1 minute ago, NCiggles said:

I don't think it would take 2 to 3 decades. The participation rate at the youth level would have to expand some but youth participation in soccer is greater than baseball. I think the big difference is the sophistication of the youth sport on the club level. It's not necessarily the number of fans but how youth soccer in other countries has a funnel towards player development that you don't always get in US Soccer. https://intel.morningconsult.com/mc-content/analysis/americans-youth-sport-participation-2025

That’s part of it. Youth soccer in this country is very political and I believe has similar issues as AAU basketball. Parents care more about their kid’s individual skills than learning to play with a team.

Also - the jump from college soccer to pro level is a huge jump.

4 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

My biggest gripe is they waited so long to rescind the red card. It should have been done the next day (Thursday) not the day before the game (3 days too late). To me, that makes it look like there was clear outside influence (non-fifa related). So I see Belgium’s bitterness from that angle.

But yes, if Lukaku (Belgium’s best striker) was suspended unfairly then was ultimately allowed to play, I don’t think you see the same level of whining from our side. Not even close.

2 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

It is a weak loser mindset from Belgium.

I understand the mentality from a media member that a political figure should not be allowed to intervene with a decision and get a result. And let them make that case.

But for a team...the team playing the USA...to whine about the availability of a player who fundamentally should be available...it's really weak.

3 minutes ago, TEW said:

Literally institute a child soldier draft for for world war cup.

Billion dollar signing bonuses for making the US national team.

Soccer Team 6 at the Naval Academy.

I want a century of humiliation for European soccer!

You would know better than I that people ultimately follow the money. Money follows cultural interest and interest follows money. Chicken and egg.

But if you are a kid born in the US in the last 40 years through the foreseeable future....your best opportunity to make incredible money and get girls is not by playing soccer. It's football/basketball/baseball.

That's not to say that soccer players don't make enormous money and run through models like a knife through butter. But they don't here. And the pathway from the USA to the premier league isn't paved as well as the Dominican Republic to MLB or Brazil to the premier league.

2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I think the biggest issue is that our best athletes just don't go into soccer. Every kid in Europe and South America is kicking around a ball(apparently dribbling is the right term) as soon as they can walk. Those that are the best at it get funneled into development pathways. In the US, those same kids are throwing and catching balls, swinging bats, shooting balls through hoops. Those that are best at it get funneled into development pathways. Sure, soccer is more popular than it used to be (and having a viable USMNT speaks to that), but it's still niche.

The money...a trillion dollars...is irrelevant. If the money that goes into football, baseball, basketball already got re-directed into soccer (and it would if that's where the cultural interest was), the US spending would be astronomical compared to all of Europe combined. An AI search tells me the US spends approximately 40 Billion per year on football/baseball/basketball kids 8-18. France spends under 1 billion per year on youth soccer. I don't know how accurate those numbers are, but AI is obviously always right. Regardless, it's pretty clear the US spends an order of magnitude more money on youth (and professional) sports than other developed countries.

Our football IS fading at the youth level. Youth baseball and basketball remain very strong. Soccer is gaining, but it's just so far off still.

Football and baseball requires more to be spent to get on the field. Soccer is awesome for its accessibility world wide. Even if soccer had more cultural interest, there’s only so much you can spend. Around 1B a year for a country the size of France is actually a lot of money when you consider you’re looking at a ball, cleats, shin guards, mouth piece, socks, shorts, jersey, and maybe gloves. Call cleats even…you’re probably close spending the same on a glove as the rest in just baseball, which is another more widely accessible sport world wide.

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

I think the biggest issue is that our best athletes just don't go into soccer. Every kid in Europe and South America is kicking around a ball(apparently dribbling is the right term) as soon as they can walk. Those that are the best at it get funneled into development pathways. In the US, those same kids are throwing and catching balls, swinging bats, shooting balls through hoops. Those that are best at it get funneled into development pathways. Sure, soccer is more popular than it used to be (and having a viable USMNT speaks to that), but it's still niche.

The money...a trillion dollars...is irrelevant. If the money that goes into football, baseball, basketball already got re-directed into soccer (and it would if that's where the cultural interest was), the US spending would be astronomical compared to all of Europe combined. An AI search tells me the US spends approximately 40 Billion per year on football/baseball/basketball kids 8-18. France spends under 1 billion per year on youth soccer. I don't know how accurate those numbers are, but AI is obviously always right. Regardless, it's pretty clear the US spends an order of magnitude more money on youth (and professional) sports than other developed countries.

Our football IS fading at the youth level. Youth baseball and basketball remain very strong. Soccer is gaining, but it's just so far off still.

That seems to have always been the narrative but I don’t believe it. Maybe LeBron James could have been a good goalie. Tom Brady nor Peyton manning would have been any good at soccer past the high school level. Allen iverson may have been a stud though.

I also think which sport athletes are great at is very mental. I chose soccer over baseball at one point because baseball was just too slow moving (and I couldn’t hit the ball).

It’s hard to say though. Maybe a kid who picked football as a kid but wasn’t a good enough WR or DB in college to make it in the NFL could have had a 10 year pro career in soccer.

Just now, eagle45 said:

I think the biggest issue is that our best athletes just don't go into soccer. Every kid in Europe and South America is kicking around a ball(apparently dribbling is the right term) as soon as they can walk. Those that are the best at it get funneled into development pathways. In the US, those same kids are throwing and catching balls, swinging bats, shooting balls through hoops. Those that are best at it get funneled into development pathways. Sure, soccer is more popular than it used to be (and having a viable USMNT speaks to that), but it's still niche.

The money...a trillion dollars...is irrelevant. If the money that goes into football, baseball, basketball already got re-directed into soccer (and it would if that's where the cultural interest was), the US spending would be astronomical compared to all of Europe combined. An AI search tells me the US spends approximately 40 Billion per year on football/baseball/basketball kids 8-18. France spends under 1 billion per year on youth soccer. I don't know how accurate those numbers are, but AI is obviously always right. Regardless, it's pretty clear the US spends an order of magnitude more money on youth (and professional) sports than other developed countries.

Our football IS fading at the youth level. Youth baseball and basketball remain very strong. Soccer is gaining, but it's just so far off still.

Yeah, definitely. The biggest issue is that European "clubs” (their professional teams) have youth academies that train them up professionally as young children. Right now the South American teams who traditionally have that street ball culture aren’t really doing very well.

Compare that to the US, where most teams have been pay to play until recently. Like, I played for a pretty well regarded select team in my youth which produced a couple guys who played professionally in Europe, but it was still soccer moms driving their kids to practice after school, and the coaches were more concerned with winning than developing talent through training.

In Europe the kids are put in a structured environment to develop talent because the clubs are financially incentivized; youth players are often viewed as a source of revenue because players are bought and sold rather than traded. So a small club that develops a star can sell the kid at 18 years old for $50 million or more — sometimes a greater value than the club itself is worth!

The MLS just started building out academy systems relatively recently. The Philly Union actually have arguably the best academy in the country and their 16 year old Cavan Sullivan is probably the most promising young player we have in the US, and he was already sold to English giant Manchester City.

But we need more of this. We need a structured talent funnel that shapes raw athleticism into skill and gets them placed in MLS youth academies, because unlike in the NFL, you simply can’t get coached up in a few years like with Mailata. Once you are about 9 or 10 years old you are NEVER going to catch up to an equally athletic kid who has been playing his whole life with quality coaching.

1 minute ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

That seems to have always been the narrative but I don’t believe it. Maybe LeBron James could have been a good goalie. Tom Brady nor Peyton manning would have been any good at soccer past the high school level. Allen iverson may have been a stud though.

I also think which sport athletes are great at is very mental. I chose soccer over baseball at one point because baseball was just too slow moving (and I couldn’t hit the ball).

It’s hard to say though. Maybe a kid who picked football as a kid but wasn’t a good enough WR or DB in college to make it in the NFL could have had a 10 year pro career in soccer.

I think all our PGs, SGs, RBs, WRs, CBs, olympic sprinters, hockey players, and likely many highly skilled baseball players are the ones that project into soccer.

26 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I'm fascinated by the push back on the reversal.

The fundamental reality is that he should not have been red-carded in the first place. The means leading to the reversal are understandably controversial and political. (and can stay out of the blog). However, what a loser mentality from Belgium. You protest the reversal of a red card that everyone universally agrees should not have been handed out? Let the media talk about how this shouldn't have been reversed and that it's inappropriate. As a team, why protest the availability of a player that never should have been suspended in the first place? Just strikes me as a spineless loser mentality.

Imagine if Devonta Smith were suspended for something he didn't do. He gets reinstated because Gov. Shapiro circumvents the NFL's protocols with Goodell and gets it overturned. Jerry Jones protests the week before an Eagles / Cowboys MNF game. We'd all lose our minds calling them cowards.

It's because of the fact that it's unprecedented. Ronaldo had a similar situation, but not quite the same because he was given a 3 game suspension that was reduced to 1 game, and he served it. That was also in qualifiers so it would be like the "pre-season" equivalent in NFL terms. We're currently in the playoffs of the world cup, so the stakes are much higher, and the decisions on suspensions are much heavier.

In soccer, a red card has always been an ejection from the current game and an automatic suspension for the following match. There is no appeals process for the one game suspension. The only other case that's been mentioned where the automatic suspension wasn't served was a situation in 1962 for Garrincha (but I'm not sure on the details there.)

Some of the reason it's unprecedented is because the authority as defined in the rules was recently broadened in 2023 to give FIFA even more discretion on when and how to apply punishment which allowed for a reversal like this to even happen. But more broadly, the context that's missing for those who are watching the world cup casually or for the first time, is that FIFA has a very long and well documented history of corruption, so you'd have to be familiar with their track record to understand why this particular decision is being questioned.

It would be like if the NFL had been known as the most corrupt sports organization for decades and then suddenly declined to enforce the rule on draft eligibility to allow one particular player to declare for the draft straight from high school and the team benefiting from that decision is the city that's hosting the draft. It could be construed as the proper decision in a vacuum, if the player had some sort of extenuating circumstances, but in context of decades of corruption and scandals, it seems shady to those that have been following the NFL for a while.

TL/DR: For soccer fans, FIFA are like the Patriots. Decades of documented corruption, to the point that every incident naturally raises eyebrows, even if the ultimate outcome was the correct one.

9 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said:

Football and baseball requires more to be spent to get on the field. Soccer is awesome for its accessibility world wide. Even if soccer had more cultural interest, there’s only so much you can spend. Around 1B a year for a country the size of France is actually a lot of money when you consider you’re looking at a ball, cleats, shin guards, mouth piece, socks, shorts, jersey, and maybe gloves. Call cleats even…you’re probably close spending the same on a glove as the rest in just baseball, which is another more widely accessible sport world wide.

The money isn’t for equipment. The money is for coaching and scouting. And in a country as large as the US, you are going to need a LOT of money to build out a funnel that can touch every reasonably populated area, coach them, scout them, then get them pushed up to higher and higher levels.

In most countries this is all done by their professional teams since basically every town has a club of some kind, even if it doesn’t play in the highest league. You could be in some backwater town of France or England and there WILL be a pro or semi-pro team that you can try out for, get coached up at, and then it is in their best interest to develop you and market you to bigger teams and push talent up to the highest levels.

7 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I think the biggest issue is that our best athletes just don't go into soccer. Every kid in Europe and South America is kicking around a ball(apparently dribbling is the right term) as soon as they can walk. Those that are the best at it get funneled into development pathways. In the US, those same kids are throwing and catching balls, swinging bats, shooting balls through hoops. Those that are best at it get funneled into development pathways. Sure, soccer is more popular than it used to be (and having a viable USMNT speaks to that), but it's still niche.

The money...a trillion dollars...is irrelevant. If the money that goes into football, baseball, basketball already got re-directed into soccer (and it would if that's where the cultural interest was), the US spending would be astronomical compared to all of Europe combined. An AI search tells me the US spends approximately 40 Billion per year on football/baseball/basketball kids 8-18. France spends under 1 billion per year on youth soccer. I don't know how accurate those numbers are, but AI is obviously always right. Regardless, it's pretty clear the US spends an order of magnitude more money on youth (and professional) sports than other developed countries.

Our football IS fading at the youth level. Youth baseball and basketball remain very strong. Soccer is gaining, but it's just so far off still.

I have 2 kids playing youth soccer and what I find in my area is that kids want to play but there is a shortage of coaches. And of the coaches you get, there is a shortage of them who actually know soccer. Most are just bodies volunteering so the kids can play.

Because when I was a kid, in my area, no one played soccer. I never knew 1 kid growing up that played soccer. Didnt hear of it. Didnt see it being played anywhere. So now you have adults who cant really coach the kids because these adults didnt grow up knowing the game at all.

My older son is going to 7th grade now. He has been playing for about 4 or 5 years. Been playing goalie for the last 3 years. He has barely had any knowledgeable soccer coach let alone specific goalie training.

Tried signing him up for a winter training session. Still no goalie coaching.

Then, there are some specific goalie camps, but they are very expensive and require traveling. None locally.

Thats also a large part of the issue in this country with all sports. Soccer, Baseball, Softball, Basketball, Volleyball.... etc Its become ridiculously expensive as you need to go on these travel circuits for elite coaching and exposure opportunities. Sports are becoming a rich kid thing instead of most talented. Other countries excel in soccer because poor kids can kick a ball around even when they cant afford a pair of shoes. And the "travel ball" culture doesnt exist. Everyone has the same opportunity.

I know a kid who played for an MLS youth academy. Helps when you have a parent who owns his own construction business with various crews so you can be freed up to drive 2 hours away to practices and even further for out of state matches. Other parents are more tied down to typical work schedules. Its just not feasible for very many people. Especially if you dont live right in that city with a MLS program.

4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I think all our PGs, SGs, RBs, WRs, CBs, olympic sprinters, hockey players, and likely many highly skilled baseball players are the ones that project into soccer.

Sure. But I think that narrative is overrated. Soccer is the most popular youth sport in this country and has been for a while. If the USA wants to be a powerhouse soccer country, it could.

2 minutes ago, TEW said:

The money isn’t for equipment. The money is for coaching and scouting. And in a country as large as the US, you are going to need a LOT of money to build out a funnel that can touch every reasonably populated area, coach them, scout them, then get them pushed up to higher and higher levels.

In most countries this is all done by their professional teams since basically every town has a club of some kind, even if it doesn’t play in the highest league. You could be in some backwater town of France or England and there WILL be a pro or semi-pro team that you can try out for, get coached up at, and then it is in their best interest to develop you and market you to bigger teams and push talent up to the highest levels.

The context was money spent at youth level if I’m not mistaken?

2 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

Royal(?) Belgium? This is a country that will celebrate gaining its independence bicentennial in four years and decision that required a monarch bicentennial in five years.

14 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

That seems to have always been the narrative but I don’t believe it.

Our current starting right fullback is Antonio Freeman's son. There's definitely something to the theory.

3 hours ago, greend said:

He looks bigger now than when he played!

Has to be juicing at his age. T or hgh

3 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I have 2 kids playing youth soccer and what I find in my area is that kids want to play but there is a shortage of coaches. And of the coaches you get, there is a shortage of them who actually know soccer. Most are just bodies volunteering so the kids can play.

Because when I was a kid, in my area, no one played soccer. I never knew 1 kid growing up that played soccer. Didnt hear of it. Didnt see it being played anywhere. So now you have adults who cant really coach the kids because these adults didnt grow up knowing the game at all.

My older son is going to 7th grade now. He has been playing for about 4 or 5 years. Been playing goalie for the last 3 years. He has barely had any knowledgeable soccer coach let alone specific goalie training.

Tried signing him up for a winter training session. Still no goalie coaching.

Then, there are some specific goalie camps, but they are very expensive and require traveling. None locally.

Thats also a large part of the issue in this country with all sports. Soccer, Baseball, Softball, Basketball, Volleyball.... etc Its become ridiculously expensive as you need to go on these travel circuits for elite coaching and exposure opportunities. Sports are becoming a rich kid thing instead of most talented. Other countries excel in soccer because poor kids can kick a ball around even when they cant afford a pair of shoes. And the "travel ball" culture doesnt exist. Everyone has the same opportunity.

I know a kid who played for an MLS youth academy. Helps when you have a parent who owns his own construction business with various crews so you can be freed up to drive 2 hours away to practices and even further for out of state matches. Other parents are more tied down to typical work schedules. Its just not feasible for very many people. Especially if you dont live right in that city with a MLS program.

Yep. I grew up in central PA and didn’t have a coach that played at all until I was in high school. Even my club coaches from age 11-16 never played organized soccer. if you wanted that your parents needed time and $. But even that is getting too out of hand and kids are burning out.

Michael Jordan played baseball in the basketball offseason as a kid.

Just now, Wentz_Era said:

The context was money spent at youth level if I’m not mistaken?

Yeah. If you have 25 kids per team, you probably need at minimum 3 coaches if you want to get them enough individual attention to make a difference.

And it’s got to be year round, so even if this is a part time job, call it $100K for 3 coaches per team. And you are going to need literally thousands of teams at every age group, so it will take literally billions of dollars just to do it right from a coaching perspective.

Thats not even getting into equipment, field use, travel, etc.

Just coaches.

5 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Our current starting right fullback is Antonio Freeman's son. There's definitely something to the theory.

Ok? Who says one would have been great at the other sport? That mostly says (to me) that he grew up in a family that had the resources to get him the right coaching and development.

Yes, the genetics to be an elite level athlete, play a role.

1 hour ago, RememberTheKoy said:

It just dawned upon me today that Rodgers has the same NFC Championship Game record as McNabb at 1-4.

I wonder how Rodgers gets looked at if instead of his great Super Bowl MVP performance and Super Bowl win that he instead had a major choking performance like a hungover Donovan McNabb did. He would still have the MVPs I guess and watching both play Rodgers was a questionably a better player. I think that is just further proof that McNabb is not a HoF player but Rodgers still would be if he lost the Super Bowl.

Rodgers body of work, championship or not, was worlds better than McNabb

39 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

I don't think it would take 2 to 3 decades. The participation rate at the youth level would have to expand some but youth participation in soccer is greater than baseball. I think the big difference is the sophistication of the youth sport on the club level. It's not necessarily the number of fans but how youth soccer in other countries has a funnel towards player development that you don't always get in US Soccer. https://intel.morningconsult.com/mc-content/analysis/americans-youth-sport-participation-2025

Youth soccer in the US is fundamentally broken. I could spend hours on it but if you polled anyone who has coached, reffed, or been involved in it in any way, the vast majority would say it's currently set up to benefit a patch work collection of disparate clubs and organizations, not the kids. The kids are seemingly an after thought most of the time. It's sad because the potential is there, but the incentive structure for clubs, leagues, coaches, tournaments, etc is so F'ed up that the natural conclusion is always going to result in substandard development.

38 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

I think the biggest issue is that our best athletes just don't go into soccer. Every kid in Europe and South America is kicking around a ball(apparently dribbling is the right term) as soon as they can walk. Those that are the best at it get funneled into development pathways. In the US, those same kids are throwing and catching balls, swinging bats, shooting balls through hoops. Those that are best at it get funneled into development pathways. Sure, soccer is more popular than it used to be (and having a viable USMNT speaks to that), but it's still niche.

The money...a trillion dollars...is irrelevant. If the money that goes into football, baseball, basketball already got re-directed into soccer (and it would if that's where the cultural interest was), the US spending would be astronomical compared to all of Europe combined. An AI search tells me the US spends approximately 40 Billion per year on football/baseball/basketball kids 8-18. France spends under 1 billion per year on youth soccer. I don't know how accurate those numbers are, but AI is obviously always right. Regardless, it's pretty clear the US spends an order of magnitude more money on youth (and professional) sports than other developed countries.

Our football IS fading at the youth level. Youth baseball and basketball remain very strong. Soccer is gaining, but it's just so far off still.

France has 20% of the population of the U.S. When I was a kid, practically no one played youth soccer. When my children were 8-18, a huge amount of kids played youth soccer. I suspect that number has increased significantly since they were playing. I wouldn’t be surprised if the U.S. doesn’t currently spend in the billions on youth soccer.

7 minutes ago, TEW said:

Yeah. If you have 25 kids per team, you probably need at minimum 3 coaches if you want to get them enough individual attention to make a difference.

And it’s got to be year round, so even if this is a part time job, call it $100K for 3 coaches per team. And you are going to need literally thousands of teams at every age group, so it will take literally billions of dollars just to do it right from a coaching perspective.

Thats not even getting into equipment, field use, travel, etc.

Just coaches.

So still astronomically less than other sports, so add coaching as a wash on cost to cleats. Which was my point.

1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Youth soccer in the US is fundamentally broken. I could spend hours on it but if you polled anyone who has coached, reffed, or been involved in it in any way, the vast majority would say it's currently set up to benefit a patch work collection of disparate clubs and organizations, not the kids. The kids are seemingly an after thought most of the time. It's sad because the potential is there, but the incentive structure for clubs, leagues, coaches, tournaments, etc is so F'ed up that the natural conclusion is always going to result in substandard development.

Youth sports in general seems to be heading in this direction. Like you said though, hours could be spent…hell just think about the fields we played on at recess/youth sports back in our days. Parents these days would have a fit if school yards looked like that now a days. I think arrogance has a lot to do with it.

22 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Has to be juicing at his age. T or hgh

I'd bet TRT, being blessed genetically and probably works out with the same intensity he played with

8 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

France has 20% of the population of the U.S. When I was a kid, practically no one played youth soccer. When my children were 8-18, a huge amount of kids played youth soccer. I suspect that number has increased significantly since they were playing. I wouldn’t be surprised if the U.S. doesn’t currently spend in the billions on youth soccer.

From what i understand a lot of the professional leagues/clubs/etc around Europe invest a ton into youth programs in Europe (France apparently is one of the best at this). I truly don’t know if MLS operates at enough of a profit to even think about investing into the travel leagues which could be pipelines, let alone the youth level.