann for losing the first two games of the campaign, reducing the margin of error.
These two guys showed no fight when all they needed was a draw from TnT. The worst was Altidore!


This is exactly what Klinsmann was talking about when he said that the sheltered kids from the 'burbs have no fight or grit to their core.

The same players turned it around and blamed "Klinsmann's foreign boys" for not having the USA fighting spirit.
Well, where was that fighting spirit against TnT?
Only a handful of them tried. It looked like they were not aware of what was required of them.

When the going gets tough, they fold. It's like they were raised in a lab, a controlled environment, heck a "pay to play" zoo where food was fed to them on platters.
Throw them out into the wild and they will be eaten by the likes of Trinidad and Tobago.
They also don't like going out of their comfort zone of the MLS.

All they needed was one goal. One draw. Just one point!
They failed!


US soccer should fast-track the MLS youth setups and hope that they will get the job done.

Author:  deanotito [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 7:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

If we ever find a way to interest black American youth in soccer, it'll change the game 100x.

But in general, I think all of this is an overreaction. They're acting like it's a world war they just lost

Author:  Enugu II [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

charlie wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
TBH, failure to get to the 2018 World Cup should not be reason to declare that soccer and the system used in the USA have failed. Far from it. USA has been qualifying for WC since 1986. That is not an easy accomplishment. That is a far longer streak than most other countries in the world. Importantly, the USA has also made it to the quarter finals and has beaten most of the major soccer countries at least once. That is better than Nigeria has ever done.

Sure, the pay to play hinders the game but it does lead to access to coaching at a younger age (TBH, I do not agree with this but many do). It also has made it much easier to track players quite early. Overall, the game has improved over the years and it shows in the play of the national team.


I disagree. When you consider the competition in their conference, and the relative difference in resources they have compared to all their competition combined, the US should be a shoe in by default to qualify in their world cup.

No one is saying US soccer has failed, but it is fair to say there are fundamental grassroot issues in US football that need to be fixed asap if they are to achieve anything on the world stage.


But those issues did not prevent an amazing run at World Cup qualifications, did they? Confederation is weak? Okay ooo! Yet, Mexico required a playoff to make it to the 2014 World Cup. Costa Rica surprised Italy, Uruguay, and England and yet it is weak. One failure at World Cup qualification and we conclude USA soccer is coming apart. Unfortunately, those in charge will buy in but they will be making a huge mistake by revolutionizing everything. But note that one thing they cannot change is pay to play. It is part of the fundamental fabric of the society i.e. the idea of commodification.


Author:  Scipio Africanus [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

Enugu II wrote:
charlie wrote:
Enugu II wrote:
TBH, failure to get to the 2018 World Cup should not be reason to declare that soccer and the system used in the USA have failed. Far from it. USA has been qualifying for WC since 1986. That is not an easy accomplishment. That is a far longer streak than most other countries in the world. Importantly, the USA has also made it to the quarter finals and has beaten most of the major soccer countries at least once. That is better than Nigeria has ever done.

Sure, the pay to play hinders the game but it does lead to access to coaching at a younger age (TBH, I do not agree with this but many do). It also has made it much easier to track players quite early. Overall, the game has improved over the years and it shows in the play of the national team.


I disagree. When you consider the competition in their conference, and the relative difference in resources they have compared to all their competition combined, the US should be a shoe in by default to qualify in their world cup.

No one is saying US soccer has failed, but it is fair to say there are fundamental grassroot issues in US football that need to be fixed asap if they are to achieve anything on the world stage.


But those issues did not prevent an amazing run at World Cup qualifications, did they? Confederation is weak? Okay ooo! Yet, Mexico required a playoff to make it to the 2014 World Cup. Costa Rica surprised Italy, Uruguay, and England and yet it is weak. One failure at World Cup qualification and we conclude USA soccer is coming apart. Unfortunately, those in charge will buy in but they will be making a huge mistake by revolutionizing everything. But note that one thing they cannot change is pay to play. It is part of the fundamental fabric of the society i.e. the idea of commodification.



:agree: :agree: :agree:

Author:  TheHitman47 [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

Enugu II wrote:
TBH, failure to get to the 2018 World Cup should not be reason to declare that soccer and the system used in the USA have failed. Far from it. USA has been qualifying for WC since 1986. That is not an easy accomplishment. That is a far longer streak than most other countries in the world. Importantly, the USA has also made it to the quarter finals and has beaten most of the major soccer countries at least once. That is better than Nigeria has ever done.

Sure, the pay to play hinders the game but it does lead to access to coaching at a younger age (TBH, I do not agree with this but many do). It also has made it much easier to track players quite early. Overall, the game has improved over the years and it shows in the play of the national team.



I'm going to have to Jump in here and state a big difference between the US and Nigeria that is the reason why they should be doing better than us. They have more money and better overall infrastructure than us. If we had money and infrastructure to match we would be a hell of a lot better than the USMNT. Nigeria tends to get results despite not having near the resources of many of the teams, even in comparison to some of the South American countries like Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and so on and we have more corruption.

Author:  TheHitman47 [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

It's not just pay to play that needs to be adjusted but also promotion relegation at club level. The NASL and USL should be folded into the MLS and created into a system that forces clubs to play better so they can keep their financial relevance. This would help players improve because it would be more cutthroat at the top level.

Author:  kolinzo [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

charlie wrote:
There is a very well written and elaborate article in the guardian that analyzes the root cause of what they call American Soccer's diversity problem:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/jun/01/us-soccer-diversity-problem-world-football

I suggest you guys read it. It seems they took a model used in other suburban sports (American Football, Baseball and Hockey) and tried to apply it to soccer, and clearly its failing because it creates a diversity issue where the sport is only accessible to those that can afford to pay to play.


Common guys. Have you seen the diversity in USMNT? You mean to tell me the national team reflects what you are telling us? It is simply not true.

Author:  kolinzo [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

deanotito wrote:
If we ever find a way to interest black American youth in soccer, it'll change the game 100x.

But in general, I think all of this is an overreaction. They're acting like it's a world war they just lost


It is a WWII that the US lost. It simply is. But then CONCACAF is just one tough region.

Wooing AFAM is not the solution to the problem here. When the money is right, AFAM will find their way to soccer but right now they can't be bothered! Besides there are many blacks in the league right now. Now the problem here is that USA want to do it their own way and I applaud that. Eventually, they will get it right.

Author:  mcal [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

bamenda boy wrote:
I thought only Nigeria, I mean Africa does such.
I hear kids are in the inner city and can't pay to get into
clubs academy system. Can someone she some light on this?

Because I am still wondering why my man Mokwelle has not been called up yet.
...pay to play is good for overall coverage for the kids' well being.
This is America, an advanced country, they have what is called insurance for protection, etc. I know it may never make sense to us Africans but if any of the kids get hurt it have to be covered.

Author:  ElHadary [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 5:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

kolinzo wrote:
deanotito wrote:
If we ever find a way to interest black American youth in soccer, it'll change the game 100x.

But in general, I think all of this is an overreaction. They're acting like it's a world war they just lost


It is a WWII that the US lost. It simply is. But then CONCACAF is just one tough region.

Wooing AFAM is not the solution to the problem here. When the money is right, AFAM will find their way to soccer but right now they can't be bothered! Besides there are many blacks in the league right now. Now the problem here is that USA want to do it their own way and I applaud that. Eventually, they will get it right.



What!? No.... it's one of the easiest by far.

Author:  Thunder [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 5:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

gurrano wrote:
This is a US/Canada issue.. I have always argued that the system was an impediment to getting the best talents involved in some sports in these countries.. I have a naija friend who has 2 boys playing travel soccer and I constantly praise him for his ability to keep up with the demands of their schedule. Some days he is travelling to Detroit for one sons game while his wife is heading to somewhere in Ohio for the other kids game. factor in that some of these games occur on working days which means they have to take time off work the also add travel cost, hotel stay etc.. and the total cost of getting involved becomes unsustainable for most working class folks like me.

anikulapo wrote:
As a parent and as a u10 coach I'm not surprised at what's happened to IS soccer . It's basically a Good Ol Boys country club system.

To get proper training at an elite club it's either btw $4-$10k and this doesn't include travel and hotel expenses for practice and tournaments .... it's a failed and flawed system and it's no surprise at the results they are getting ..., as for me and my house we sabi wetin we go do


Gurrano, for more than 25 years I've had to deal with it with my children, and it was no joke. I thank God for my wife bcos her support was immense and instrumental thru it all. We have been to almost every major tournament in the land, jointly and severally; from Surf Cup to Disney, ODP to Regionals. Cost and time aside, the most meaningful conversations we've had with the kids was inside the car/van. For that, I am thankful.

Author:  Enugu II [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 7:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

mcal wrote:
bamenda boy wrote:
I thought only Nigeria, I mean Africa does such.
I hear kids are in the inner city and can't pay to get into
clubs academy system. Can someone she some light on this?

Because I am still wondering why my man Mokwelle has not been called up yet.
...pay to play is good for overall coverage for the kids' well being.
This is America, an advanced country, they have what is called insurance for protection, etc. I know it may never make sense to us Africans but if any of the kids get hurt it have to be covered.

Mcal

Pay to play is about profit and offering access to certified coaches in most cases. It also frees access to high level competition and to scouts. The It has
nothing to do with insurance. In fact you are required to sign an indemnity form that requires your own med insurance to provide coverage in case of insurance. For sake of accuracy in this debate there are some academies that do not charge a fee or offer financial support for a kid with exceptional talent. But those are few.

Author:  kolinzo [ Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

ElHadary wrote:
kolinzo wrote:
deanotito wrote:
If we ever find a way to interest black American youth in soccer, it'll change the game 100x.

But in general, I think all of this is an overreaction. They're acting like it's a world war they just lost


It is a WWII that the US lost. It simply is. But then CONCACAF is just one tough region.

Wooing AFAM is not the solution to the problem here. When the money is right, AFAM will find their way to soccer but right now they can't be bothered! Besides there are many blacks in the league right now. Now the problem here is that USA want to do it their own way and I applaud that. Eventually, they will get it right.



What!? No.... it's one of the easiest by far.


No it isn't. It is one of the toughest region to qualify. USA not qualifying just showed you this. About two WCs ago Mexico had to go to playoffs to qualify. And these two are powerhouses in CONCACAF.

Author:  bepanda [ Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

And you believe that the USA or Mexico would qualify, if they were to play consistently against Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Ecuador, Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia, Uruguay, Paraguay?
You are kidding yourself ...
Bepanda
kolinzo wrote:
ElHadary wrote:
kolinzo wrote:
deanotito wrote:
If we ever find a way to interest black American youth in soccer, it'll change the game 100x.
But in general, I think all of this is an overreaction. They're acting like it's a world war they just lost

It is a WWII that the US lost. It simply is. But then CONCACAF is just one tough region.
Wooing AFAM is not the solution to the problem here. When the money is right, AFAM will find their way to soccer but right now they can't be bothered! Besides there are many blacks in the league right now. Now the problem here is that USA want to do it their own way and I applaud that. Eventually, they will get it right.

What!? No.... it's one of the easiest by far.

No it isn't. It is one of the toughest region to qualify. USA not qualifying just showed you this. About two WCs ago Mexico had to go to playoffs to qualify. And these two are powerhouses in CONCACAF.

Author:  mcal [ Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: U.S had a pay to play policy?

Enugu II wrote:
mcal wrote:
bamenda boy wrote:
I thought only Nigeria, I mean Africa does such.
I hear kids are in the inner city and can't pay to get into
clubs academy system. Can someone she some light on this?

Because I am still wondering why my man Mokwelle has not been called up yet.
...pay to play is good for overall coverage for the kids' well being.
This is America, an advanced country, they have what is called insurance for protection, etc. I know it may never make sense to us Africans but if any of the kids get hurt it have to be covered.

Mcal

Pay to play is about profit and offering access to certified coaches in most cases. It also frees access to high level competition and to scouts. The It has
nothing to do with insurance. In fact you are required to sign an indemnity form that requires your own med insurance to provide coverage in case of insurance. For sake of accuracy in this debate there are some academies that do not charge a fee or offer financial support for a kid with exceptional talent. But those are few.
...agree, it changes as you progress higher. My point is mostly at the lower levels, travel soccer like.

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC + 1 hour
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/