According to FIFA, the United States has more soccer players than any other country -- 18 million, including 14 million under the age of 18. That means that the United States has more children playing soccer than there are children in Spain. Nonetheless, the United States is only the 33rd-best soccer playing nation, according to FIFA, while Spain is the best.
Spain is doing something to develop its best players into an international soccer-playing juggernaut while the United States isn't.
Bad arguments about why the United States isn't very good at soccer
Here are my pet theories on why the US doesn't perform that well in soccer in international competition:
1) Our soccer fields are too well groomed
This theory isn't mine; it's Johann Cruyff's. Cruyff grew up playing soccer in the streets of Amsterdam, and credited the hard asphalt surfaces for his impeccable ball control and balance later in life. Similarly, when I lived in Spain, the only time I saw a grass soccer field was at the Camp Nou and the Estadi Olympic. Only the professionals play on grass. Similarly, almost all the best Brazilians grow up playing soccer either on the streets
Ever try to play soccer in a parking lot or in a street? Either you have precision and control or you have to chase after your ball. American children grow up accustomed to a well-groomed field stopping the ball for them. Children who play on a street need or kicking against a wall develop exquisite control. Those who play on grass don't have to, because the game is played entirely on the ground until they reach their teen years. By then, they're years behind.
Bad arguments about why the United States isn't very good at soccer
1) We didn't grow up playing the game
I'm 34 years old, and I grew up playing the game. If I were a player, I would be nearing retirement age now.
For over 30 years, every suburban neighborhood in the United States has had soccer fields. I lived in Sylacauga, Alabama, in the 1980s, and it had soccer fields. If Sylacauga has soccer fields, lack of soccer fields isn't the issue.
2) Our best athletes don't play soccer
Is Lebron James a better athlete than Lionel Messi? Is Usain Bolt a better runner than Ryan Hall? These are dumb questions, because their talents are suited for different types of activities. It's unlikely that the United States equivalent of Lionel Messi isn't developing into a great soccer player because he's working on his jump shot.
Regardless, lack of athleticism isn't the biggest problem with the US soccer team. The US team is plenty athletic -- it's high-level skill that's lacking.
Here are my pet theories on why the US doesn't perform that well in soccer in international competition:
1) Our soccer fields are too well groomed
This theory isn't mine; it's Johann Cruyff's. Cruyff grew up playing soccer in the streets of Amsterdam, and credited the hard asphalt surfaces for his impeccable ball control and balance later in life. Similarly, when I lived in Spain, the only time I saw a grass soccer field was at the Camp Nou and the Estadi Olympic. Only the professionals play on grass. Similarly, almost all the best Brazilians grow up playing soccer either on the streets
Ever try to play soccer in a parking lot or in a street? Either you have precision and control or you have to chase after your ball. American children grow up accustomed to a well-groomed field stopping the ball for them. Children who play on a street need or kicking against a wall develop exquisite control. Those who play on grass don't have to, because the game is played entirely on the ground until they reach their teen years. By then, they're years behind.
2) Americans never play pick up soccer
14 million kids play soccer in the US, but how often do you see kids playing soccer at the park without a parent shuttling them around with cones? It doesn't happen much. A two-hour practice isn't enough to develop extraordinary skill. You have to spend hundreds of hours honing your craft or it won't happen.
3) We don't have an evolved talent development scheme
Because there isn't a tradition rooted in soccer in this country, we don't have a talent development scheme. In basketball, the best players get picked up by AAU teams by the time they're 12 years old. Then, they compete against the best players locally and around the country. These players then routinely attend the best high schools with the best coaches, who connect them to the best colleges and then the pros.
In soccer, we don't have as developed a system. Europe has elite youth teams in every major and minor city. The best players work their way through the ranks and get noticed by the best clubs. By the time a kid is 14 or 15 years old, if the kid has elite talent, he probably has elite coaching and access to world-class facilities. The United States has a competitive youth system that has only recently developed a direct pipeline to the local club teams.
I think the United States is starting to get there, but we just aren't there yet. But while the development scheme is improvement, it still only has a fraction of the resources of the equivalent European model. As long as that is the case, we can probably expect our adult teams to lag behind.
14 million kids play soccer in the US, but how often do you see kids playing soccer at the park without a parent shuttling them around with cones? It doesn't happen much. A two-hour practice isn't enough to develop extraordinary skill. You have to spend hundreds of hours honing your craft or it won't happen.
3) We don't have an evolved talent development scheme
Because there isn't a tradition rooted in soccer in this country, we don't have a talent development scheme. In basketball, the best players get picked up by AAU teams by the time they're 12 years old. Then, they compete against the best players locally and around the country. These players then routinely attend the best high schools with the best coaches, who connect them to the best colleges and then the pros.
In soccer, we don't have as developed a system. Europe has elite youth teams in every major and minor city. The best players work their way through the ranks and get noticed by the best clubs. By the time a kid is 14 or 15 years old, if the kid has elite talent, he probably has elite coaching and access to world-class facilities. The United States has a competitive youth system that has only recently developed a direct pipeline to the local club teams.
I think the United States is starting to get there, but we just aren't there yet. But while the development scheme is improvement, it still only has a fraction of the resources of the equivalent European model. As long as that is the case, we can probably expect our adult teams to lag behind.
You make some valid points Kieran but I think you miss the biggest point of them all.
ReplyDeleteEconomic force of the sport - In almost every country ranked ahead of the US, Soccer is the number one economic force in their sporting world.
• Media Support (TV deals, top journalists, and Ad Revenue)
• Venues - (Size, quality (luxury), and location of stadia)
• Fan Support (Tickets, Merchandise, Passion)
• Management and resources (Most wealthy owners, most savvy GMs, best coaches and trainers)
• Most talented athletes (all things being equal, the best talent is going where the money is).
All those tangible things create more difficult to quantify intangibles, like passion, history, desire, and celebrity. While it's hard to quantify the value of those elements, its often those elements that attract and retain the best athletes into one sport vs. the next.
In most of the competitive Soccer nations in the world, there is very little competition for the top of the economic sports pyramid. In America Soccer is competing for a distant 5th. Quite simply that's why we cannot attract and retain the best talent in the sport.
In your arguments you graze over the athlete discussion, dismissing Lebron as a poor fit for Soccer and suggesting that athleticism is not an issue for the USMNT.
I agree that there are different athletic attributes that carry various weights from one sport to the next. But you can't tell me there isn't a hell of a lot of overlap from one sport to the next. See Gonzalez, Tony; Gates, Anotnio, Iverson, Allen; Jackson, Bo, Sanders, Deion, etc. Those guys played multiple sports and thrived due to their world class athleticism which included speed, balance, coordination, tenacity, etc. Now they may not be the right examples but I'd argue that a hell of a lot of point guards, and defensive backs have the right levels of agility, coordination, stamina, balance, spatial awareness, and vision to make them superior soccer players. (For the record I think Lebron would make a hell of a lot better Center Back than Per Mertersacker, and a far more agile and explosive forward than Peter Crouch.)
You say that the Americans have great athleticism, but they are not World Class elite athletes. When the USA lines up against Brazil, Germany, and other elite competition they are often thoroughly outmatched for athletic talent on the field.
The reason... our best athletes are going where the money is and until we can change that into a tangible reality for at least a full generation of sports the US will not compete consistently on the world stage. You may argue that money exists in Europe but, European leagues are not a tangible reality for the majority of young American athletes. While cable networks, videogames, and the interenet is changing that it's not the same as the seeing thousands of people in Broncos' jersey's every Sunday paying top dollar to see the top athletes fight in our back yard.
A couple of counterarguments:
Delete1) Money doesn't hurt, but it doesn't guarantee success. Europe (particularly Scandinavia) dumps more money into track and field than anywhere in the world, as they do with soccer, but they don't produce the best athletes.
2) Athleticism is an amorphous concept, but I wouldn't say that Landon Donavon and Demarcus Beasley are vastly inferior athletes to Kaka and Ronaldinho, just vastly inferior skillwise. SImilarly, it is superior skill, not superior athleticism, that separates Philip Lahm from whatever right back the US is trotting out at any given moment.
Basically, if you compared the USMNT to the German or Brazliian national teams in a decathlon, it would likely be more competitive than most of the soccer games against the two sides.