Originally Posted by ag futbol
Why are they constantly trying to "sell" us on the Academy? I have seasons tickets to see the first team play. The Blue Jays dont do a PR push to update fans on the new clubhouse for their single A team.
I guess they are expecting me to view the academy investment as a sign of hope for the future as the team of the present is so hopeless. I just don't get why player development is a core focus of the clubs marketing?
Because they need something to take the focus away from the first team.
Classic diversion and it obviously works.
No one is buying Season Ticket Packages because of the Academy or the Training Facility.
They are showcasing the Academy for the reason it is a foreign concept to many outside the game or the team. This is North America. The subject of our Academy regardless of this investment deserves attention.
When the SUPERDUPER draft isn't the default focus of up and coming talent for the casual NA fan I can see the Academy news not being news.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
No one is saying they are.
But the amount of "credit" that goes to the team by a lot of people on here and the fuss made about the academy, a normal and regular part of any soccer club, shows that their diversion works and helps keep the masses appeased.
Developing youth is nothing new or revolutionary either in soccer nor in most other sports.
NA Pro teams Academies regular and normal? That would depend on your definition. How many MLS teams had Academies to their name 5 years ago?
Worldwide its normal but we live in NA.
And until I see a huge honkin' list of people who cite their renewal on that awesome academy MLSE built I cry bullshit.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
You cry bullshit about what? I just said people aren't renewing based on the academy alone.
Comprehension. It's a useful skill.
Condescension. It's a useless skill.
and until people are renewing because of the Academy I don't see an overabundance of credit given by the masses. Mountain out of molehill.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
So credit only equals ticket buying? With that kind of logic, no wonder this team can't make progress.
Nobody made a mountain out of anything until you started your whining. Stating observations aren't always about making a fuss. Sometimes they are just observations. It's ridiculous that any statement made on this board is immediately cast in the light of a complaint. I am not complaining about the academy. It's what this team should be doing. But by the same token, since they should be doing it, (because otherwise they'd be putting themselves at a disadvantage to other teams) then it's not exactly revolutionary. It's pretty simple logic.
But much like a lot to do with this team, we applaud this team when they do things they are expected to do like somehow they're being brilliant when what they are really doing is re-inventing the wheel and then when their feet should be held to the fire over things they aren't doing, we do nothing. What you are looking at is a recipe for mediocrity. Welcome to Toronto.
Let me know when this organization does something truly revolutionary for them and sports in this town...like put together a contending winning team.
Ensco mentioned the different labour laws in NA affecting academies but didn't elaborate. How does it work? Can these kids sign pro contracts before they turn 18? Or does the TFC academy develop them and then just hope that when they turn 18 they decide to sign here?
I'm no MLSE proponent BUT as far as MLS standards it certainly appears to me that they have indeed gone beyond the standard - and i agree they should do that if we hope to build a long term, solid team that competes year after year. MLSE have sunk coin into this, significant coin, and I'm sure with expectation that they will reap dollar rewards. None-the-less what they have done is state-of-the-art in N.A. - well beyond the "standard"
Several MLS teams already have academy and team grounds that rival this. They're not shiny new like TFC's, but multiple fields, physio rooms, classrooms etc. is already in place.
It's nice. It's like getting a new car. Looks pretty. But does it get you from A-B any faster than your neighbour's 3 year old car? Probably not. So yeah, enjoy the new car but let's not act like the team has done something so innovative it gives them an advantage. This is as innovative as that shiny new "system" we have in place that has produced such awesome results so far.
And much like the team itself, that is the 3rd highest in the league, unless this Academy produces product that helps the team win at a higher rate than other teams with their less than state-of-the-art facilities, then it's a waste of money, at least from our perspective. My guess is that TFC results is not the ultimate goal of this new facility and there is a business plan behind it that accounts for some kind of return on the investment that has little to do with TFC. Rental of the facility maybe? MLSE are keen Real Estate investors, I am guessing asset accumulation is also a part of it. But unless you can connect this investement with direct benefits to the pitch that are proportionate to the investment made, then I have as much interest in this facility as I do in their condo.
And for the record, I do realize how jaded I sound but I think for good reason.
MLSE has shown to be able to make money, but their profitability does not translate to results. So unless that profit they are making finds it's way into my pocket, I could care less if they make money or not, it's the results on the pitch/ice/court that I care about.
MLSE has shown to be willing to spend buckets of money to product underperforming teams. So great, they spent buckets on this facility. Is anyone here convinced that they will produce better players than some private academies that have a fraction of the budget? Or the other MLS team academies that don't spend as much but still produce MLS players? Or the Colleges that produce the players drafted into the league? Shoot...South American clubs don't spend a fraction of this kind of money and produce 10x the players.
Efficiency impresses me. MLSE are the worst example of efficiency. Therefore, I am not impressed. They could spend $100million on a training facility, it's useless to me if it doesn't produce better results on the pitch.
An academy is nice and all, and welcomed, but why is something that be part of standard operation procedures be celebrated like manna from heaven?
It will be interesting to see if the TFC academy produces better players down the road than the numerous private academies that belong to SAAC out in the area.
By your token credit only equals winning games? You are jaded if you think nothing else deserves mention and slight "the masses" who wish to point it out.
Maybe concentrating on what could be done vs what has already been done being not enough or soon enough would be more proactive.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
Holy Fuck. The longer we keep this discussion going the bigger the hyperbole. If you want to disregard it you're better off not addressing it not making outrageous descriptions out of run-of-the-mill mentions.
I too look forward to the competition that will be developing between TFC Accies and the SAAC.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
Pete, I would suggest TFC is the one making hyperbolic statements.
But like Pookie points out there are still some flaws with the Academy... namely the quality of coaching there.
The investment is nice and all but I hope the same level of investment is there 10 years from now especially since it will likely take that long, if not longer, to see a return on that investment.
"That's nice"
That's all i needed to hear. It doesn't mean we're world beaters that will name our babies after MLSE.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
Its going to take years for academy results, and I am fine with that.
The first team is seperate from that for a long time and should be measured accordingly.
Road Trips: July 7 2007 Chicago, July 22nd 2007 Columbus, August 11 2007 NY, October 13 2007 LA, March 29 2008 Columbus, May 24th 2008 DC, May 26 2008 Montreal, June 28th 2008 NE, March 7-11-14 2009 Charleston, March 28 2009 Columbus, April 10 2010 New England, May 12 2010 Montreal, April 7 2012 Montreal, March 16 2013 Montreal , June 3 2014 Montreal, March 14 2015 Columbus
Twitter: @RPBPhil
Exactly.Pete, I would suggest TFC is the one making hyperbolic statements.
But like Pookie points out there are still some flaws with the Academy... namely the quality of coaching there.
The investment is nice and all but I hope the same level of investment is there 10 years from now especially since it will likely take that long, if not longer, to see a return on that investment.
To me this is a fundamental question that really has no answer at this point.
Take an U11 player in in SAAC. This fall, this player will have an option to go out for both District (assuming registration politics go away) and TFC-A . Both are supplemental development programs at this point meaning that they offer 1 additional night of training per week. I don't know how qualified the TFC-A coach is but I know that at least one District guy holds his UEFA license.
The SAAC club that the player belongs to could also involve coaches with Canadian A licenses as well as UEFA. Most employ former professional players at some level. Most operate summer camps. Most offer off-season supplemental training.
Is this U11 player better suited to join TFC-A (which is free) once a week or go with District and the UEFA coach for a fee for the one night per week? Based on qualifications, I might lean to District. Let's also not forget geography as the catchment area stretches out from London to Ottawa. What is going to be so unqiue about TFC-A that gets the U12 player's parents to drive from Peterborough or Guelph once a week into Toronto?
I think many would make that drive if there was some superior offering. I see a nice building with a plan that models what I can get at SAAC.
Let's explore the older guys now. Is a player at U15 better suited to join TFC-A with former MLS players and their "B" licenses or stick with SAAC and the more qualified coaching? Both programs have a higher ratio of training to games, both offer 10 month training and off-field support. Some might offer scholarship assistance, some might offer pathways to provincial or national teams. One costs more while the other is is free, though since nothing is ever free you have to weigh the trade off with player "rights"
Considering that the OPDL is about to start in 2014 which borrows all kinds of ideas from SAAC and other Academy programs worldwide, what is TFC-A really offering that is unique? Or more importantly, what is it offering that is better than what already exists with SAAC and is coming with the OPDL?
^Pook, I know the above outlines obstacles for the future of development in our province but all I can think is how exciting it is to have multiple options! It raises opportunities for competition for overall qualities in programs.
I'm sorry for the parents of kids who actually have to be a part of trialing which path is better suited in this time of change but on the outside looking in I'm chuffed that we're witnessing this change occurring!!
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
I too think the options are great. I would just encourage parents to look at each and weigh the pros and cons. TFC-A is a great addition to the pathways... and isn't it good to see pathways finally.... but as always, informed consumers usually win out.
The one way TFC-A can win out is to offer superior coaching and development which costs $$$. (technology, equipment, personnel, facilities, etc.) You figure TFC has the $$$ to invest in that, question is will they? At the end of the day that is the one huge advantage that TFC has. If they can provide that at a minimal cost to parents/players, the choice will be easier.
Facilities are nice and can attract but ultimately the measure of success is based on the people that are employed by the team and what they can offer.
That's the area where Canada has to catch up to the rest of the world. Either develop quality coaching within the country or bring in quality coaches from overseas who can teach.
It's fine to want to teach the players but you also need the infrastructure to teach the coaches.
^ agreed. I would also like to see them offer things that others can't.
It's where I was going with the whole Academy vs NCAA salary thing in the other thread. Reward the kids that come through the program, even if you don't have to.
Offer bursaries, scholarships... something beyond what they can get elsewhere. Again, we think of this program as Provincial but how many parents of 13-14-15 year olds are going to move from Ottawa or Thunder Bay for their kids' soccer career? Even a 3 x week from London to Toronto seems less than what most are willing to do.
The older kids might be billeted or benefit from a residence but really, how many parents are going to go that route? In their minds (and they are the ones spending the cash), this isn't the Ontario Hockey League.
Make it worth their while.
There is a general agreement that MLSE is willing to spend the money. But the question everyone forgets to ask is whether they spend the money wisely.
Is a huge $20million facility necessary? From a business standpoint perhaps, but from a performance standpoint, not really. Clubs in poor countries produce the best talents in environments that make our elementary school yards look like paradise. The real impact will be felt not by spending money on the nicest jacuzzi, but whether they bring in the best and brightest minds to teach the kids. Given the political situation within MLSE, I don't have a lot of faith that they necessarily know what they are doing in that regard. Building nice facilities? Hey! MLSE is great at that. Bringing in the right people? Not so much. And that will be the difference. Like I said, they could spend $100million on the facility, it won't mean jack shit if they can't get better performance.
Personally, to further Roogsy's point, I am skeptical at the motivation to engage in an Academy at all. It seems more like a league wide initiative to build more value into the Adidas deal. The more youth they can count as in the program (ie. daily clinics, summer camps, etc) the more they can earn in the next deal.
FC Dallas went from 2,500 to 5,000 kids. Clearly, that number in no way represents the number of kids on their U17 team.
Being with TFC-A gives you more exposure into the MLS than being on a district team no?
Well no. Technically, District is for U12 players. They then go to Regional at U13 and then Provincial teams after that.
So, would being with TFC-A at U12 and U13 (once a week while still playing with their clubs) give them any exposure into MLS? Clearly, no. It would give them more exposure to other TFC-A coaches and teams but that's about it.
Would the U17 player get more exposure at TFC-A over a Provincial player? Perhaps. Most likely a TFC-A player might also play Provincial if given the opportunity.
But a non-TFC-A Player playing Provincial (with no MLS Academy rights owed to any one team) could arguably have more MLS options (Vancouver, Montreal or Toronto) than a TFC-A player who is tied to Toronto and available roster openings. This non TFC-A player might also have NCAA routes which may or may not be made available to a TFC-A player.
we can debate the merits of NCAA vs Academy in a whole other thread
Sorry, this is what I was getting at. Being at the Academy later in age gives more exposure to MLS options.Well no. Technically, District is for U12 players. They then go to Regional at U13 and then Provincial teams after that.
So, would being with TFC-A at U12 and U13 (once a week while still playing with their clubs) give them any exposure into MLS? Clearly, no. It would give them more exposure to other TFC-A coaches and teams but that's about it.
Would the U17 player get more exposure at TFC-A over a Provincial player? Perhaps. Most likely a TFC-A player might also play Provincial if given the opportunity.
But a non-TFC-A Player playing Provincial (with no MLS Academy rights owed to any one team) could arguably have more MLS options (Vancouver, Montreal or Toronto) than a TFC-A player who is tied to Toronto and available roster openings. This non TFC-A player might also have NCAA routes which may or may not be made available to a TFC-A player.
we can debate the merits of NCAA vs Academy in a whole other thread
The major problem I've found with the u-12/ u-13 levels in this city is that they are not focused on development, rather more focused on winning. Once a player has tapped out in how they can compete, they are discarded instead of developed. I can only assume TFC-A is setup to have the ability to train their own youth who can then step up later on with the already developed skills needed to compete and develop further.
Our team picked up a kid who was a starter on a higher team but then rode the bench and was quickly left off his previous team. We had to re-train the kid how to pass/receive/ maintain ball possession. No idea how he was a starter with the lack of skill/knowledge that he had. I can only assume TFC-A is setup to avoid situations like this.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote