Files.emailmeform.com



AbstractThis paper reports an exploratory study about what factors distinguish elite national soccer federations – those that consistently produce premier players and World Cup teams – from mid-tier and low-tier national soccer federations. In this study I compare and contrast the soccer federations of the United States, Mexico, France, England, Japan, and Nigeria by reviewing relevant literature, examining federation websites, and interviewing federation officials. Using a competitive benchmarking methodology, the following criteria are the focus of my study: average FIFA rank between 2009-2019, national honors and accomplishments, 2018-19 budget, youngest youth team, youth setup structures, coaching philosophies, percent of homegrown talent, and current reputation of domestic leagues. The results shed light on the factors that distinguish elite football federations.Executive SummaryThis is a competitive benchmarking study on international soccer federations. The study looks at six countries representing a variety of cultures, financial statuses, and geographic climates. Furthermore, these countries have been broken down into tiers based off their success in international soccer competitions. England and France have been placed in the upper tier, Mexico and the United States have been placed in the middle tier, and Japan and Nigeria have been placed in the lower tier. These six countries will then be compared against each other using a list of factors that reveal information about not only the country’s soccer federation, but of the country itself. The factors included in the study are average FIFA rank between 2009-2019, national honors and accomplishments, 2018-19 budget, youngest youth team, youth setup structures, coaching philosophies, percent of homegrown talent, and current reputation of domestic leagues. This study uses information from online resources and databases, and phone interviews to supplement the individual research. Articles I used provided information about the countries in my study, the leagues of the countries I studied, and similar situations that have occurred in other leagues or sports that are still useful in the context of this study. In addition, studies solely about the competitive benchmarking process were used to gain knowledge of the research and completion process of this study. For the phone interviews, this study used information provided by Sunil Gulati, Mirelle van Rijbroek, and Daniel León. Gulati is the former President of U.S. Soccer, van Rijbroek is the Director of Player Talent Identification for Youth National Teams for U.S. Soccer, and León is a National Selections Operations Coordinator for the Mexican Federation of Football. The findings concluded from this study varied depending on the factor measured. Budget, youth setup structures, and domestic league reputation revealed useful information. Larger budgets, and an efficient use of those budgets, led to greater international success. Furthermore, the more rigid and developed a country’s youth setup structure was, the greater chance it had to find international soccer success. Lastly, the more competitive a country’s domestic league is, the more likely it generates a positive effect on the country’s national team. Youth intake, coaching philosophies, and percent of homegrown talent revealed less concrete information. Mid-tier teams provide younger youth teams than upper tier teams. In addition, it is difficult to distinguish one set of coaching philosophies from another because the wording is all very similar. Finally, the percentage of non-homegrown players are so small that this factor does not play a significant impact on international soccer success. Through the study’s findings, there are a number of ways U.S. Soccer can proceed in moving towards the upper tier of international soccer federations. Firstly, more money needs to be invested into their overall budget. The overall size of England and France are a fraction of the United States, yet those two countries have a significantly larger budget. This allows those countries to scout the entire country, while many prospects are missed in the United States due to a lack of proper funding. Along with a greater budget, the United States attempt to imitate European coaching trends far too often. The United States is in a unique situation because of the many cultures, economic opportunities, and geographic climates that make up their player pool. What works in Europe is not guaranteed to work in the United States. Moving forward, the United States needs to track progress based off of their own progression and goals, rather than comparing themselves to upper tier European nations who represent an entirely different soccer culture than the United States.IntroductionAfter watching the U.S. Men’s National Soccer Team nearly defeat Belgium, a rising soccer power at the time, in the round of 16 at the 2014 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup, I had high hopes for them in the 2018 FIFA World Cup. But by early 2017, I began to realize that I may have been too optimistic. After a rocky start to their World Cup qualifying campaign, the US were still well positioned to qualify. After all, the Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF) is the easiest region to qualify from and all they had to do was beat Trinidad & Tobago, a Caribbean nation with a population of 1.4 million people. They lost 2-1, effectively ending any chance of them making the 2018 FIFA World Cup. The frustration I felt that night, the lack of tangible progress I have seen in this generation of players, is why I want to do this thesis. Why are significantly smaller countries with substantially less resources and money continuously outperforming the United States in soccer?This paper reports an exploratory study about what factors distinguish elite national soccer federations – those that consistently compete for major international trophies such as the World Cup-- – from mid-tier and low-tier national soccer federations. This is an important question because identifying and acting upon key factors in elite player development could advance a middling soccer federation dozens of years. This is especially the case for US soccer as they look towards hosting the World Cup in 2026 after failing to even qualify for the competition in 2018. US youth soccer participation increased from 1.6 million participants to 2.4 million participants between 1990 and 1995 after they hosted the 1994 World Cup (Reuters, 2018) and with this information in hand, US soccer can more fully take advantage of another potential uptick in youth soccer participation after hosting the 2026 World Cup. While there are some papers that study athlete development in individual leagues or countries, there is a lack of papers that compare the different findings between the leagues or countries for purposes of identifying any patterns for success. Each country has different governmental policies, national cultures, league rules, economic statuses, and geographic limitations. An athlete developmental system in one league or country that works well, could fail miserably in another. My study will examine some of the factors mentioned above, identify overlooked factors, and look for patterns that point to country success in international soccer. Previous research suggests that elite club teams produce international mainstays (Bullough, 2017) and wealthier countries with established infrastructure produce elite level talent (Butler, 2018). This is shown through the English national team where the majority of their players play on their elite domestic teams. My goal is to add to the literature on competitive benchmarking in international soccer and generate practical suggestions for countries looking to maintain or improve their countries’ success in international competition.Literature ReviewMy study seeks to compare national sport federation structures and strategies for athlete development, for the purpose of highlighting federation differences between tier 1 (elite / great international success), tier 2 (sub-elite / some international success), and tier 3 (developing, little international success) men’s national soccer teams. The goal is to identify factors that distinguish these tiers for purposes of inferring possible advantageous characteristics. No studies have directly examined this topic, so to begin I draw upon studies that examine country and country-based federation factors that appear to relate success in the international stage.CountryThe first aspect of athlete development that needs to be studied is the country in which they train and develop. Each country has its own unique history, culture, geography, infrastructure, and financial resources at its disposal that factor into the country’s soccer success. Butler et al. (2018) found that the population of a region is found to have a positive effect on the number of caps a player receives. A cap is a term for a player’s appearance in a game at international level. It may be that more populous regions have better football infrastructure, which may result in better player identification or development. Along with existing infrastructure, there may be more nutrition and sport science professionals with greater knowledge towards how to properly manage and develop players. The many benefits of wealth found in Butler’s study is supported by a similar study done by Gelade and Dobson (2017) and their research on GDP and international soccer success. This study also found that players born in wealthier regions accumulate more caps over the course of their careers. It would appear that regional wealth is driving talent selection at elite international level. Gelade and Dobson (2007) also view a country’s impact on player development through its climate. These are the country factors: Tradition, expatriate index, GDP (wealth), temperature, precipitation, and vapor pressure. Their results indicate that the international playing field is by no means level. Resource limitations and climatic factors dictate the typical degree of success nations can expect to achieve in international football. The study concludes that there are two ways to overcome these issues. One is simply to encourage more people to play soccer. Encouraging wider participation might enable some countries to improve their performance, especially those where participation levels are currently low. This is something a country like the United States, who have high population but low participation rates, can benefit from. A second option is to increase the proportion of expatriate players in the national team. They suggest that nations might significantly improve the strength of their teams by adopting policies that increase the opportunities for players to gain professional experience abroad, particularly in poorer nations.Ichniowski and Preston (2014) explain that international teams with elite talent, have an easier time using that talent to develop even more talent. The conclusion is borne out by a rich set of complementary data on national team performance, player-level performance, performance of foreign players who joined elite teams. National teams do not begin on an even playing field. As supported by the expatriate index mentioned by Gelade and Dobson, some countries, such as France, have the majority of their national team players play abroad in countries like England, Spain, and Italy. These leagues are more competitive than the French domestic league, allowing their players to get acclimated to a higher level of competition. This differs from countries like the United States and Mexico where many of their national team players play in their respective domestic leagues. Sotiriadou and colleagues (2008) describe Australia’s sport attraction and development processes for youth athletes. The first step is a twofold attraction process that aims to increase awareness, participation and membership of general participants, and to nourish large numbers of young participants destined to be elite sports performers. The next step is the retention/transition process that capitalizes on the identification of the most talented, retains them, and assists them to obtain the required skills to achieve high standards of performance. The last step is the nurturing process, where their goal is to nurture the finest athletes, their success at prestigious international events and competitions, and sustain a culture of elite athletes continuing triumphant accomplishments. A country’s general investments in sport and youth sports may matter as well to international soccer success. The key step in this process is the critical point of retention and transition. Oftentimes this is the point where countries lose out on talent. Especially for a country like the United States, retention is key when many of the top athletes play and excel in multiple sports. When competing with more popular sports like football, basketball, and baseball, retaining the talent is as important as finding the talent. In summary, the following country-level factors likely matter in how elite men’s soccer professional teams fare: wealth, population, weather climate, and a history of emphasis on youth sports in general. Country FederationJust as the country at which a player trains in is important to their development, the federation at which they train at is just as crucial. As Butler et al. (2018) found, players born in regions with more youth academies accumulate caps at a higher rate than other players. Most countries have some form of systematic athlete development systems for their sports teams that compete internationally, and I draw from a range of studies on this topic that have implications for my study. However, as mentioned earlier, I could find no studies that compared directly the soccer federations of various countries.A review of the literature examining national soccer federations reveals some factors that appear to correlate with international success, such as World Cup wins. In the English Premier League, Bullough and Jordan (2017) explain the home-grown player rule, or the rule that requires EPL teams to have at least 8 of the 25 players on a full roster to have been trained at an English club for at least three years before the age of 21, resulted in a greater quantity of players making it to the international. However, such information does not have a direct correlation to international soccer success. Although a struggling team should be exploring every option by giving as many players as possible international opportunities, many of the best national teams like France and Spain have very little roster turnover. Fifty-two of the 369 home-grown players reached the highest point of playing for the English national team. The home-grown player rule plays a unique role in English soccer. The English Premier League is the wealthiest and most competitive domestic league in the world. As such, many of the teams have the luxury of acquiring the best talent in the world. If not for the home-grown player rule, many, but not all, English players would be overshadowed by the foreign players. The presence of the rule, however, gives English players an opportunity to develop by requiring English clubs to prioritize their success.Using the information above, the study takes a closer look at a few of the biggest clubs in England to see the role they play in this process. Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, and Tottenham are the clubs in question. Chelsea and Manchester City are heavily funded by overseas financial moguls and prefer to buy developed talent rather than developing talent. This shows that both teams have very little faith in their own youth systems and take advantage of their finances to purchase international talent developed elsewhere, oftentimes at smaller clubs with less financial leverage. The other four “Big Six” clubs offer a more traditional youth development system with Manchester United producing 33 players, Arsenal producing 22 players, Liverpool producing 21 players, and Tottenham producing 19 players. It is of note, however, that only 14 percent of appearances by Manchester United graduates were played with Manchester United, and similarly with Arsenal, that number was only slightly higher at 20 percent. Despite these clubs producing players through their academies, only a small portion of them actually find success with the club. This suggests that the benefits of the home-grown rule may be limited. Maqueira et al. (2019) performs a similar study on the two biggest clubs in Spain: FC Barcelona and Real Madrid CF. FC Barcelona uses an internal talent development model while Real Madrid CF uses an external talent capture model. These two models are compared the following talent management phases: talent attraction, talent selection, talent development, and talent retention. For Barcelona, the phases are described, respectively, as an attraction of values, an early capture of talent, a close-knit team, and an emotional bond. For Real Madrid, the phases are described, respectively, as a strong brand image, a late capture of talent, an individualized development structure, and a high operating performance. They find that the economic and operational results of the two models are equally effective for achieving business goals and, therefore, neither of the two models is better than the other as far as either economic or operational effectiveness is concerned. However, depending on the way that they compete, their organizational culture, and the nature of their competitive advantage, soccer federations may prefer to opt for one of these two talent development models or for a combination of the two. Unfortunately, this study did not examine competitive success as an outcome variable.B?hlke and Robinson (2009) perform a more general analysis on the Swedish Athletics Association (SAA) and the Norwegian Skiing Federation (NSF), organizations that serve similar purposes as international soccer federations. In their study, they analyzed four factors: athlete development pathways, coaching structures and coach education programs, sport science support, and athlete lifestyle support. Looking first at athlete development pathways, the research concluded that the extensive club infrastructure that exists in Norway and Sweden, alongside the mature national competition circuit, appear to be a sufficient substitute for the lack of a centrally organized, and well financed athlete development pathway. KPMG Sport Advisory Group (2012) in a study of Olympic athlete development, compares a variety of countries. They found several factors that were key to athlete development programs such as effective restructuring, a stable funding channel for the sport sector, a “brutal” elite sport redistribution system, and the rebranding of the Olympic team. Countries that did so had better overall performance in the Olympics.Finally, Nourayi (2006) studies the NBA to find patterns of competitive success. He found that a team can improve its winning percentages by changes in the roster that help it emulate superior teams. Comparing teams that advanced in a given season and reach the playoffs with those that did not, revealed the more important skill factors for success in the NBA such as three-point shooting efficiency and possessions per 48 minutes. When trying to improve a soccer federation, emulating other organizations that use progressive tactics like set piece plays and efficient shot choices lead to improved team results. This suggests that in addition to the factors already identified, benchmarking as a technique may be helpful to competitive soccer teams at the international level. In summary, the following factors related to country federations appear to matter in the achievement of upper tier status among elite men’s soccer teams: home-grown player rule, extensive club infrastructure, and alternative pathways such as purchasing talent.The literature reviewed suggested a range of country and country federation factors that matter, such as wealth and, depending on the country, opportunities to succeed inside and outside of the country. My study builds on this work and identifies additional factors that help determine tier status in international competition. MethodologyOverviewThis study employs the method of competitive benchmarking to answer my research question of what factors distinguish elite national soccer federations – those that consistently produce premier players and World Cup teams -- – from mid-tier and low-tier national soccer federations. This study compares and contrasts the soccer federations of the United States, Mexico, France, England, Japan, and Nigeria on the following criteria: average FIFA rank between 2009-2019, national honors and accomplishments, 2018-19 budget, earliest age when players join youth academies, youth setup structures, coaching philosophies, percent of homegrown talent, and the current reputation of domestic leagues. I chose these six countries because they represent a variety of climates, economic situations, and talent levels within their national teams. This study examines the soccer development programs of the 6 countries mentioned above with the use of web-based sources and individual interviews. Additional details follow. Benchmarking ApproachBenchmarking is the process of rapidly learning the essence of a desired field of knowledge with an interest in finding its leading edge (University of Delaware, 2014). Due to each nation having different policies within their soccer federations, as well as their national governments, a benchmarking study would make the most sense, with the focal country being the US. Then, we will compare the six countries and find any consistencies that may reveal the factors that go into elite sport development systems.Typically, benchmarking follows these steps: literature review, an explanation for US underperformance, and comparisons of the different tiers (Sotiriadou et al., 2008) The literature review is used to analyze the different studies I have looked at and the findings from those studies which I may find useful for my own study. This information is then used to infer and examine the underlying reasons of US Soccer’s shortcomings. After understanding where US Soccer stands as a soccer federation, it would be useful to see how they compare to competitors both more and less accomplished than them. From these comparisons, it becomes possible to identify what areas are of advantage and disadvantage for US Soccer within the global soccer landscape.A similar benchmarking study I used as reference for my own approach was provided by Majeski Athletic Consulting (2015). They studied a situation comparable to those of lower tier international soccer federations occurring in Alaska. They focus on the finances for the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, a school whose finances are very disadvantaged because of their geographical location. These findings can be very useful for soccer federations that may also be limited financially. After benchmarking similar schools, their suggestions include: increasing student fees to support athletics, restructuring athletics annual giving, reducing athletics financial aid by 10-20% (maximum), eliminating/consolidating administrative staff, or eliminating/reducing facilities rental expenditures.Benchmarking studies compare a measurable property or thing with a reference or standard. For example, B?hlke and Robinson (2009) compared the applicability of benchmarking as a research tool for improving the management of elite sport systems using the comparators of athlete development pathways and sport science support, among others. I will be comparing countries, as well as their soccer federations. I study the following countries from the highest tier (greatest international soccer success) to the lowest. First, England currently has a population of 66 million people with a total GDP of $3.028 trillion and a per capita GDP of $45,565. Soccer is the most popular sport in the country and FIFA recognizes England as the birthplace of soccer. Their governing body for soccer is also the oldest in the world, with the first rules being drafted in 1863. This, in turn, has helped the English Premier League to become the most watched soccer league in the world.France is our second top-tier country and they have a population of 67,348,000 people with a total GDP of $3.081 trillion and a per capita GDP of $47,113. Soccer is one of the most popular sports in the country and they have even hosted multiple FIFA World Cups. They boast one of the most successful national teams in the world and their top league, Ligue 1, has produced some of the greatest players ever like Zinedine Zidane and Michel Platini.Looking at the mid-tier teams, the United States have a population of 327,167,434 people with a total GDP of $20.891 trillion and a per capita GDP of $62,518. American football is the most popular sport and soccer is behind the likes of baseball and basketball. Despite this, they have hosted a FIFA World Cup and are home to MLS, their highest-level soccer league. The market for professional sports in the United States is roughly $69 billion, roughly 50% larger than that of all of Europe, the Middle East, and Africa combined.Like the United States, Mexico is another mid-tier country. They have a population of 123,675,325 people and a total GDP of $2.575 trillion with a per capita GDP of $20,645. Soccer is the most popular sport in Mexico, and it is believed that their domestic league was established in 1902 with a heavy British influence.Japan is the first lower-tier country we study and they have a population of 126,440,000 people and a total GDP of $5.632 trillion with a per capita GDP of $44,550. The popularity of soccer has grown within the country since the inception of the Japan Professional Football League in 1992. Since then, they have co-hosted a FIFA World Cup and have become one of the most successful national teams in Asia.Nigeria is the second lower-tier country in our study and they have a population of 199,315,249 people and a total GDP of $1.221 trillion with a per capita GDP of $6,130. Soccer is largely considered its national sport and they have their own domestic league as well. Their national team is known as the “Super Eagles” and they reached their highest FIFA ranking of #5 in the world in April 1994. I have selected the countries mentioned above (England, France, United States, Mexico, Japan, and Nigeria), because they represent a wide range of financial levels, geographic elements, soccer infrastructures, and cultures. There are many developed countries such as England, France, the United States, and Japan, yet all three tiers are represented between them. Similarly, despite countries like Mexico and Nigeria being warm and having a climate meant for soccer, it is actually the cooler climates like England and France that have found greater success. The level of soccer infrastructure though, is the most telling factor since England and France have had the most success with the most developed soccer federations. Lastly, the there is an array of cultures that spread across the globe within the countries I have selected. Their cultural values and traditions play an integral role in directing athletes to the soccer pitch. Table 1 presents descriptive data on each country.Table 1. Descriptive Information, by CountryCompetitive TierPopulationTotal GDPPer Capita GDPEngland155,619,400$3.028 trillion$45,565France167,348,000$3.081 trillion$47,113United States2327,167,434$20.891 trillion$62,518Mexico2123,675,325$2.575 trillion$20,645Japan3126,440,000$5.632 trillion$44,550Nigeria3199,315,249$1.221 trillion$6,130Data and Data CollectionUpon doing my research into each national soccer federation, I began by typing into Google the name of the country’s soccer federation. For England, it directed me to the English FA website where I clicked the “About” tab and found information about their staff and partners, as well as what they aim to accomplish as an organization. For France, it directed me to the French Football Federation where I had to immediately translate the page from French to English. I then clicked the “FFF” tab that contains information and statistics about the organization, its staff, partners, and rules and regulations. For the United States, it directed me to the US Soccer home page where I clicked on the “Academy” tab that provided stories and updates on all of their youth teams. I then looked at the “More” tab where they explain their different partners and their coaching requirements. For Mexico, it directed me to the Mexican Federation of Football Association where I had to immediately translate the page from Spanish to English. I began by clicking the “FMF” tab which contained information about their staff and vision. I then clicked the “Regulations” and “Statistics” tabs which explained their organization in greater detail, as well as the performances of their national team and its players. For Japan, it directed me to the JFA website which was had already been translated into English. Under the “National Team” tab, I clicked the “Samurai Blue” tab. From this point, I scrolled to the bottom of the website where I found the “Public Documents” link which contained their rules, regulations, and contracts. For Nigeria, I clicked on their website link which directed me to a pop-up ad. Upon trying again, I was able to get to the NFF website which was already in English. There were no tabs on this website that were particularly helpful, but the main homepage contained their most recent news stories. Table 2 presents the federation websites, by country.Table 2. Soccer Federation Web AddressesCountrySoccer Federation NameWeb AddressEnglandThe FAédération Fran?aise de Football StatesU.S. Soccer Federation of Football Association, AC Football Federation factors I will be looking at in this study are average FIFA rank over the past 10 years, national honors and accomplishments, budget, average age when players join youth academies, youth setup structures, coaching philosophies, percent of homegrown talent, and reputation of domestic leagues. Going in order of the list above, I will explain why each factor is important in the context of this study. The country’s FIFA rank provides a look at how a country has performed over an extended period of time. Any country can have one or two good years, but only the elite countries can consistently be good over the course of a decade. Their national honors and accomplishments are all retroactive but still help maintain or enhance a country’s national soccer reputation. It is a testament to their past successes and what has helped get them to the point they are at today. The budget for their national soccer teams will help with building a quality coaching staff and training facilities. These factors are integral in the development and maintenance of their players. These three factors provide an overview of each country I can use to compare against the other factors in my study.The average age players join youth academies is also a great indicator of how much training they receive throughout their career and how long they have to learn the national team style of play. The earlier the players join, the more time they have to improve their game, while also giving them more wear and tear that could lead to future injuries. Similarly, youth setup structures are what develop and nurture the players and help mold them into national level soccer players. Good youth setup structures will be able to consistently product elite level talent regardless of the talent pool they are dealt. Coaching philosophies are not so much catered towards player development, but rather towards the way they are utilized and the style of play they are encouraged to learn. Coaching philosophies either help improve or inhibit the talent the youth setup provides them. Between these factors, it is possible to see how one country’s developmental system differs from another.The percent of homegrown talent is a good indicator of how good the country is at developing their own talent, rather than poaching other players away from foreign countries, and then allowing them to gain citizenship for their own country. Soccer federations with a high percentage of homegrown talent are more sustainable than soccer federations with a low percentage of homegrown talent. Lastly, the reputation of their domestic leagues will help build interest in soccer, as well as attract more talented players to the country, potentially leading to a more prominent national team. An elite domestic league will also bring in more television revenue and help the national soccer federation financially. Both factors exist independently, yet have noticeable impacts on the makeup of a national team.I will find this information on their national team websites, online research databases, and peer-reviewed journal articles. Along with the web sources, I will use my own previous knowledge and textbooks. I will supplement this research with in-person interviews with officials from both US Soccer and the Mexican Federation of Football.Federation InterviewsI will be interviewing employees and staff members from both US Soccer and the Mexican Federation of Football in order to supplement my independent research. I have selected the two federations because of the convenience, as well as the differences in economic factors and culture. The interviews allow me to triangulate the information I have gathered on England and the United States. That is, my internet research and interviews, serve as two separate sources of information that will give me a fuller and clearer perspective on the state of two of the soccer federations I am researching. The questions I asked were the following: What is the budget for your soccer federation? What is the youngest youth team the federation works with?Can you explain in detail what your current youth setup is like?Are there any coaching philosophies that you try to instill in your players?How often do you recruit players from outside of the country?Does your domestic league have a positive or negative impact on your player development? These are my initial questions and will ask follow-up questions as needed. Table 3 presents the individuals interviewed as well as their titles and affiliations.Table 3. Interview Participant InformationIntervieweeAffiliationTitleSunil GulatiU.S. SoccerFormer President of U.S. SoccerMirelle van RijbroekU.S. SoccerDirector of Player Talent Identification for Youth National TeamsDaniel LeónMexican Federation of FootballNational Selections Operations CoordinatorResultsThe results in Table 4 below were found through benchmarking research and phone interviews with national soccer federation officials. Through federation websites and online databases, I was able to find information on the seven factors I studied for the six countries of interest.Table 4. Benchmarking ResultsEnglandFranceMexicoUnited StatesJapanNigeriaTierUpperUpperMiddleMiddleLowerLowerAvg. FIFA Rank2009-20199.612.719.724.439.344.1Soccer Federation/ Geographic AreaUEFA/ EuropeUEFA/ EuropeCONCACAF/ North and Central AmericaCONCACAF/ North and Central AmericaAFC/ AsiaCAF/ AfricaAll National Honors and Accomplishments? World Cup Wins: 1? Federation Wins: 0? World Cup Wins: 2? Federation Wins: 2? World Cup Wins: 0? Federation Wins: 10? World Cup Wins: 0? Federation Wins: 6? World Cup Wins: 0? Federation Wins: 4? World Cup Wins: 0? Federation Wins: 32018-19 Budget?146 million($191.46 million US)€ 250.2 million($277.46 million US)Not Available$115 million($115 million US)Not AvailableNot AvailableYoungest TeamU17U16U17U15U15U17Youth Setup Structures- Foundation Phase- Youth Development Phase- Professional Development PhaseBasic Training:- 3rd-6th gradeElite Training:- Interregional (High level preformation)- National-Training at licensed professional club (High-level training)Not Available- 16-30 games per season- Domestic and international tournaments- Full-time players expected to start at least 25% of their games- District training center- Prefectural training center- Regional training center- National training centerGoals:- Establish football academies in every state of the Federation- Train over 500,000 players under the age of 15Coaching PhilosophiesThe Future England Player: Skills and Attributes- Technical- Tactical- Physical- Social- PsychologicalThe philosophy they teach is based upon technical quality and mental decision-making.Import coaching:- Recruit from Europe and South AmericaMain Focus:- Education- Nutrition- Sports scienceFocus on the individual player over the team:- Development more important than winning- Become a creative and tough player- Make good judgments- Show fighting spirit for victory- Be alert- Ambition and prideNot AvailablePercent of Homegrown Talent95.7%87.5%100%90%92.6%84.7%Current Reputation of Domestic LeaguesUnanimously ranked as the best league in the world5th best league in the world11th best league in the world15th best league in the world, known for attracting stars past their prime17th best league in the world, have begun attracting bigger stars- most of them past their primeLittle international success, poor reputation due to mismanagement of financesDisplayed in Table 4 above are the six countries in my study. England and France are upper tier countries with elite/great international success, Mexico and the United States are middle tier countries with sub-elite/some international success, and Japan and Nigeria are lower tier countries with developing/little international success. I chose the factors measured above because they give a comprehensive overview of the national team federations. I have identified these factors as the critical elements towards player development. Through these factors, it is possible to establish a more complete picture of the player development pathway and the likelihood of future success for a particular country. I found information for every section in the table above through each federation’s website. What I was not able to find however, were budgets for Mexico, Japan, and Nigeria. As an organization’s finances are usually confidential information, it is not surprising that some countries keep them private.InterviewsThe interviews listed in Table 5 enhanced the information in Table 4 by giving me supplemental first-hand information. As all three interviewees held different positions within their respective soccer federation, they all had different areas of expertise and knowledge that helped contribute to a variety of factors in my study. As noted, under “Key Takeaways” both U.S. interviewees discussed challenges faced by the U.S. Soccer Federation. The interviewee from the Mexican Federation of Football provided information on how Mexico’s soccer development strategies are influenced by European countries. Table 5. Summary of Phone Interviews with Federation OfficialsParticipantFederationPositionKey TakeawaysSunil GulatiU.S. SoccerFormer President of U.S. SoccerThe size and variety of cultures in the U.S. make it harder to replicate the recruiting and training styles of European countries.Mirelle van RijbroekU.S. SoccerDirector of Player Talent Identification for Youth National TeamsThe presence of collegiate soccer is a big factor in the U.S. failing to catch up to many European nations with academy systems in place.Daniel LeónMexican Federation of FootballNational Selections Operations CoordinatorMexico takes many of their coaching and playing styles from European teams and countries like FC Barcelona and Spain. Sunil Gulati confirmed that the budget for U.S. Soccer was around the $115-120 million range; an amount much greater than when he initially took over. However, when asked about training methods and coaching philosophies, he explained that it would not make sense for the U.S. to have defined principles for the entire country. There are so many geographical and cultural differences that it is impossible for every player to learn soccer the same way. He did support the notion of U.S. soccer learning and adapting their methods from other countries though, saying that “What [they] did at Bradenton and what [they’ve] done with the academy program is try and replicate some of what others have been doing successful at doing”. Mirelle van Rijbroek shared a similar sentiment as Sunil Gulati when explaining the difficulties of developing talent in the United States. “[The U.S.] have a lot of members and all those different members are organizing their own leagues, competitions. Which makes it really fractured and fragmented and that’s very difficult.” In addition, van Rijbroek was able to reveal a lot about the U.S.’s coaching philosophies, saying “the key qualities are understanding the game and key decision-making, initiative, responsibility- optimal, tactical, optimal tactical, and focus.” Lastly, Daniel León provided me some insight into the Mexican Federation of Football. When asked about Mexico’s coaching philosophies, he supported the notion that they import their coaching from oversees, saying, “We have for example, our coordinator here in Mexico national team is from Spain. He knows how it works with the training. From Spain, there is a lot of our formations.” After asking him if this philosophy is the same for every player in their program, León goes on to say, “Yeah, of course. But maybe not for the senior team, but for the youth teams. It’s easier for the youth national teams than the senior team because senior team only has FIFA dates when they can play. But if not the senior team, the young teams is a good option.” In addition to the information presented above, Gulati and van Rijbroek confirmed and provided supplemental information reflected in Table 4. However, due to time constraints, I was not able to ask León about his thoughts relating to the United States’ failure to qualify for the 2018 World Cup. DiscussionMy research examined the national men’s soccer federations from six countries, across three tiers of competitive success. The information in Table 4 reveals some trends between the different factors, but also a lack of trends in others. The average FIFA rank over the past 10 years makes sense in relation the nation’s stature and international success. While France has won more international competitions, what makes England the higher ranked team is the consistency of their performance. France tends to produce a generation of players that dominate internationally, followed by a stagnation in talent that causes them to underperform based on their reputation. England, due to their ability to mass produce soccer talent, is able to consistently compete at the international level. The rankings also correlate in a similar way between Mexico and the United States. They compete in all the same competitions and Mexico has been more successful in them, leading to their higher average FIFA rank. Despite Japan and Nigeria performing well in their regional tournaments, the lack of competition in their regions, as well as lack of overall success in World Cups, prevent them from rising in the rankings as well.The key takeaways from the table involve budget, youth setup structures, and characteristics of the domestic league. Although the budget section is incomplete, it is possible to see that the more successful countries do have a bigger budget. Not only that, but the money is well managed and used efficiently. The youth setup structures appear to reveal more about the economic and infrastructural situation of the country rather than its soccer federation. England, France, the United States, and Japan all provide multiple levels of youth programs with defined rules and regulations. Looking at Mexico’s youth structure, their goals are extremely vague and will make it difficult to effectively track and manage progress. Nigeria is even further back, as they state that they simply want their players to have access to academies throughout the country. Lastly, the reputation of the domestic leagues do reveal a correlation with international success. The order of average FIFA rank over the last 10 years is the same as the order of their domestic league ranks. This reveals that a strong domestic league can generate interest within the sport for a country, as well as generate money for their national soccer federation that can be used to fund youth programs. Unlike the previous three factors, average age of youth intake, coaching philosophies, and percent of homegrown talent reveal some information. Surprisingly, lesser teams like the United States and Japan provide younger teams than more successful teams like England and France. I would say that this could be because of finances, yet England and France have huge budgets to spend. This may mean that England and France prioritize older players more than capturing a lot of younger players that may never actually be good. The coaching philosophies provide additional information. The difference between England and Nigeria is clear, as the former has philosophies for and goals for both the players and coaches, while Nigeria is just beginning to track their player data. The middle four teams all share some sort of overlap at one point or another. They all value the individual player over the team, and they emphasize strong and quick decision making from their players. In a developmental sense, this makes sense, as the only time team success matters over individual progress is at the senior level. Lastly, the percent of homegrown talent statistics vary greatly and do not appear to indicate anything. Either way, the percentage of players coming in from outside the country are so small, that they would not have a significant impact regardless of these marginal differences between countries. Overall, countries with the most defined training methods and coaching philosophies are the ones that have the most international soccer success.Looking at the results, the reputation of domestic leagues reinforces federation efforts and vice versa. The only factor that correlates with the tiers is the reputation of the domestic league. When money and interest is invested into a domestic league, there appears to be a positive effect on the overall interest in the sport and the level of talent it produces. This leads into the correlation between annual budget and tier placement. Upper-tier countries like England and France had significantly larger budgets than a mid-tier country like the United States. Especially considering the shear range the United States has to cover compared to smaller European countries, having a budget discrepancy this big does not bode well for the United States. Another pattern found is the relationship between the consistency of training and coaching philosophies to the development of elite talent. Whereas upper tier countries like England and France have a defined way of playing with a specific type of player they look for, middle and lower tier countries do not have the freedom to pick and choose talent, and therefore, are forced to mold their philosophies to the player rather than the other way around. This leads to less cohesion within the national team. These results also support country factors found by Ichniowski and Preston (2014). My results indicate that upper tier teams have an advantage in continuing to produce elite level talent. This is why it is so difficult for many of these countries to move between tiers. Bullough and Jordan (2017) provide information of federation factors that is supported by my research as well. They focus on the impact the Homegrown rule has had in England, and, because of that rule, they have the second highest percentage of homegrown players on their national team out of the six countries I studied. Ultimately, after doing extensive research on both upper tier countries and the United States, it is difficult to see the United States being able to adopt many of the upper tier practices. Although they have the resources to keep up with upper tier federations, the United States is an extremely unique situation due to the size of the country, the different cultures that make up the country, the presence of collegiate soccer, and the popularity of other sports. Whereas soccer dominates England and France, football, basketball, and baseball do the same in the United States. When scouting talent in England and France, the geographical range in which they look is much more plausible than the United States. This leads to England and France having an easier time molding their players into one consistent play style, whereas a player from New York will have a significantly different play style than a player from Los Angeles.The one area U.S. Soccer can improve in is their budget. When working in a country as big as the United States, greater financial investment is required to fully maximize the athletic potential of the country’s talent pool. England and France are able to uncover more talent because they have more money to scout a smaller geographic area. This allows their national teams to accurately represent their respective talent pools, unlike the United States, who leave a lot of talent uncovered because of their budgetary shortcomings. Study LimitationsOne way my study could have been improved would have been do interview people from more than just two of the countries I studied. While Gulati and van Rijbroek gave me plenty of useful information about U.S. Soccer, it was difficult to gain a lot of detailed information about the Mexican Federation of Football from León. The latter issue was mostly because of the language barrier. Since these interviews were both with mid-tier countries, I was not able to gain an accurate perspective on how they differed from either lower or upper tier countries. Another way this study could have been improved is if the information for mid and lower tier countries like Mexico, Japan, and Nigeria were more easily accessible. There was plenty of information and articles available for countries like England, France, and the United States, but I had to leave a lot of financial information blank for the other countries. Furthermore, the quantity of information I found about them was minimal and the quality of the information I found on them may be outdated. Future research on this topic may require travel to the countries in question for greater access to federation officials and federation archival materials. In addition, I believe choosing factors that were more objective rather than subjective would have helped reveal clearer results. Factors like “Youth Setup Structures” and “Coaching Philosophies” are broad and vague. As such, most of the information I found regarding these factors were not helpful in distinguishing the federations from the different tiers. If I had used more measurable factors, like expected goals (xG) by a country, that use factual evidence to prove or support a statement, my findings would have revealed much more useful information. I encourage future research on this topic to adopt this strategy. Finally, my study was limited to men’s soccer. Research on women’s soccer may have yielded a different pattern of results.ConclusionThe key findings of my study were apparent associations between budget and tier status, and domestic league reputation and tier status. A possible association with the consistency of youth setup structures and tier structure was also found. The remaining three factors studied did not reveal any noticeable patterns across countries or tiers. In the context of the United States and what they should do to find greater success internationally, the most straightforward way to reach the elite tier is to invest substantially more money in player recruitment, player development, and talent identification. ReferencesAcademy Philosophy (2019). In?U.S. Soccer Development Academy. Retrieved from , M. (2009, July 5). Football Federations Around The Globe – A Look At The World Of Football. In?Sportslens. Retrieved from Analysis on Sport Organizations. (2012).?KPMG Cutting Through Complexity.Benchmarking Research (n.d.). Retrieved from , N., & Robinson, L. (2009). Benchmarking of ?lite Sport Systems.?Management Decision,?47(1), 67-84. doi:10.1108/00251740910929704Bullough, S., & Jordan, J. (2017). Youth Academy Player Development in English Football.?Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal,?7(4), 375-392. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Collection.Butler, D., et al. (2018). Explaining International Footballer Selection through Poisson Modelling.?Journal of Economic Studies,?45(2), 296-306. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Collection.GDP Ranked by Country 2019 (2019). In?World Population Review. Retrieved from , G. A., & Dobson, P. (2007). Predicting the Comparative Strengths of National Football Teams.?Social Science Quarterly,?88(1), 244-258. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Collection.Ichniowski, C., & Preston, A. (2014). Do Star Performers Produce More Stars? Peer Effects and Learning in Elite Teams.?NBER Working Paper Series. doi:10.3386/w20478Intercollegiate Athletics Financial Assessment. (2015, December).?University of Alaska, Fairbanks.Maqueira, J. M., et al. (2019). Talent Management: Two Pathways to Glory? Lessons from the Sports Arena.?Employee Relations,?41(1), 34-51. doi:10.1108/er-11-2017-0271Men's Ranking (2019). In?FIFA. Retrieved from (2019). In?Mexican Federation of Football. Retrieved from , M. M. (2006). Profitability in Professional Sports and Benchmarking: the Case of NBA Franchises.?Benchmarking: An International Journal,?13(3), 252-271. doi:10.1108/14635770610668776Players Development (2019). In?JFA. Retrieved from , K., et al. (2008). The Attraction, Retention/Transition, and Nurturing Process of Sport Development: Some Australian Evidence.?Journal of Sport Management,?22(3), 247-272. doi:10.1123/jsm.22.3.247The England DNA (2019). In?The FA. Retrieved from (2019). In?The NFF. Retrieved from Structures (2019). In?FFF. Retrieved from ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download