FC Cincinnati Academy

Bucknut3

Member
Has anyone heard about the major development with FC Cincinnati starting a fee-free soccer club which will start in 2019? Free travel, free kits, tutoring and a true academy style training program. Not sure if this will include a girls program or will the DA program remain the same. Will this effect ECNL here locally and nationally? Wow big changes possible!
 

Philly_Cat

Active member
Has anyone heard about the major development with FC Cincinnati starting a fee-free soccer club which will start in 2019? Free travel, free kits, tutoring and a true academy style training program. Not sure if this will include a girls program or will the DA program remain the same. Will this effect ECNL here locally and nationally? Wow big changes possible!
I can speak from the boys side that this was announced last Fall from FCC. I believe its mandatory that every MLS club have an academy. FC's academy is still in its infant stages of planning. CUP has been working with them in their planning to include giving them access to their current players for whichever age group that are starting, and down the road sending them players they feel would be a better fit for their development. Similar to what CUP already does with Columbus Crew. CUP will be adjusting their DA teams based on how FCC expands, as they dont believe there is enough talent in Cincinnati area to sustain 2 quality DA teams at the same time. If I'm not mistaken FCC is currently working on starting with a U16 team, which would affect the current U15s. But like I said, they are still in their infant stages and all of that is subject to change as they move forward.

I've talked on here numerous times about DA clubs that are fully funded, meaning it's free to play. Columbus Crew is fully funded. That's truly how you grow the game of soccer, because it doesn't automatically eliminate a large portion of potential talent from the sport due to cost. I believe there will eventually be a girls side, but don't quote me on that and definitely don't expect a ton of changes happening soon.

Not sure why you feel the need to constantly dig at the DA. Why are you insinuating that the CUP DA and CDA are not "true academy style training"? Do you actually know what is going on within the academy or are you just standing on the other side of the fence making assumptions and throwing rocks? I will again just speak for the the boys CUP DA. You are not going to find a training environment comparable anywhere around, and it's not even remotely close.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
I've talked on here numerous times about DA clubs that are fully funded, meaning it's free to play. Columbus Crew is fully funded. That's truly how you grow the game of soccer, because it doesn't automatically eliminate a large portion of potential talent from the sport due to cost.
The "fully funded" talk is somewhat accurate. Yes, those within some DAs do not have to pay. The "fully funded" part comes from their affiliates. As an example, FC Dallas has a "fully funded" DA, but they bring in around $15m from their affiliate clubs spread throughout.

Sporting KC likes to talk about how they do not support the pay-to-play:

The SKC Academy is a strong opponent of pay to play models and does its best to reduce costs for players to play at a high level of soccer. While all SKC Academy players are required to pay a membership fee (which includes a season ticket to SKC games), the U19, U17 & U15 SKC Academy teams are fully funded and do not have to pay costs associated to coaching, facilities, travel, equipment, leagues, tournaments, and referee fees, etc. The U13 & U12 SKC Academy teams are partially funded as the players only pay for costs associated with travel (transportation, housing, and meals) related to SKC Academy trips.
But, they have no issues in charging $340 for a fall "Center of Excellence" program, $180 for winter, and another $340 for spring ($860 total). Then, they also have no issues with their affiliates running pay-to-play structures. There are 12 SKC affiliates spread from Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, and Indiana.

These aren't the only guilty parties. Chicago Fire have an affiliate in Louisiana. Colorado Rapids and Seattle Sounders have affiliates in North Carolina. Sure, they can call their DAs "fully funded," but what they mean is the funds are fully paid from other participants who never have the chance to truly join our DA.

At least Minnesota United and DC United are honest enough to charge their DA participants. They've been honest about it saying that a fee keeps "skin in the game" (essentially).
 

Philly_Cat

Active member
The "fully funded" talk is somewhat accurate. Yes, those within some DAs do not have to pay. The "fully funded" part comes from their affiliates. As an example, FC Dallas has a "fully funded" DA, but they bring in around $15m from their affiliate clubs spread throughout.



Sporting KC likes to talk about how they do not support the pay-to-play:







But, they have no issues in charging $340 for a fall "Center of Excellence" program, $180 for winter, and another $340 for spring ($860 total). Then, they also have no issues with their affiliates running pay-to-play structures. There are 12 SKC affiliates spread from Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, and Indiana.



These aren't the only guilty parties. Chicago Fire have an affiliate in Louisiana. Colorado Rapids and Seattle Sounders have affiliates in North Carolina. Sure, they can call their DAs "fully funded," but what they mean is the funds are fully paid from other participants who never have the chance to truly join our DA.



At least Minnesota United and DC United are honest enough to charge their DA participants. They've been honest about it saying that a fee keeps "skin in the game" (essentially).
I'm not sure I see the issue you're pointing out? Yes, fully funded means if you make the team you don't have to pay. It still costs money to fund the team through. That money comes from sponsors, the upper club if it's a pro club, or yes, the lower and younger teams too. Not sure how that's being sneaky or lying. No one is promising or even trying to make all of soccer free. That's an unattainable and unsustainable goal. The point is to not get rid of potential elite level talent just because they can't afford it.

The Sporting thing you pointed out, are those camps or programs for their DA players or for the rest of the club and anyone else who would like to attend? That would be weird if a DA was offering training to their own DA players but it is separate and costs more. That doesn't make sense.

The skins in the game argument doesn't make sense to me either. You think those kids on fully funded teams don't know what it took to make there, know what they are receiving, the opportunities to be had, and aren't working their butts off to keep their spot? These aren't 9 year olds where almost every kid is playing because it's fun and they get to hang with their friends. We are talking older more mature kids that not only are elite but have a passion for the game.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
I'm not sure I see the issue you're pointing out? Yes, fully funded means if you make the team you don't have to pay. It still costs money to fund the team through. That money comes from sponsors, the upper club if it's a pro club, or yes, the lower and younger teams too. Not sure how that's being sneaky or lying. No one is promising or even trying to make all of soccer free. That's an unattainable and unsustainable goal. The point is to not get rid of potential elite level talent just because they can't afford it.
There's a difference in fees coming in from sponsors, ownership, or even Solidarity Payments/Training Compensation than pawning the fees off to other people paying for club soccer. They all make the promise of attainability or access to the MLS entity, or they wouldn't "affiliate."

It's completely hypocritical to say they are against pay-to-play while utilizing fees from pay-to-play affiliates to fund a DA. 100% hypocritical.

The Sporting thing you pointed out, are those camps or programs for their DA players or for the rest of the club and anyone else who would like to attend? That would be weird if a DA was offering training to their own DA players but it is separate and costs more. That doesn't make sense.
If I'm not mistaken, the "Center of Excellence" programming is for the pre-DA ages. So, they are utilizing it as a means of identifying (or so they claim) players before they can enter the DA. So, they are utilizing a pay-to-play method BEFORE they claim "fully funded."

The skins in the game argument doesn't make sense to me either. You think those kids on fully funded teams don't know what it took to make there, know what they are receiving, the opportunities to be had, and aren't working their butts off to keep their spot? These aren't 9 year olds where almost every kid is playing because it's fun and they get to hang with their friends. We are talking older more mature kids that not only are elite but have a passion for the game.
It's not me thinking this. It's straight from DC/Minnesota.
 

Philly_Cat

Active member
There's a difference in fees coming in from sponsors, ownership, or even Solidarity Payments/Training Compensation than pawning the fees off to other people paying for club soccer. They all make the promise of attainability or access to the MLS entity, or they wouldn't "affiliate."



It's completely hypocritical to say they are against pay-to-play while utilizing fees from pay-to-play affiliates to fund a DA. 100% hypocritical.







If I'm not mistaken, the "Center of Excellence" programming is for the pre-DA ages. So, they are utilizing it as a means of identifying (or so they claim) players before they can enter the DA. So, they are utilizing a pay-to-play method BEFORE they claim "fully funded."







It's not me thinking this. It's straight from DC/Minnesota.
For the first part, agree to disagree.

The 2nd part still isn't making sense to me. Why do they need a separate camp to identify their own players? They are already in their club, already identified, and they see them every day for continuous evaluation through the year. Now if you said Sporting holds camps through the year as a side gig to bring in extra money, and it's offered to the public and something extra for kids within their club that isn't included with their program within the club (preDA, rec, or whatever) that would make sense. All I'm saying is what you're saying doesn't make sense to me.

For the last part, it was still a question to you. Do you think that? That's fine if a club says that, doesn't mean I must believe in it. I was asking what you think.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
i miss the days when the other club was lex luthor

my vote its not free its subsidized which is fine if others are willing to subsidize it thats on them
 

Bucknut3

Member
I can speak from the boys side that this was announced last Fall from FCC. I believe its mandatory that every MLS club have an academy. FC's academy is still in its infant stages of planning. CUP has been working with them in their planning to include giving them access to their current players for whichever age group that are starting, and down the road sending them players they feel would be a better fit for their development. Similar to what CUP already does with Columbus Crew. CUP will be adjusting their DA teams based on how FCC expands, as they dont believe there is enough talent in Cincinnati area to sustain 2 quality DA teams at the same time. If I'm not mistaken FCC is currently working on starting with a U16 team, which would affect the current U15s. But like I said, they are still in their infant stages and all of that is subject to change as they move forward.

I've talked on here numerous times about DA clubs that are fully funded, meaning it's free to play. Columbus Crew is fully funded. That's truly how you grow the game of soccer, because it doesn't automatically eliminate a large portion of potential talent from the sport due to cost. I believe there will eventually be a girls side, but don't quote me on that and definitely don't expect a ton of changes happening soon.

Not sure why you feel the need to constantly dig at the DA. Why are you insinuating that the CUP DA and CDA are not "true academy style training"? Do you actually know what is going on within the academy or are you just standing on the other side of the fence making assumptions and throwing rocks? I will again just speak for the the boys CUP DA. You are not going to find a training environment comparable anywhere around, and it's not even remotely close.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

No intent to disparage DA or CDA at all. The comment was made to reflect the “ wide net, no cost” aspect and multiple teams training together with a clear goal or objective being to develop talent. Not sure how you arrived at that conclusion but just looking for answers out here. Was really seeking to see how this would involve the girls side personally.
 

Philly_Cat

Active member
Has anyone heard about the major development with FC Cincinnati starting a fee-free soccer club which will start in 2019? Free travel, free kits, tutoring and a true academy style training program. Not sure if this will include a girls program or will the DA program remain the same. Will this effect ECNL here locally and nationally? Wow big changes possible!
That's where I got that from. It insinuates there isn't a "true" academy already here, or if there is their training isn't like a "true" academy. Maybe I'll take you at your word (which I probably shouldn't), and you didn't mean it in a disparaging way. Then you constant vitriol towards the CDA influences how you say things even when you're not trying. Something to think about.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
The 2nd part still isn't making sense to me. Why do they need a separate camp to identify their own players? They are already in their club, already identified, and they see them every day for continuous evaluation through the year. Now if you said Sporting holds camps through the year as a side gig to bring in extra money, and it's offered to the public and something extra for kids within their club that isn't included with their program within the club (preDA, rec, or whatever) that would make sense. All I'm saying is what you're saying doesn't make sense to me.
What I'm saying? It's all available on the Sporting KC Academy page. It's not me saying it.

"The Centers of Excellence (COE) is a high level supplemental training program for boys aged eleven and younger. Players in the COE receive high level training directly from Sporting Kansas City Academy Coaches...

Participation in the SKC Centers of Excellence are supplemental to all activities with the current club team as the SKC COE is a club-neutral program."

Straight from their page. It's a side gig, because there's no DA below U12 (well, now that doesn't exist). But, it's additional side gig because they do provide additional camps.

For the last part, it was still a question to you. Do you think that? That's fine if a club says that, doesn't mean I must believe in it. I was asking what you think.
I can see it both ways. I've heard it for years that people will put more into something when they have a vested interest (such as money involved). I'm not sure I agree with your sentiments of "[w]e are talking older more mature kids that not only are elite but have a passion for the game."

I've worked in soccer too long to believe anyone at these teenage years are actually truly "more mature" and "have a passion." I've been involved with many players throughout several DAs and still don't see it. Do I believe the player (individually) has that mentality of a "vested interest" with the money, not necessarily, but it could be the parents' perspective to be committed. The parents could emphasize that to their kids involved in the DA. It wouldn't be the mentality from kid-to-DA.

But, I also don't believe a player will be fully invested when they are members of a "fully funded" DA (or full-scholarship at a college). Sure, there are some that are, that's a small percentage though.
 

Bucknut3

Member
That's where I got that from. It insinuates there isn't a "true" academy already here, or if there is their training isn't like a "true" academy. Maybe I'll take you at your word (which I probably shouldn't), and you didn't mean it in a disparaging way. Then you constant vitriol towards the CDA influences how you say things even when you're not trying. Something to think about.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
I think you have me mixed up with someone else. I have never said anything disparaging about the CDA. Why do you keep saying that? Are you trolling me? I have no strong feelings about any of the platforms or clubs here in Cincy but certain coaches, well that’s another story. Maybe check your sources or go back and read my comments.
 

Philly_Cat

Active member
I think you have me mixed up with someone else. I have never said anything disparaging about the CDA. Why do you keep saying that? Are you trolling me? I have no strong feelings about any of the platforms or clubs here in Cincy but certain coaches, well that’s another story. Maybe check your sources or go back and read my comments.
I got you completely mixed up with buckshooter!!! Hahahhahahahhahahahaah

I'm soooooooo sorry. I'll HAPPILY put the gloves away now lol

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

Upper 90

Member
What difference does it make if it is free for HS ages? Most of those kids had parents that spent literally 10's of thousands in U6-U14 so that they would be good enough by U15/16. They don't really need "free", it is backwards if we really want to find and develop true talent. Take a look at the parking lot at tryouts for the top of the top. Making this free for 3 HS teams with our current model does not do anything. We need more "free" in the early years.
 

Bucknut3

Member
what difference does it make if it is free for hs ages? Most of those kids had parents that spent literally 10's of thousands in u6-u14 so that they would be good enough by u15/16. They don't really need "free", it is backwards if we really want to find and develop true talent. Take a look at the parking lot at tryouts for the top of the top. Making this free for 3 hs teams with our current model does not do anything. We need more "free" in the early years.
amen!!!!
 

buckshooter5

Active member
Someone has to pay ! Nothing is for FREE ! Everything cost Money and it has to be coming from Somewhere?

Basically it is free For these DA Kids and Screw other kids (Parents) hard to pay for it.

There is a lot of truth in the Top High school players, They have been playing since 4 years old and have spent tons of money to get to that DA level !

SO Please someone show me a Kid at that HS age that now has a chance to play for free and can even KICK a ball ?
 
.
Top