College at least in regards to soccer and the limitations it places on athletes in terms of training time isn’t as good as the European academy system. We see that with the men who nearly to a man come out of academies and not the NCAA. All title 9 did was give US women a head start largely because of cultural sexism towards sports that didnt exist in the USA.
Now European clubs have womens team attached to them and instead of playing soccer in the US the European women are staying home and able to take full advantage of the academy system. As to why recently the USWMNT has been getting its ass kicked.
The MLS would be served by taking the initial financial hit by establishing academies in the hood, and then see a return on investment once they are able to sell the players later on. But even if Mens soccer remains a regional and suburban sport in America it’s still in a healthier and long term sustainable place than the Women relying on the NCAA. Pulisic after all earns more in a year than the majority of women players will see in their lives.
Good points.
US Women dominate because our country is simply less sexist when it comes to athletics so our girls had a HUGE jump on the rest of the world.
As the rest of the world starts investing into women's soccer, the gap is going to narrow significantly.
It reminds me of U.S. Basketball (men).
1992 Dream Team was so damn good that they didn't need much prep time. That approach worked in 1996 and 2000 but the world caught up by '04. We still had the most talent but couldn't just roll out of bed and compete anymore.
The USWNT may have a two-fold issue. There's no guarantee we're inherently more talented once the other women catch up. On top of that, other countries will begin training the girls under nationalized programs at an early age....have a Starting XI that's been together since middle school.