U.S. youth men’s programs must be reviewed after 2001 disappointments.

By Robert Wagman
SoccerTimes

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Thursday, September 20, 2001) -- This has not been a good year for the United States men’s youth teams. In fact, the results have been so disappointing, that a fundamental review of the multi-million-dollar annual expenditure for the program is certainly in order.

Much was expected from both the under-20 men in the World Youth Championships this summer in Argentina, and the under-17s in the world championships currently in progress in Trinidad & Tobago.

The high expectations for the U-20s came as a result of a fourth-place finish of the under-17 national team two years ago in the world championships in New Zealand. When the Americans fell just short of a medal in the 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney, Australia, last September, it seemed as if the U.S. youth programs had finally matured into a power.

The under-20s, however, comprised mostly of New Zealand veterans, underachieved badly in Argentina in June. After advancing from group play with a second place tie with a lackluster 1-1-1 record, the U.S. was quickly eliminated by Egypt 2-0 in the round of 16.

That was a good performance compared to the one put in by the under-17s the past week in Bacolet, Tobago. It was three and out of the U-17s with France (5-3) and Nigeria (2-0) making their victories lopsided. The U.S. did not manage a shot on goal in its final setback yesterday against the Nigerians.

It’s hard to quantify what effect events in New York and the Washington area had on the team. But throughout the tournament, the Americans showed as a team, and as individuals, they simply didn’t measure up to the speed and skill levels of those they were facing.

There seems to be one common denominator between the two youth teams the U.S. sent into international competition this year. With a few exceptions, they were essentially amateur squads facing teams of well schooled young professionals. The under-20s had five professionals including the San Jose Earthquakes’s Landon Donovan, the Chicago Fire’s DeMarcus Beasley and D.C. United’s Bobby Convey, but otherwise it was a college all-star team facing entire teams of professionals.

The contrast was even more stark in the U-17 tournament. There, the U.S. sent high schoolers to face teams comprised of players from some of the top youth, reserve, and in some cases, second-division teams in Europe and Asia. The two professionals on the U.S. squad, the Dallas Burn’s Eddie Johnson and D.C. United Santino Quaranta, were the only players who seemed ready to compete.

In most of the major soccer countries of the world, players are developed through the extensive youth and reserve team programs of the professional clubs. These clubs spend millions a year on scouting, coaching and housing players from all over the world. They see this as the cost of doing business, and as justified if they can develop even a few players who eventually will play on their full sides, or if they develop young players who will some day generate transfer fees.

Major League Soccer is simply not in a position to develop and fund youth programs. As a further disincentive, because the league as a whole owns all players and doles them out to teams, a club with a youth program would have no claim on a player developed in its own youth program. So the United States Soccer Federation, using several million dollars a year in sponsorship money, has tried to develop a system somewhat modeled on the European system.

Through the Olympic Development Program (ODP), coaches and scouts look at players in every state. The ones judged the best get funneled up through the program and the best 20 or so at the under-17 age group, if their parents allow it (and that is always an issue), move to a residency program in Bradenton, Fla., where they live, go to school, and train year-round.

Part of the problem with this system is that the program gets locked into a relatively small number of players, though John Ellinger, the U-17 is confident he has the nest players available. "I am sure I have seen all the best kids in this age group in the country," Ellinger said. "The program for identifying the best kids is very sophisticated, and I think functioning well."

One problem is that once U.S. Soccer invites a player into the residency program, it is locked into keeping that player for the year whether he develops or not since he has left his school and home to travel to Florida. There is not much flexibility to bring in newly discovered talent during the year.

Many youth coaches around the country complain about the direction of ODP. They say the program is has grown to become heavily political; because it is run at the state level there is no consistency to the standards applied to the participants; and of the great expense to the parents of the players.

The bottom line is: Are we seeing all the best young players, and is the best being brought out of them?

The coaches of the teams the U.S. is facing in these youth competitions usually assemble their teams from among hundreds of young players in professional training programs while Ellinger and Wolfgang Sunholz, the under-20 coach, draw from a much smaller pool, even given the fact that so many kids in the U.S. are playing soccer.

The current U.S. program certainly is better than before, but obviously is still lacking. The recent results make it clear the program now needs a top-to-bottom review.

Senior correspondent Robert Wagman's "It Seems To Me . . . " appears regularly on SoccerTimes. He can be e-mailed at bobwagman@soccertimes.com..