Comments on: Arbitrator Rules in Favor of US Youth Soccer and MYSA

By: MIAC Fan

MIAC Fan — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:51:01 +0000

The biggest difference in the cost between most community clubs and clubs like MTA are the winter training expenses and travel costs associated with tournaments.
Top coaches with strong clubs and better teams all earn a fairly similar amount from what I’ve heard over the past 2-3 years. The main difference is the cost of dome time and travel compared to teams that don’t train as often or travel as extensively.
The choice comes down to the player and parent and what they want out of a team.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:17:29 +0000

Unethical probably was a poor choice of words. I guess it comes down to how the individual is selected. More and more I’ve seen the recruiting of players who are not exceptional, which leads me to believe that private clubs, not just MTA, are simply trying to pad their revenue. I’ve also witnessed exceptional players who were left out because they couldn’t afford the higher costs associated with clubs such as MTA. I know that MTA offers scholarships to some, but in my experience, those have been reserved for the truly exceptional athletes. Even when partial scholarships are offered, the fees are still generally higher than most clubs, making it difficult for many. I have had this discussion with many of my friends who coach with MTA, and they definitely disagree with me on certain aspects, but have also admitted to others. The coaches of MTA are definitely a devoted group and are great at what they do. But I also look at models like MU that have done a fantastic job of offering high level training to those within the club who would like it, while at the same time keeping their costs down. I guess the way I can best summarize my thoughts on this matter is to simply say that I believe their is a difference between recruiting and offering an alternative. I have seen many players who were getting exactly what they wanted from their existing club until they were convinced that they were missing out by someone representing a private club. That just strikes me as salesmanship and I really don’t agree that this is the way we should be going about it. There is more to youth athletics than simply securing a scholarship. If a child is happy where they are, I don’t think it is right to convince that child, or parents, that they are not achieving their full potential. Ultimately, it’s still just a game.

By: Jeff Wolter

Jeff Wolter — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 05:57:06 +0000

Recruiting happens in youth soccer, it’s just new to Minnesota youth clubs. To say it is unethical is too harsh.

It’s the way the correctly selected player moves on that counts. If the players is selected by a small and well staffed club team that provides regional or national exposure for the developing player, then that is a win-win even for the club that originally developed and lost the player.

But, when every player is told they need to be with just one entity and they then end up playing the same other teams in the same district league as they were in before, and are being training nearly the same way for a much higher expense, then the player is not really being exposed to better competition.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 04:47:47 +0000

If that is in fact happening, then that sounds like a club issue, not so much an MYSA issue. I would absolutely not condone those types of actions. I support MTA’s mission and believe that they do a lot of good for the players that want to reach another level, however, I am not okay with one club going out of their way to pull players from another club. It is simply not ethical. If White Bear was doing that to Mahtomedi or Lakeville was doing that to Eden Prairie, nobody would believe that to be acceptable. However, for some reason, MTA gets away with it under the guise that they are the only club capable of offering a higher level of training or exposure. Let me be very clear here, I fully support MTA and what they do. I pride myself on not taking sides in this state and trying to stay as unbiased as possible. I don’t support the MYSA over the Thunder or the NSC over the MYSA or Community Clubs over Private Clubs. I am on the outside looking in and I try to stay as objective as possible. I am not affiliated in any way with any of the aformentioned entities, so I don’t have any reason what-so-ever to take sides. Nobody is without guilt, and that includes the MYSA, MTA, NSC, the Thunder, US Club Soccer, etc., etc. This, of course, includes me. I am in no way saying that I have all the answers, and obviously, these are simply my opinions for what they are worth.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:13:51 +0000

The bottom line is MYSA got very territorial when it came to the kids. I witnessed on numorous occasions local MYSA clubs not letting players go to MTA and parents not allowed to coach in a MYSA club because of a suspected affiliation with MTA. They were afraid the kids would get recruited away. Obviously, these kids wanted something more. Something that MYSA was not providing for these kids. So to say that MYSA has a responsibilty to “all” of the kids playing soccer in this state is not entirely true. Lets face it, USYS and MYSA and WYSA and whatever wants it all, the cake, the frosting, the calories and the plate too.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 04:50:27 +0000

The fact remains that the Thunder was a for-profit entity, and although their existence was great for the youth of this state, a line has to be drawn somewhere. MYSA did NOT have an obligation or responsibility to promote that team. There are many for-profit entities in this state that are great for youth soccer players; whether it be indoor facilities, training programs, stores, clubs or whatever. But it is unrealistic to think that the MYSA should blindly support them all even though they all have their benefits when it comes to youth soccer. It’s simply not realistic.
Also, I don’t think that I implied in any way that the top .1% should not be given other options or have additional opportunities. My issue is with the coaches who believe that the only kids worth spending their time on are in that upper echelon and who believe that the other 99.9% are not worth their time. That being said, I know that the vast majority of coaches out there do not fit this description. I would be the first to admit that those individuals are few and far between. But it also seems like those individuals are the ones that tend to be the catalysts to much of the fighting that occurs in this state and I am simply tired of it. I have absolutely nothing against US Club Soccer and what it offers, but to think they are owed something by the USYSA or MYSA is simply absurd considering they give nothing back to those organizations. The membership of the MYSA is required to pay, in order to receive coverage in sanctioned events. They do so in the form of their dues paid each season. Why should US Club Soccer be given the same benefits without contributing? That simply does not make sense.
I am optimistic that the various soccer entities in this state are really beginning to work together. I am seeing it happen on numerous levels. I just hope that it continues in that direction and that everyone can keep their eye on what is truly important.

By: Soccer Boy

Soccer Boy — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 23:06:16 +0000

I am surprised. However, I think it goes to show that this is why there is a process. Quite frankly, if this matter would move on and into the courts, I would not give MYSA a chance of prevailing on the ultimate issue.

I am also shocked a decision was issued as the dispute was essentially moot with the MYSA sanacitoning-there may have been some other issues. I would like to expand on this from a legal sense, but this is not the proper forum. In the end, kids will get to play soccer—and that is what it is all about!

By: Ric

Ric — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:13:44 +0000

Hopefully we all get back to putting the kids first, after all, isn’t that what youth soccer is all about?

By: Semi Anonymous

Semi Anonymous — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:13:35 +0000

Good point M.

I also agree with part of what Ryan says, namely the last paragraph. However, when you say the MYSA has a responsibility to the kids in this state (which I agree with 100%), then to also say that MYSA should not work to support the pro team is contradictory. Supporting professional soccer in MN IS supporting the kids. It’s about role models, inspiration and aspirations to someday play professionally regardless of the likelihood that even comes to fruition, excitement that pro soccer brings to the area, and development for both coaches and players alike who have the opportunity to watch professional soccer live.

THAT is why MYSA leadership is suspect in my eyes. They either don’t see the benefit, or they chose to ignore the benefit due to selfish, spiteful reasons (MTA). Whichever way it is, it doesn’t cast a good light on the decision makers behind this.

By: M

Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:51:44 +0000

I agree with BQ that it’s nice to see a bit of cooperation between NSC and MYSA, after an embarrassing period where overgrown adult egos got in the way of their mission which is to promote and grow the game.

As far as what Ryan posted: I agree with some of it (especially the part about how “MYSA has a responsibility to all of the kids playing soccer in this state”). Remember, though, that they have a responsibility to that “top .1%” as well. All MTA was/is trying to do is provide another option for players who want to compete at the highest level possible (an option, btw, that MYSA’s own governing body — US Soccer — would like more clubs in our country to try to emulate in order to raise the level of play in our country). While MTA is not perfect by any means, MYSA seems to be obsessed with the idea of “community clubs” to the detriment of “elite” clubs. That’s a reasonable perception, at least. Either that, or they had an axe to grind with some of the individuals who were involved with running MTA. Either way, their mission of growing and improving the game seemed to take a backseat due to petty BS (and those overgrown adult egos I mentioned above).