US Soccer U-17 MNT: Why The Focus Should Be Winning Instead Of Development

The U.S U-17 national team’s performance at the Nike International Friendlies has yielded results below expectations for many. After the previous ‘92 cycle was boasted with a number of good prospects for our future national side, it was only logical to assume that the new ’94 cycle would be stacked with better, if not similar quality. Once again we have been reminded of the flaws of youth development in this country and how much more work needs to get done if we ever want to get a shot at the 2011 U-17 World Cup.

Despite USSF’s massive two-year long effort in developing the elite players in the so-called hotspots, Cabrea’s staff have been unable to select the best of the best, which is what many fans consider to be the hidden combination: the much anticipated “golden generation” that would truly represent US soccer at its face value. The fact that youth soccer beats other sports in number of participants is of no practical use. One then asks, has the development academy lived up to the expectations? Have the scouting networks done their homework?

It is here that the subject shifts in focus. Is the goal of the Bradenton to win youth world cups, or does it merely exist to develop players? Yes, the answer might be both, but other nations’ records tell a different story. Talent and skill are not necessarily translated into success at the youth level. A stunning example is the Brazilian side that failed to even get past the group stage at the recent U-17 WC in Nigeria. With the likes of Coutinho, Neymar and Wellington, it looked as if Brazil would breeze through the tournament. Yet, despite the wealth of top class talent, they were not able to make it.

In our case, Wilmer Cabrera attempted to add some jogo bonito to his tactics, centering the attack around Luis Gil, Shinsky , Jerome and Jack McInerney. The fullbacks made constant, if not ineffective intrusions into their opponents’’ flanks. And yet his side only managed to score 4 goals. If that is attacking philosophy in motion, then why even bother to watch football?

Our U-17 team should follow the footsteps of their Swiss counterparts. They may not have Neymar, but they surely won the trophy.

As always, there are those purists out there who claim winning is not the goal of youth development. I am not debating that. In fact, we as a nation must focus in technical skills when developing players, but the point is to establish our academies as world class training centers and build our players’ confidence when stepping on the pitch. If the goal is to develop the player’s skill, leave that job to the development academies. The young players from all categories need to see a landmark achievement they can look up to as a potential inspiration and even motivation to furhter excel. By winning a FIFA youth tournament, the USSF would truly make a decisive jump in youth development. Thus, Bradenton should focus on building a winning team, which brings us to the next point.

As seen in the Nike friendlies, what coaches and fans have labeled as great, if not the best players out of the ’94 pool have not stepped their game against the likes of the Netherlands and Portugal. Koroma and Gijon had some flashes, but looked like decent players when matched against Cruzeiro and Sao Paulo FC products. Although the gap in technical skill is not huge, we should not rely on the assumption that our U-17 players have enough quality to play careless attacking football against such dangerous teams. The question is not if they can, but whether they should. If the goal is to win and gain momentum for the sport in this country, then a form of organized, modern cattenaccio should be used. Our U-17 side has all the physical qualities to adopt that style. This is in the best interest of U.S. soccer. Players are taught the proper technique at the academy level, and Bradenton selects a winning team. The latter would increase the chances of winning the first FIFA trophy. That is the most optimum result, both in the long term and short term for American soccer at the youth level.

However, under Cabrera, the national team will continue to employ an attacking style, which is great to further develop this new cycle of players. Cabrera and his staff will likely continue to evaluate players based more on their attacking skill than on defensive, combative abilities. We now know how that played out for the ’92 cycle. Either way, the long term results are promising in terms of youth development. Nonetheless, the short term objective of winning on the international stage makes the difference, which is why the attacking style should be de-emphasized in favor of a more defensive, counterattcking system when it comes to our U-17 national team.