The US is pretty shit at any sport where they can’t just outresource everyone else, which they have been able to do for most Olympic sports for a long time. They probably haven’t been the best in baseball for a while, the rest of the world has arguably already caught up to the US in basketball, women’s soccer is looking pretty wide open now, and they can’t develop technical men’s soccer player to save their lives lol. They rely entirely on just being richer than everyone
This is a post about the state of player development in the US for every sport that was mentioned. One of my more niche interests I guess.
The USA is the best in baseball by a wide margin. A best US lineup would be competitive with a best of the rest of the world lineup. Japan keeps getting better at producing players but they are still a long way behind the US. In baseball the US has the best facilities and training regimens, while also having the biggest player pool. Though Japan is extremely close in the former two.
In basketball the rest of the world has left the US behind. The US still has the most talent by a large margin, but that is because of facilities and player pool. They stick to extremely antiquated ideas when it comes to what makes a good basketball player. Though that should be changing eventually. Players like Jokic, Doncic, and Curry aren’t going unnoticed.
In both basketball and womens soccer the US is held back by their reliance on the collegiate system. In the rest of the world all players go through academies where they train full time while contracted to a professional club as a youth player. The biggest difference is that growing up a US player will play 6 games a week and practice once. While a player in Europe will play one game and practice 6 times in a week. They also get into the higher quality facilities sooner because many players play for the same club from age 6 to their professional career. In the US travel team/collegiate system players are only ever played in their best position and players are selected for how good they are now. In an academy system players are put into a range of positions to grow their potential. And players are selected for how good they’ll be at 18, instead of 12.
US Womens soccer is starting to build up their academy infrustructure but its much more difficult than in Europe. In Europe Barcelona has a mens team, a womens team, and a basketball team. Plus all associated infrastructure. FC Barcelona can build womens facilities with a flick of their wrist, whereas its much harder in the US. But, the NASL is growing, and academies are getting better. The US will never have its old dominance again, but it will start to pull ahead once every NASL team builds up their academy infrastructure. Short term Europe has the advantage, but long term there will only ever be a few womens teams in Europe that can think long term enough to build high quality academies. This is due to promotion and relegation, and the reduced profitability of the womens game.
Mens soccer in the US gets better every year. Because of the MLS ownership structure every team thinks long term. Ligue 1 in France puts 70% of its revenue towards player salaries while in MLS its only 26%. This is because MLS is incentivizing its teams to invest in their academies, training facilities, and stadiums. First with the lack of promotion and relegation letting teams think farther ahead. Next with roster rules forcibly shrinking the rosters of teams without homegrown players. Lastly with the salary cap, as players on homegrown contracts don’t count against the salary cap. The US will probably never have an academy as good as la masia, ajax, Dortmund, Bayern, ect. But eventually, imo, the US will have 20 or 30 academies that are just below that level.
Oh, there are plenty of technically focused young mens soccer players in the US. The US will always be known for athleticism. Our huge player pool to academy space ratio will they always have great athletes available. But, the majority of promising US U21 talents are most known for their technical or tactical ability. As it should be.
Producing professional players is all about how much infrastructure you have around it. The US is developing that infrastructure for mens soccer more efficiently than any other country in the world, except maybe Japan again. Though Japan’s big advantage is in their training methods and player analysis which is among the best in the world. While the US is among the best in the world in terms of facilities, it lags behind in quality coaches. But, getting more coaches into the system takes longer than construction.
I think about this all the time, when you pillage resources from every nutrient-rich country in existence for capital and do it at gunpoint, no shit you’re going to be richer than everyone
The US is pretty shit at any sport where they can’t just outresource everyone else, which they have been able to do for most Olympic sports for a long time. They probably haven’t been the best in baseball for a while, the rest of the world has arguably already caught up to the US in basketball, women’s soccer is looking pretty wide open now, and they can’t develop technical men’s soccer player to save their lives lol. They rely entirely on just being richer than everyone
without balkanization this would’ve happened in 1992
I need Yugoslavia to reunite for many reasons, but the main one beings to humble the Americans at basketball
This is a
post about the state of player development in the US for every sport that was mentioned. One of my more niche interests I guess.
The USA is the best in baseball by a wide margin. A best US lineup would be competitive with a best of the rest of the world lineup. Japan keeps getting better at producing players but they are still a long way behind the US. In baseball the US has the best facilities and training regimens, while also having the biggest player pool. Though Japan is extremely close in the former two.
In basketball the rest of the world has left the US behind. The US still has the most talent by a large margin, but that is because of facilities and player pool. They stick to extremely antiquated ideas when it comes to what makes a good basketball player. Though that should be changing eventually. Players like Jokic, Doncic, and Curry aren’t going unnoticed.
In both basketball and womens soccer the US is held back by their reliance on the collegiate system. In the rest of the world all players go through academies where they train full time while contracted to a professional club as a youth player. The biggest difference is that growing up a US player will play 6 games a week and practice once. While a player in Europe will play one game and practice 6 times in a week. They also get into the higher quality facilities sooner because many players play for the same club from age 6 to their professional career. In the US travel team/collegiate system players are only ever played in their best position and players are selected for how good they are now. In an academy system players are put into a range of positions to grow their potential. And players are selected for how good they’ll be at 18, instead of 12.
US Womens soccer is starting to build up their academy infrustructure but its much more difficult than in Europe. In Europe Barcelona has a mens team, a womens team, and a basketball team. Plus all associated infrastructure. FC Barcelona can build womens facilities with a flick of their wrist, whereas its much harder in the US. But, the NASL is growing, and academies are getting better. The US will never have its old dominance again, but it will start to pull ahead once every NASL team builds up their academy infrastructure. Short term Europe has the advantage, but long term there will only ever be a few womens teams in Europe that can think long term enough to build high quality academies. This is due to promotion and relegation, and the reduced profitability of the womens game.
Mens soccer in the US gets better every year. Because of the MLS ownership structure every team thinks long term. Ligue 1 in France puts 70% of its revenue towards player salaries while in MLS its only 26%. This is because MLS is incentivizing its teams to invest in their academies, training facilities, and stadiums. First with the lack of promotion and relegation letting teams think farther ahead. Next with roster rules forcibly shrinking the rosters of teams without homegrown players. Lastly with the salary cap, as players on homegrown contracts don’t count against the salary cap. The US will probably never have an academy as good as la masia, ajax, Dortmund, Bayern, ect. But eventually, imo, the US will have 20 or 30 academies that are just below that level.
Oh, there are plenty of technically focused young mens soccer players in the US. The US will always be known for athleticism. Our huge player pool to academy space ratio will they always have great athletes available. But, the majority of promising US U21 talents are most known for their technical or tactical ability. As it should be.
Producing professional players is all about how much infrastructure you have around it. The US is developing that infrastructure for mens soccer more efficiently than any other country in the world, except maybe Japan again. Though Japan’s big advantage is in their training methods and player analysis which is among the best in the world. While the US is among the best in the world in terms of facilities, it lags behind in quality coaches. But, getting more coaches into the system takes longer than construction.
Barbarism is how the US got to the top.
I think about this all the time, when you pillage resources from every nutrient-rich country in existence for capital and do it at gunpoint, no shit you’re going to be richer than everyone