Money Talks

There’s been something eating at me for a while and I was finally able to put it together in this article. This could probably be classified as a whole “Angry Man Yells at Cloud” piece but everything I have to say is, in my opinion, true.

$1,025,000,000…. One billion and two hundred and fifty million dollars. Yes, you read that right. ONE BILLION DOLLARS! That’s the combined amount paid in reported expansion fees for the last five expansion MLS teams (excluding Austin). When I read that, my jaw hit the proverbial floor. While I wish this were just a blip on the screen, it really isn’t. This has become the modus operandi for as long as Major League Soccer has been around. Couple that with a perceived serious conflict of interest among the ranks of US Soccer and you begin to see a pattern.

However, attacking US Soccer and MLS is not where I’m trying to head with this article. Instead, I want to focus on what that one billion dollars could do if it were pumped into the entire structure of US Soccer.

Let’s begin with the actual pyramid itself. As it stands now, there isn’t a traditional soccer pyramid. The reasoning given by an overwhelming majority of MLS fans and higher ups is that owners wouldn’t want to risk their investment into something that could diminish in value should the team be relegated. If that were the case, why has there been such a large influx of American owners in European clubs that run a higher risk of relegation than clubs like Arsenal, Manchester United or Liverpool? 

Admittedly, I understand why fans and higher ups say this kind of stuff. They have all focused on the wrong part of what happens in a relegation. They’ve focused on the lost revenue and lower attendances due to being down a level. However, what they either don’t look at or willfully ignore is the fact that there are positives to being relegated. Yeah, hard to believe, but hear me out.

The first positive is that while there may be lost revenue, parachute payments help offset that loss. If you don’t know what parachute payments are, they are payments made to relegated clubs to soften the drop to the next division. In the Premier League (where this is most evident), the first year payment is 55% of the broadcasting slice each club receives. Year two sees another 45% go to the club unless they make promotion again. While I understand this may be a difficult thing to introduce, I think it could potentially be welcomed in by the owners. By taking a portion of that one billion dollars and putting it toward these payments, it would keep teams from essentially dying off should promotion/relegation ever occur.

The other positive of relegation is that it allows for clubs/teams to reorganize themselves to allow for a better future business path. Without the threat of relegation, clubs often fall into bad habits and faulty approaches. It’s not hard to see that sometimes reorganization and restructuring is a necessary evil within a business, so the same could be said about a soccer organization. Relegation would allow for a hard reset for clubs on the wrong path.

Granted, most of this article has focused on things at the top of the pyramid but what about the bottom of it? Well, the influx of a sizable portion of that money would improve the quality of a lot of clubs as well as incentivize them to keep pushing for bigger things.

As I stated previously, if promotion/relegation were to occur clubs would die off if they were relegated (or so say the anti-pro/rel crowd). However, over the last five years alone, there has been a large amount of clubs in the amateur levels close up shop due to the ever-rising costs put on them via the Federation or leagues they’re in. By providing these clubs with the funds to cover these costs, it would allow for them to maintain a level of sustainability for a longer period of time.

In addition to this, it would give clubs the opportunity to buy land and build small stadiums instead of getting gouged by local public parks organizations. And for those clubs lucky enough to own their own ground, this money would allow for necessary upgrades to be done to keep the fan experience at the highest level possible. We have often pointed out the lack of soccer infrastructure, particularly in the lower levels, and this helps rectify this situation.

Another pressing need that the money could be put toward is fanwear. Most amateur clubs currently outside of USL League 2 or NPSL don’t have much apparel to sell. This shortage is due to the clubs trying to keep costs low in order to carry over to the next year. There are some clubs that buck that trend from my point of view, like Providence City FC, but those are few and far between. Having clubs get a portion of money that can be spent on shirts/scarves/replica jerseys would allow owners to stress less and focus more on putting together a solid product on the field.

I also feel that putting some of this money into the coaching and referee programs will help elevate the level of knowledge and improve performance in both areas. I mean, when we watch soccer in this country, what do we see generally? Constant long balls down the pitch. Rarely do we see different tactics brought in to a team. I’m not saying that there is an underlying issue in the social paradigm but when you see a team playing a “Tiki Taka”, possession-based style, how many people bash it because of their preconceived notions? It’s ridiculous and needs to stop because, to put it simply, most people enjoy watching clubs like Barcelona or Manchester City or Bayern Munich and guess what? All three of those were/are coached by a man whose system and ideas are based in possession and Tiki Taka, but I digress. That’s something for another discussion completely. However, the underlying point is that investing money in programs that help develop creative coaches would yield great results for the entire pyramid and the players that fill every level.

Lastly, but probably most importantly, by taking that billion dollars and putting it into the lower leagues, those clubs would be able to found youth academies and help open the game to those who otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford it. Yes, that’s a shot at the current pay to play scheme we have in this country but it’s a necessary one. It’s beyond time we have a youth setup that isn’t catered solely to the suburban kids. The amount of talent being ignored simply because those kids live in the inner city or whose parents can’t afford the ever rising costs is astronomical. I understand other countries still have some type of pay to play in their youth set up but it in no way approaches the level of costs that our setup demands.

I admit I tend to live with my head in the clouds with this type of stuff but I needed to get it off my chest. And while this may sound like the rant of someone who is unhappy with the entire setup in this country (which is true), these are also things people need to understand could come from the influx of over a billion dollars that was paid to Major League Soccer. And the biggest group that NEED to hear this are MLS fans If we want to become a soccer powerhouse on the international level, we have to invest money into the pyramid from top to bottom. We can be better but we have to get out of our own way if we want to move forward.

- Shawn Laird

The American Pyramid: Venue TBA - A Proposal

This article is a response to a piece that ran yesterday. If you’d like to read that piece, click this link.

I’m an idea guy, always have been. I like to dream and scheme. When a problem presents itself, I like to attack it logically, but with a healthy dash of “what if.”

So when facing this venue issue in amateur soccer, I have an idea. It changes all the time, as more people offer input, but this is the current idea:

A group-funded trust that buys land, builds fields, and operates them for local sides.

The Funding

I’m a big believer in ground funding, probably because of dabbling in socialism in college. Everyone tosses what they can into the pot, we all eat. Group funding has become a wonderful way to fund all sorts of causes, from new cars to medical treatment. So why not soccer fields?

What is daunting to most clubs or organizations looking to purchase or build their home field is the initial cost. How do they lay out funds for land, fields, bleachers, offices, changing rooms, parking, the list keeps rolling on. So let’s focus on what it would cost to the individuals who would pledge. I can’t speak to the finances of every person reading this article, but I can for myself. I am a middle class guy, not rich, not poor, got a mortgage and a car payment, but I still have enough free cash in the monthly budget to go out to eat 5 or 6 times, buy a soccer kit, a new pair of shoes, go to two or three soccer matches, etc. There’s some disposable income there.

So if I subtracted $25 a month, would it kill me? Not at all. If 10 of us did that, we’d raise $250 a month, $3,000 a year. What if a 100 of us did that? Add a zero, $2,500 a month, $30,000 a year. You can do the math. Protagonist Soccer Twitter account has almost 2,300 followers. Let’s say 10% of those followers committed to this. That’s 230 dedicated $25 a month pledges. That’s almost $6,000 a month, $70,000 a year. That’s an operating budget. And it doesn’t include a soccer club that pledges $100 a month or a well-off donor who tosses in $1,000 one time gift. If we all pull together, we could create the necessary funding.

The Trust

It would be absolutely important for the Trust to impartial, devoted to the idea of growing the game organically, and open to all geographic locations. The Trust would have to be made up of pragmatist types who want to stretch the dollars as far as possible, but who are also willing and able to dream big. The number of trustees could be determined at a later date, but at this point, 6-10 trustees would be a good starting point. The size of the Trust leadership could be voted on by the donors.

The Trust would be a non-profit group without a budget (unpaid). This is vitally important for the goals of the funding to be achieved. So many non-profits eat up funds by paying their managers salaries. The Trust will operate without pay, allowing funds to flow to goals of the project. That is not to say that funds won’t be used for business cards or incidentals, but it is to say that time, effort, and sweat will be a donation.

To ensure accountability, the trust will post monthly recaps with pertinent information for the body of donors. Once every five years, the trustees will be voted on by the donors. Each donor would receive a single vote and the winners of the vote would be elected to 5 year terms. If, for some reason, a trustee is considered to be not serving with integrity, the trustee group can vote on their ouster. That vote must be a super majority (75%).

The Concept

The funds donated are accumulated on a monthly basis. During this accumulation period, the Trust researches potential sites for soccer fields. This research will include studying demographic factors, local need, cost effectiveness, municipal funding, city permitting and zoning regulations, potential grant funding, local soccer leadership, etc. Three potential sites will be considered each year (or as funding allows). Each January, three trustees will prepare a presentation of the sites and these presentations will be made to the donor class. This could be done easily through digital means. Once the prestations have been made, the donor class will be allowed to vote. The voting process will be over the following 24 hours, to allow for research and considering by the donors.

Once a site is chosen by the donors, the Trust will begin to take steps to advance the site (which will happen in a long-term approach).

• Securing supporting grants

• Purchasing the land

• Preparing long-term, segmented growth plans

• Preparing the field(s)

• Building bleachers

• Installing fencing

• Building office space on-site

• Building showers/changing rooms/bathrooms

• Lighting

• Watering system

• Parking

• Supporting infrastructure (food, ticket booth, merch booth)

The Trust would also designate some funding in a trust to allow for operations costs and upkeep. Ticket sales, merch revenue, concessions, and any other revenue raised on site would be split with the “home” tenant and the operating cost fund.

Expansion Ideas

Once the site has been purchased, a local trustee will be chosen from the area to supervise the long-term upkeep of the facility. An alternative idea might be to sell the site to local clubs in amateur leagues (with stipulations to potential clubs and use those funds generated for future expansion). But the goal would be to involve local clubs in the upkeep. Partnering with a local club playing in a national league would be optimal. Aside from this club who’s field this would be as a “home field,” the goal of the project is to build or partner with a local league to use the site for matches, facilitating the growth of local soccer.

Aside from this relationship, we’d propose the idea of a dedicated group of volunteers, 5-10, who would work with the trust to obtain their referee licenses, paid for by the trust, with the understanding that they would be available for matches at the site, free of charge to the clubs. This would require people dedicated to growing local soccer, focused on the health of grassroots soccer, willing to donate their time.

Naming rights of the site would be offered to the donor class, voted on when deemed necessary. The name would be perpetual and unavailable to sell as long as the Trust exists. The only change allowed would be if the donor class designated it necessary and, even then, never for monetary reasons.

What’s Next?

There’s no clean answer to that question, it honestly depends on the desire and inspiration of all of us in the lower league community. How much do we want change? How much do we want growth? How serious do we think this problem is? How much will we sacrifice for the cause?

I have seen so much fracturing within the lower leagues, I am hopeful that there is a unity in purpose as well. Let this idea of a Trust, be the beginning of a conversation, not the end.

- Dan Vaughn

The American Pyramid: Venue TBA

This morning, as I scrolled through soccer twitter, I spotted a story that really depressed me. According to The Post and Courier (a prominent Charleston newspaper) “an affiliate of Atlanta-based Holder Properties Inc. purchased MUSC Health Stadium for $6.475 million on Friday, six weeks after buying the neighboring former Blackbaud Inc. headquarters building for $35.5 million.” I sat back in my chair and sighed.

For those that don’t follow Charleston Battery or the USL, I understand if that news is less interesting to you, but allow me to vent my own thoughts on this news. First, Blackbaud Stadium, as it was originally named (naming rights were sold in 2015), was opened in 1999 as the first modern-era, soccer-specific stadium in the country (Columbus opened their soccer-specific stadium the same year). It was and IS a big deal. Aside from Mapfre, which benefits from the USMNT matches it draws, the Baud was a shining example of a real soccer venue in an era of soccer clubs sharing venues with bigger and better-funded sports clubs.

Read this description of the stadium on the Battery website, “styled after the classic English soccer experience, the stadium seats 5,100 and offers fans an unmatched environment with superb sight-lines, concessions, a children’s interactive soccer theme park, and even a plush English-styled pub.” And it was a non-MLS, privately funded, stadium. Now it will be eaten up by a land development firm, Holder Properties Inc. The CEO, John Holder, described his plans as “we’re going to take a big-picture look at it and create, hopefully, a village kind of concept.” Disgusting.

If that doesn’t break your heart, you aren’t a soccer fan.

Too Much of a Good Thing? Nah.

With the explosion of lower league soccer in this country, we have more soccer than we actually have attention or time for. The NPSL has close to 100 clubs, while the UPSL is at 322 confirmed for the Fall (sure to grow), add to that the regional leagues that stretch across the midwest to the west coast with another 300-400 clubs (at varying levels of talent and funding) - that’s close to 1,000 soccer clubs and that’s just the men’s sides. The soccer explosion is also happening in the women’s side. Aside from the WPSL (which has over 100 clubs), the UPSL has started their own WOSO league which is rapidly growing (50-60 planning on playing in the Fall according to a league source). It’s a good time for soccer fans in this country.

With the advent of streaming, most of these clubs have some online availability for viewing their matches. Mycujoo is here and is the best in the game currently, but many clubs use Facebook Live, Periscope, and Youtube to steam matches. There’s almost too much soccer right now, I say that as a guy running a website with 15 writers trying to cover this massive amateur soccer landscape. We focus on what we can - pick the matches we have time for, keep twitter loaded up, and read boxscores. It’s a lot of soccer. And that’s a good thing!

The level of league organization has risen in the last 10 years to foster this growth. The success of the NPSL in growing and sustaining their clubs is to be commended, it’s done wonders for the lower leagues and the fan bases that need to believe their club will be back next season. The UPSL has grown the game exponentially, putting clubs on a national stage from every corner of this country, including Alaska this year. The national leagues are a credit to the game and we’re lucky to have two solid national amateur leagues raising the bar. The rise to prominence of regional leagues is also bringing us into a golden age of organization and growth.

Well-established regional leagues like Bay State Soccer League, Buffalo & District Soccer League, and Maryland Majors have been joined by up and coming leagues like Northern Ohio Soccer League and Wisconsin Primary Amateur Soccer League. And mentioning 5 regional leagues doesn’t do this level its due. Regional leagues are growing exponentially. The organization is getting better for clubs of all sizes, from coast to coast.

So I said all that to say this: We have a problem.

Houston (and everywhere else), We Have a Problem.

How many soccer specific venues are owned and operated by amateur clubs? The answer is… not many. When I put a call out for this information on Twitter (and yes, that’s a limited market, I know), I received max: 10. And I’m not minimizing that! But as I just mentioned, we have over 1,000 amateur sides in this country and 1% are playing their matches in fields that they own. Consider that the most well-known lower league venue isn’t owned by the club playing in it.

Detroit City FC’s Keyworth Stadium in Hamtramck, Michigan is known beyond the NPSL for their home field experience. Much of that is because of the environment created by the Northern Guard supporters group, but a great SG is part of any soccer experience. While DCFC helped raise funds to refurbish and upgrade the stadium, Keyworth is owned by Hamtramck School District. Imagine a scenario where something terrible happens at a DCFC match and the school district decides to discontinue their agreement with the club. Suddenly, the cradle of American lower league soccer reverts to just another aging high school stadium.

And that high school stadium scenario is the situation for the vast majority of amateur clubs. In fact, every amateur soccer match I’ve attended so far has been in a high school facility. So let’s consider the negatives of playing in a high school stadium for a moment, as your local club is probably dealing with these already.

High School was Fun, Right? No.

1. You don’t belong.

Before you push back with “but our SG really makes it feel like home,” be honest with yourself. The football lines on the field, the high school logo on the midfield, the scoreboard, all of those things scream you are a visitor in your home field. Even in the best situations, the reality is that you are borrowing someone else’s facility and once you leave it will go back to its original purpose - hosting high school football, soccer, and track.

2. Money, time and effort.

As a guy who paid rent most of my life, I know how it feels to write a check to someone that owns the property I call home. I did it for years. Every year, cubs are forced to wrangle with school districts across this country to hold onto “home fields” because they don’t own the property. The rent is built into into their operating costs every year, money flying out the window into someone else’s pockets. And in many places, for less than optimal situations - subpar facilities, working around school events, having to get someone to come in and open the gates. In the end, it’s not your field.

3. A feeling of permanence.

This is similar to point 2, but I’d like to emphasize a different aspect. In the lower leagues, we’ve watched clubs come and go. Every week another one folds. Fans need to feel like they can invest their time, energy and MONEY into a club that will be there next season and the season after. The oldest clubs are less than 10 years in most cases, though there are some legacy clubs with more history. Having a home field with history gives a permanent structure that memories are built on.

4. It eliminates beer sales.

There may be some arrangement out there where this is not the case, but I haven’t seen or heard of it. School districts don’t want alcohol on premises for all the reasons that you’d expect. It’s a liability, obviously, but it’s also not a good fit for the venue. Typically high school stadiums are joined to a school facility, which wouldn’t allow beer on the premises. At this level, you need every revenue stream you can get. Removing a big one at the onset kills the bottom line.

A Shameless Plug to Come Back

I don’t think I have every answer to this problem, and I look forward to hearing from the people in the trenches who are dealing with this reality every season. But I think the conversation needs to happen and we need to be real about facing these issues. Let’s talk.

As this article was being completed, Shawn Laird, one of our writers, pointed out he had sent an overlapping article in two weeks ago (he worked on it independent of my own work). So before I offer my solutions, I’d ask you to read Shawn’s article as well. His focus and insight are vital to this discussion as well.

Tomorrow, I’ll pitch my potential solution.

- Dan Vaughn

Re-Aligning the American Pyramid: Shawn Laird

After conducting an interview with Scott Taylor of FC Arizona about their stadium announcement, it got me thinking about the current stadium situation throughout the lower league soccer landscape. Of particular interest to me was/is the current teams strewn across the country in NPSL and USL League 2. I decided to take a chance and sought out as much information on the subject as I could. What I found, however, was both surprising and unsurprising all at once.

Across both leagues, there are currently 163 teams, and of those 163 teams, 112 don’t play in any form of a soccer specific stadium. That works out to an astonishing 68.7% of teams that play in a variety of stadiums, ranging from college/high school football fields to baseball stadiums and, in a few cases, public parks.

If we were to break it down by league, it gets more surprising. As of now, there are 91 NPSL teams spread nationwide. Of those 91 teams, 70 of them play in the aforementioned stadiums. That comes out to a crazy 76.9% of all teams. Jumping over to USL League 2, teams in non-soccer specific stadiums come in at a clip of 58.3%. While this is significantly better than NPSL, it is still unacceptable for these numbers to be so high.

Before I go any further, I want to acknowledge a few things you may be thinking. First, I understand these leagues are used for developmental purposes (for the most part) and have short seasons to accommodate college players. That, in turn, probably brings up the question: Why sink so much money into a short season league? We all know building a stadium is insanely expensive and can effectively hamstring a team, regardless of how much money the owner may have. This issue goes hand in hand with the question. Another question is, what would happen with the stadium the rest of the year? It could and, most likely would, turn in to a money pit for owners due to upkeep and bills related to the operation of the stadium.

Now, I know that modular stadiums have recently become a big thing and could be seen as an adequate go between. I would generally agree with that, had I not read an article by Midfield Press last year. In the article, Midfield Press focused on modular stadiums and, specifically, Vancouver’s first stadium. They stated that a modular stadium is nothing more than a giant LEGO set that can be bolted together and used for a predetermined time frame. Once that time is up, it can be taken apart and shipped elsewhere. As I stated before, they used Vancouver as an example for the article, explaining that the team used a modular stadium during its first year in MLS while renovations were being done on BC Place. While I thoroughly enjoyed the article, one thing stuck out to me, the price tag. According to the article, Vancouver spent an estimated $14 million to have the stadium brought in and set up. Granted that is significantly cheaper than Orlando City’s stadium cost of $155 million (used as reference due to locality to me), it would still be unattainable and unsustainable for any team at the NPSL or USL League 2 level, should they look in that direction.

But, fear not, for I have a potential solution. I only have two words for you, shipping containers. Okay, so they’re more of a prefabricated container, but shipping containers are used as the base of the stands. Recently, I was sent some information about a UK-based company known as Audience Systems. They specialize in prefab/container stands for clubs in the National League and below. By focusing on utilizing containers, Audience Systems helps reduce costs no clubs, while also providing one hell of a matchday experience.

As you can see in the picture below, their models can have seats or they can converted in to safe standing sections. According to the information I have, Audience Systems can build stands for up to 100 people in seated sections and 125 people in safe standing sections. Additionally, as you can see, these stands come with roofs to cover supporters throughout a match. Not only that, containers could be used for concession stands, merchandise, restrooms, etc., but that’s not the focus here.

(Photo courtesy of Audience Systems, Cheadle Town)

While I’ve reached out to Audience Systems for the costs of each type of stand, I have yet to receive a reply. However, if I had to venture a guess, I would say it could probably between $6000-$8000 per container. I would also venture to say that any additional amenities (cooling fans, overhead lighting, etc.) would most likely cost extra unless you happen to know a few electricians.

As I stated before, these containers could be used as concession stands or locker rooms. A great example of this is Detroit City FC. They recently brought in four containers and repurposed them into a half suite/half concession stand additions to Keyworth. In Crain’s Detroit Business, it was stated that they had already turned them in to 12 suites, with seven of them already leased for the upcoming season. I would like to caution everyone, however, that this isn’t something that can happen for every team. Detroit City is insanely popular and the owners recognize the needs of the supporters and have acted appropriately by bringing these containers in.

Now that that’s out of the way, I want to reiterate my belief that not a lot of clubs will be able to afford something like this. But I may have one or two fixes for that as well.

I recently took a look at the 2018 US Soccer audited financial statements. While I’m no expert in that field, I noticed that the organization has $166 million in assets. However, I’m not entirely sure how much of that is cash on hand and how much is other assets. While I’m sure one of you can help me out, I feel that US Soccer should be providing grants to help teams build stadiums of their own. By doing this, it could go a long way in the hopes of rebuilding the fractured relationship between those at the top and the lower leagues. Another way teams could build stadiums could be entering in to long-term deals with companies and giving them naming rights of the stadium. As evidenced in other sports, almost every stadium is named after a company. By entering in to a long-term deal with a company, a team could effectively offset their expenses (travel, kits, league fees) with that money and give them a better chance of survival in the current soccer landscape.

In the end, I don’t expect teams to fully embrace this idea, but my hope is that they will come around to it eventually. Teams could study the idea and do the math on how much it would cost and build at their own pace, instead of overextending themselves to hit a specific deadline. It would also give teams the opportunity to give their home ground a true grassroots/Do-It-Yourself feel, instead of the sterilized, corporate stadiums we currently have in MLS.

- Shawn Laird

Re-Aligning the American Pyramid: Dan Creel

The biggest problem within the U.S. soccer league system (aka the “pyramid”) is the lack of an open, entry-level professional level. The U.S. Soccer Federation currently only sanctions three levels of professional soccer leagues. And, the Federation’s professional league standards set a very high financial test for men’s and women’s clubs who want to join a Division III league.

Obviously, these standards directly lock out smaller professional clubs and leagues from sanctioned play. But, more importantly, it stifles grassroots, community-based pro soccer from gaining traction, ultimately hobbling the growth of U.S. soccer in general. If a club or league wants to operate professionally at a lower level, their only options are to play as an unsanctioned organization or to be sanctioned by the U.S. Adult Soccer Association.

The structural and organizational difficulties for lower level soccer organizations under these constraints are unmistakable. If Division III is unavailable or undesired, clubs and leagues must join an amateur organization and play as “semi-pro” at best. The gulf between USASA and Division III is so wide that it makes it practically impossible for organizations to survive in the liminal space between them. The current structure creates a Catch-22 where lower level professional soccer is unviable. How can lower level pro soccer grow without the space to do so?

The U.S. soccer league system needs a Division IV professional level. It should be an “open” division with no or nominal financial barriers. And, it should go without saying, that there should be a Division IV for both women’s and men’s leagues. These Division IV leagues should have regional geographic reach at best. With the size of the country, travel costs are a huge issue that is always important to recognize. It is necessary to understand that a professional league does not need to be national in scope to still be important and valued.

All Division IV clubs should enter the U.S. Open Cup First Round and not need to enter via the qualification rounds. As professional concerns, they should practically not need to “prove” themselves both from a competitive and financial standpoint as much as amateur clubs should. The USOC is a great way to develop lower level soccer. It gives a showcase to clubs who would get zero media coverage otherwise and provides an additional aspirational goal for lower level clubs. Adding prize money based on each round a club takes part would make the tournament more desirable and help the bottom line of every club who enters.

If the USSF is uncomfortable managing such an operation or believe such an endeavor is beyond their scope then it should authorize another organization to have the jurisdiction over such levels lower than Division III. Currently, the authority over such leagues and clubs is managed by the USASA. The USASA regulates amateur soccer in the US and is the only amateur soccer organization sanctioned by the USSF.

Because the mission of the USASA is overseeing amateur soccer, the lower level professional game isn’t and shouldn’t be a priority for them. And, it shows. For the average U.S. soccer fan, the lower levels of soccer are a confused mixture of leagues and clubs. In fact, it is difficult to know what is going on even for the more proactive, engaged fans.

There are a massive number of soccer players and fans in this country but the connection between them and local clubs is severely broken. It takes an effort to connect an individual to a club in their community and attendance shows that. A huge part of the problem of such a needlessly complicated system is that soccer fans don’t know what is going on in league soccer in their communities. And, if clubs aren’t being supported then it makes it difficult for their officials to justify keeping them going. The current state of structural benign neglect doesn’t just allow the cycle to continue, it lays the foundation for it.

Lower level professional soccer needs a support system. Grassroots clubs are passionate about soccer but need financial and organizational resources to survive. Without such a stable environment lower level clubs and leagues usually find it impossible to continue during difficult times. This is the norm for soccer in the U.S. rather than an aberration. We need to lay a foundation that cultivates and empowers lower level organizations.

It is understandable why the USSF might be squeamish about not having such a tight financial control over professional soccer leagues and clubs. An ongoing lesson in U.S. soccer is that the history of the professional game is littered with fly-by-night organizations. But, holding the reins too tight makes things ultimately run poorly. Soccer needs to loosen the reins to allow clubs and leagues some relief from the self-imposed restrictions, which will allow lower level soccer communities to relax and begin to invest more and grow the professional game.

- Dan Creel