Comparing the Crew proposals (spoiler alert: Columbus wins)

Posted on August 9, 2018 by Beau Dure

Just in time for Austin to vote today to move closer to a stadium agreement for the Crew, we have another stadium proposal out of Columbus.

So let’s compare.

They’re roughly even on aesthetics. Each stadium looks cool and has a roof over the stands. See Austin and Columbus.
Each plan offers something for the community. The Austin City Council has won a lot of concessions, including one for 130 affordable-housing units. The Columbus proposal includes futsal courts for the community.
Each one appears to be truly soccer-specific, with no pointyball tenants.
Each one appears to be grass.
Capacity is somewhere between 20,000 and 25,000, which seems reasonable.

All good. Here are the differences.

DISTANCE FROM DOWNTOWN

One complaint about Columbus Crew Stadium is that it’s too far from downtown. It’s really not. (It’s also close to a university that’s pretty substantial, offering up a lot of people from the demographic MLS covets.)

Oh, 3.7 miles isn’t close enough? OK then. The new proposal is 1.4 miles from the same spot. Actually not a much shorter drive, but now we’re talking about potential walking distance.

And here’s Austin …

And that’s generous. The site I picked is on the north side of downtown. I was tempted to pick the statue of this guy …

The distance is, conservatively, 10 miles.

If this were an expansion bid and not something involving an existing owner, Don Garber surely would’ve shrugged and checked in on Sacramento’s ownership group.

That said, here’s the last difference …

REQUIRING AN ORIGINAL MLS CLUB TO MOVE FROM A STADIUM BUILT FOR THAT CLUB, THEREBY ALIENATING FANS ALL ACROSS THE LEAGUE AND UNDERMINING THE LEAGUE’S CREDIBILITY IN ALL FUTURE DISCUSSIONS WITH MUNICIPALITIES AND PROSPECTIVE OWNERS

Austin: Yes
Columbus: No

We do have to admit a couple of unpleasant things here. This effort to Save the Crew — the stadium proposal, the 10,000-season-tickets-and-counting pledge, the engagement of a business community that frankly hasn’t done enough to this point — wouldn’t exist if Anthony Precourt wasn’t looking to move the team.

So MLS has to find another way to press its clubs to do better. If you want to add that to your promotion/relegation talking points, fine, but bear in mind that a lot of English owners don’t build or renovate stadiums precisely because they don’t have the guaranteed income of top-division soccer. (See Reading.)

But that’s a long-term concern. In the short term, if MLS doesn’t immediately make the Columbus stadium vision its top priority, then it’s going to be dead to a lot of its longest-serving supporters.

See more Columbus stadium renderings at Massive Report.

youth soccer

Biobanding and the Little League model

Posted on August 6, 2018 by Beau Dure

One of those sudden brainstorms — or at least a brain-quick-bolt-of-lightning. The recent USSF (from England) “biobanding” initiative is similar to the Little League model I once proposed.

The common thread: Let players progress on a pathway that’s more flexible than “U8, U9, U10 … U14,” etc.

The idea is simple. Instead of age groups, you have levels. Those levels would have common-sense age ranges — no 16-year-olds on the same field with 9-year-olds — sure, it’s good for free play, but every self-respecting adult or upper-teen player is going to back off a bit against the tweens. But they would overlap.

One way to do it, going from kindergarten up to age 12:

Top level: All 12-year-olds, a lot of 11-year-olds, some advanced 10-year-olds
Level 2: Any 11-year-olds who aren’t at the top level, some 10-year-olds, advanced 9-year-olds
Level 3: 10, 9, 8
Level 4: 9, 8, 7
Below that, you’d probably just want a first-grade league and kindergarten league

This could run concurrently with or instead of a rec league organized mostly by grade year. (See my other pieces on not having full-time travel before age 12.)

Want to support Ranting Soccer Dad? Great! Check out the Patreon page or buy the “three minivans” T-shirt.

podcast, us soccer, women's soccer

New podcast, new T-shirt

Posted on August 3, 2018 by Beau Dure

The feedback I’ve received on the T-shirts is that everyone loves the “three minivans” badge.

minivans-shirt So the new T-shirt emphasizes that badge. The RSD banner is moved, and the “TRAVEL SUCKER” logo becomes a small badge.

Take a look and get your shirt now.

Also new …

I’m going to do fewer hourlong podcast interviews. Instead, I’m going to do two different sorts of podcasts:

The big ones: Multipart, multivoice series on a particular topic, akin to the great “American Fiasco” series.

The small ones: Short podcasts covering a couple of topics.

This week, it’s the latter. Give it a listen.

The three topics this week are:

We have a new U.S. Youth Soccer chairman. What does that mean for U.S. Soccer?
On women’s soccer broadcasts, could we show a variety of aspirational archetypes, not just soccer players?
What’s new at Ranting Soccer Dad.

pro soccer, youth soccer

A pro academy and a rec program

Posted on August 2, 2018 by Beau Dure

“We all start as recreational players.”

I’ve been saying that for a while, and I’m not alone. Whether it’s a suburban U5 program with parents and size 3 balls or a kid joining a neighborhood kickabout, everyone’s first experience with soccer is low-stakes recreational soccer. Unless you think Messi was birthed as a fully formed U16 Barcelona academy player, you realize the basic truth here.

American youth clubs are usually all-inclusive. Even if they have a Development Academy program or other elite teams, they tend to have rec programs running from U5 to U19, including TOPSoccer. (Yes, I found it amusing and kind of tone-deaf that a new soccer semipro league boasted about having “the TOP soccer players in the region.” I’m surely not the only person who thinks of TOPSoccer upon seeing that, and it makes me wonder if the people running this league are aware of the complete range of the U.S. soccer community.)

Apparently, we’re not alone. If you get the United Soccer Coaches magazine Soccer Journal, please check out the interview with Espanyol’s Eloy Perez. Among other interesting things (re-typed here, so typos are mine):

Q: You have a large recreation program at the club. Can you tell me how that works?

A: Yes, we have 56 teams in the recreation program. The players can decide if they want to train one or two times per week, and to play a game on Saturday mornings.

Q: And it takes place at the training ground?

A. Yes, yes, it takes place here at the training ground. The same place that the academy and first team practices.

Q: Have you had much success bringing players from the recreation program and then into the academy, and eventually the first team?

A: Yes, we had out first player from the recreation program play for our first team last year, Oscar Melendo. He started in the recreation program when he was six years old. Hopefully he is the first of many.

Q: What other goals do you have for the recreation program?

A: For us, it’s an opportunity to work with the community, to make sure children from 5-14 get good training and get to know we are a family club that looks after its people. They get to learn the game well, to be introduced to sport, to work with others. Things that will help them.

I’m curious to know how many other pro clubs in Europe do this.

And why can’t we?

Duresport.com