Why America’s Best Male Athletes Are the Missing Piece in U.S. Soccer
Opening Statement
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury:
Every four years, Americans hear the same explanations for why the United States still is not an elite men’s soccer nation.
“It isn’t an athleticism problem.”
“It’s technique.”
“It’s coaching.”
“It’s youth development.”
“It’s soccer culture.”
“It’s pay-to-play.”
Let us begin this trial with a stipulation: Every one of those explanations contains some truth.
Better coaching would improve American soccer. Better technical development would improve it. Better scouting, stronger professional academies, lower youth-soccer costs and a more coherent national system would improve it. A deeper soccer culture would improve it.
In fact, U.S. Soccer’s own Pathways Strategy identifies high costs, confusing development routes and unequal access as problems that need to be fixed.
The American pay-to-play system undoubtedly excludes talented children. Elite youth soccer can require club fees, travel teams, tournament costs, hotels, transportation and enormous commitments from parents. These barriers reduce the number of gifted children who can remain in the system long enough to be discovered and developed.
I concede all of that before opposing counsel even rises.
But those valid criticisms do not negate the primary reason the United States has failed to become an elite men’s soccer nation:
America’s best young male athletes disproportionately choose other sports.
A better soccer infrastructure can only develop the athletes who enter that infrastructure and remain in it.
If many of the country’s fastest, quickest, most coordinated, most creative and most competitive boys are already dreaming about the NFL and NBA, they are not spending their childhoods becoming elite soccer players.
My conclusion is not that America would automatically dominate world soccer if more of its finest athletes chose it. Soccer is too global and too competitive for any country to dominate indefinitely.
My conclusion is more reasonable:
If the United States combined a first-class soccer-development system with a substantially larger share of its finest young male athletes, it should become a consistent top-five soccer nation and a legitimate World Cup contender.
The defense calls this theory a myth.
Today, that theory goes on trial.
The Defense’s Case
Opposing counsel makes several arguments.
First, soccer is unusually technical. A fast forty-yard dash does not create a first touch. A high vertical leap does not teach a player to receive a pass under pressure. Strength does not create field vision.
Second, the United States already has millions of athletic children playing soccer. Therefore, the country supposedly has no shortage of athletes.
Third, American soccer loses because its players lack the technique, decision-making, coaching and tactical education found in elite soccer countries.
Fourth, the defense points toward Lionel Messi, Diego Maradona and Pelé. None was built like an NBA forward or NFL linebacker, yet they became three of the greatest players ever.
Finally, the defense argues that placing Barry Sanders, Deion Sanders or Allen Iverson on a soccer field would not have transformed them into elite soccer players.
The last point is plainly true.
It is also an argument against a case the prosecution never filed.
The Argument We Are Actually Making
No one is proposing that Barry Sanders could have walked away from the Detroit Lions at age 27, put on soccer cleats and joined Manchester United.
No one is suggesting that Allen Iverson could have left the Philadelphia 76ers and immediately become an international midfielder.
The real question is this:
What might athletes with their extraordinary natural abilities have become had they entered elite soccer training at age five and devoted the next fifteen years to the sport?
Imagine Barry Sanders learning to dribble, pass and shoot from childhood. Consider his historic balance, acceleration, peripheral awareness, change of direction, lower-body control and ability to escape several defenders in almost no space.
Imagine Deion Sanders developing as a winger, attacking fullback or forward. Consider his speed, anticipation, coordination, footwork, confidence and ability to read movement around him.
Imagine Allen Iverson, one of the quickest and most elusive athletes in American sports history, spending his formative years mastering a soccer ball. Consider his coordination, creativity, toughness, vision, competitive intensity and ability to change direction before an opponent could react.
Would all three necessarily have become soccer superstars?
Of course not.
Would a development system containing hundreds of boys with comparable athletic gifts have produced more elite soccer players than the current system?
It defies common sense to say no.
Exhibit A: Speed Matters More Than the Defense Admits
Soccer purists often talk about speed as though it were a crude American obsession with stopwatch numbers.
Then Kylian Mbappé receives the ball in open space—and suddenly everyone understands the importance of speed.
Acceleration creates separation. Recovery speed prevents goals. Quickness helps attackers beat defenders. Agility permits players to change direction while maintaining control. Explosiveness helps determine who reaches a pass or loose ball first.
Fast players also alter tactics. Defenders must retreat earlier. Teams must provide additional coverage. Space opens for teammates because one unusually fast attacker can threaten an entire defense.
Speed alone does not make a soccer player. Neither does technique alone.
A player with elite technique, intelligence and speed generally has a higher ceiling than an equally skilled player who is substantially slower.
This principle is accepted in every other sport. Soccer does not receive a special exemption.
Exhibit B: The Defense Misdefines Athleticism
When critics discuss American athletes, they often reduce athleticism to three measurements:
- Height
- Straight-line speed
- Vertical leap
They then point to Messi and announce that athleticism must not matter very much.
That is nonsense.
Athleticism also includes:
- Acceleration
- Agility
- Balance
- Coordination
- Reaction speed
- Endurance
- Spatial awareness
- Body control
- Flexibility
- Anticipation
- The ability to execute difficult movements at full speed
Messi is 5-foot-7. He is also one of the most athletically gifted soccer players ever.
His acceleration was exceptional. His balance was historic. His coordination, reaction time, agility and control of his body while changing direction were almost incomparable.
Maradona’s height did not make him unathletic. His low center of gravity, explosiveness and balance were major athletic advantages.
The defense cherry-picks several unusually short legends and presents them as proof that athletes coming from American football or basketball would not help.
But elite soccer players are not generally tiny. Data compiled from listed Premier League players places the average height at approximately 5-foot-11.95, almost exactly six feet.
Messi proves that a player does not need to be tall.
He does not prove that speed, balance, agility, coordination, strength or explosiveness are unimportant.
Exhibit C: Soccer Is Highly Technical—but It Is Not Uniquely Technical
The prosecution will gladly stipulate that soccer is one of the most technically demanding sports in the world.
Controlling and striking a moving ball accurately with the feet is extremely difficult. Players must execute those skills while running, under pressure, while scanning the field and often while exhausted.
The inability to use the hands for most of the game increases the technical challenge.
But soccer fans sometimes take a reasonable point and transform it into an arrogant one:
Soccer is so uniquely technical that athletic success in other sports tells us almost nothing about a child’s potential to become an elite soccer player.
That conclusion does not follow.
Quarterback is a highly technical position. It requires intricate throwing mechanics, footwork, timing, defensive recognition, anticipation, accuracy and rapid decision-making while several enormous opponents attempt to knock the passer down.
Wide receivers need precise route-running, body positioning, hand-eye coordination, field awareness and the ability to track a ball while sprinting.
Basketball requires dribbling, shooting, passing, footwork and split-second decisions against the best defenders in the world.
Baseball players must recognize and hit pitches traveling at extreme speeds while changing direction and location.
Hockey players perform specialized technical movements while balancing on thin blades over ice.
Soccer may be more technically demanding than many of those sports. But it is not the only sport requiring years of difficult technical development.
An ESPN expert panel once rated 60 sports across ten athletic categories: endurance, strength, power, speed, agility, flexibility, nerve, durability, hand-eye coordination and analytical aptitude. Boxing finished first, ice hockey second, American football third, basketball fourth and soccer tenth.
The rankings are subjective and do not measure technical soccer skill perfectly. Nevertheless, they undermine the claim that soccer occupies a separate athletic universe beyond the understanding or developmental potential of gifted athletes from other sports.
Exhibit D: Better Athletes Often Learn Physical Skills Faster
The defense says that development makes the player.
Agreed.
That strengthens the prosecution’s argument.
Development determines whether a gifted child learns soccer skills, basketball skills or football skills. But natural ability affects how quickly children acquire those skills and how effectively they eventually perform them.
Better coordination can accelerate the development of footwork.
Better balance can assist dribbling and ball protection.
Faster reactions can improve defending and receiving.
Superior spatial awareness can improve passing and positioning.
Exceptional body control can help a player execute difficult technical movements repeatedly and at game speed.
Being a great general athlete guarantees nothing. Some gifted athletes would never develop elite touch, vision or tactical understanding.
But it is equally foolish to claim that natural balance, coordination, quickness and reaction ability have no relationship to the acquisition and execution of soccer technique.
The defense presents technique and athleticism as competing explanations.
Elite soccer requires both.
Exhibit E: America’s Athletic Talent Is Divided Like No Other Soccer Power’s
Many countries have other sports.
That is not the same as possessing four enormous professional team sports that compete with soccer for athletes, media attention, childhood dreams, scholarships and money.
The United States has:
- The NFL
- The NBA
- Major League Baseball
- The NHL
It also produces world-class performers in:
- Summer Olympic sports
- Winter Olympic sports
- Track and field
- Swimming
- Wrestling
- Gymnastics
- Golf
- Tennis
- Boxing
- Mixed martial arts
- Auto racing
Show me another FIFA top-30 country that distributes elite male athletic talent that widely while performing at a high level across so many unrelated sports.
England has cricket and rugby.
France has rugby, basketball and other sports.
Spain has basketball and tennis.
Germany has several successful sports.
Japan has baseball.
Those are genuine competitors for talent. But soccer remains culturally and economically dominant, or at least near the top, in almost every elite soccer nation.
The United States is different. Soccer competes with four major professional team sports, several of which dominate American culture.
Australia provides the closest comparison. Soccer has enormous participation there, but Australian rules football, cricket and rugby league receive greater domestic attention. Australia remains a respectable soccer country, but not an elite one. Football Australia and regional reports continue to identify soccer as one of the country’s leading participation sports, including first among organized team sports in Western Australia.
Canada also divides athletes among hockey, football, basketball, baseball and soccer. It has improved substantially but has not historically become an elite men’s soccer country.
The bottom line is this: None of the elite soccer nations currently ranked ahead of the United States have four team sports more popular than soccer draining their finest young male athletes. In fact, all 14 countries currently ranked higher than the United States in the FIFA World Rankings have soccer as their number one sport.
That means every one of them has ZERO team sports more popular than soccer, while the United States has FOUR. Four to zero. Let that sink in. Please stop saying, "Other countries play other sports too," as if that makes it an equal comparison. It doesn't.
These comparisons do not mathematically prove causation.
They do, however, support the obvious proposition that when several other major sports compete for the same gifted children, soccer receives a smaller share of the best available athletic talent.
Exhibit F: Football and Basketball Receive the Glamour
A gifted American boy does not make his choice in a cultural vacuum.
He grows up watching NFL and NBA stars dominate television, highlights, advertisements, social media and school conversations.
He sees quarterbacks celebrated as national celebrities.
He sees NBA guards receive enormous salaries and shoe contracts.
He sees packed college-football stadiums and nationally televised basketball tournaments.
The NFL and NBA offer established roads toward money, fame, scholarships and social status. Even a child who never reaches the professional level may see football or basketball as the most prestigious athletic pursuit in his community.
Soccer is growing. Major League Soccer has improved. The World Cup creates enormous bursts of interest.
But American boys still grow up more likely to dream of becoming Patrick Mahomes, LeBron James or an NFL star than the next great American soccer player.
The defense calls this a lack of soccer culture.
That is correct.
But culture is not separate from athlete allocation. Culture helps determine which sports the finest athletes select.
Exhibit G: America Loses a Major Pool of Speed and Explosiveness to Football and Basketball
A substantial percentage of America’s fastest, quickest and most explosive male athletes ultimately enter football and basketball.
This is particularly apparent at positions such as:
- Wide receiver
- Running back
- Defensive back
- Mobile quarterback
- Point guard
- Shooting guard
- Outfielders (in baseball)
Many Black American athletes are heavily represented within those positions and within the NFL and NBA generally. The causes of athletic representation are complex and can involve individual ability, culture, opportunity, economics, development systems and selection.
This article does not need to resolve every biological or sociological question surrounding that representation.
The relevant sporting fact is simpler:
A large pool of exceptionally fast, agile and explosive American athletes is being developed primarily for football and basketball rather than soccer.
European soccer powers have successfully developed exceptional players from immigrant and minority communities, including many players whose speed and athleticism became major tactical advantages.
The United States possesses an enormous and diverse population of potential athletes. But many of its most gifted young players are directed toward other sports before soccer has the opportunity to develop them.
That is a competitive loss, regardless of why those individual athletes possess their particular abilities.
Exhibit H: The Economic Incentives Favor Other American Sports
Athletic children and their families make practical decisions.
The average salaries, scholarship opportunities, television exposure and cultural visibility attached to football, basketball and baseball are powerful incentives.
American soccer now offers legitimate professional opportunities. Nevertheless, an elite young athlete considering several sports may perceive a clearer domestic road through football or basketball:
- High school recognition
- College scholarships
- Major televised competitions
- Established professional drafts
- Greater domestic celebrity
- Larger endorsement possibilities
Even where soccer salaries can be enormous globally, the American child must often enter an international developmental and transfer system that is less familiar to his family.
When the money, fame and institutional support point in one direction, it should not surprise anyone when athletes follow.
Exhibit I: Elite American Soccer Is Too Expensive
Soccer is theoretically one of the least expensive sports.
A ball and an open space are enough to begin.
But elite American soccer frequently becomes something else entirely:
- Club fees
- Travel teams
- Tournament charges
- Transportation
- Hotels
- Private training
- Equipment
- Significant parental time
Recent public debate has again emphasized that some American families face youth-soccer costs ranging from thousands to well over $10,000 annually. Former U.S. star Landon Donovan has said that, under today’s system, his own family might not have been able to afford the path he followed.
Basketball courts, by comparison, are common and usually free. A child can walk to a public court, practice alone and join pickup games against different ages and ability levels.
Public schools provide extensive football, basketball, baseball, wrestling and track infrastructure. Football programs often supply fields, equipment, coaching and structured competition.
Soccer has school teams too, but the elite pathway frequently requires private clubs and extensive travel.
This creates a devastating combination:
- Soccer already loses many top athletes to more glamorous sports.
- It then places financial barriers before talented children who do choose soccer.
The defense properly identifies this as an infrastructure failure.
But once again, it does not negate athlete diversion. It compounds it.
Exhibit J: Other Countries Often Support the Soccer Ecosystem More Directly
The United States provides indirect assistance through public schools, municipal fields, parks and tax-supported facilities.
What it generally lacks is a unified national system of substantial public investment specifically organized around producing elite soccer players.
Several soccer countries treat sports facilities, community clubs, coaching and national development as forms of public infrastructure. Governments, municipalities and sports ministries may help fund fields, training centers, coaching systems and federation programs.
The American system relies more heavily on families, private clubs, schools, professional academies and market forces.
That difference matters.
But this point belongs beside the prosecution’s argument, not against it.
Better public support would allow soccer to identify and retain more talented children. It would not change the fact that football, basketball, baseball and hockey continue competing for those children’s attention.
Cross-Examination of the Defense
Question: Does speed help Kylian Mbappé?
Answer: Obviously.
Question: Did Messi possess exceptional acceleration, balance and body control?
Answer: Yes.
Question: Does recovery speed help a defender?
Answer: Yes.
Question: Does jumping ability help on headers?
Answer: Yes.
Question: Does coordination assist technical development?
Answer: Yes.
Question: Would the United States produce more elite players if more extraordinarily coordinated and explosive children received excellent soccer training beginning at age five?
At this point, the defense begins changing the subject.
It tells us that first touch matters.
We agree.
It tells us that coaching matters.
We agree.
It tells us that Belgium did not defeat the United States merely because Belgium ran faster.
We agree.
But none of those statements answers the question.
The defense repeatedly proves only that athleticism without soccer development is insufficient.
The prosecution has never disputed that.
The defense does not prove that athlete allocation is irrelevant. It does not prove that equally trained players with greater speed, balance, coordination and agility would gain no advantage. And it does not prove that America would remain at approximately the same level if hundreds more of its most gifted children entered elite soccer development.
The Hockey Objection
One critic asks why Americans do not make the same argument about hockey.
The answer is straightforward.
The worldwide competitive pool in hockey is far smaller and more geographically concentrated. The United States can compete near the top through strong regional hockey cultures, college programs, extensive infrastructure and access to the world’s premier professional league.
Soccer requires the United States to compete against the deepest and broadest international talent pool in sports.
That does not make athlete diversion less important.
It makes the loss more costly.
When a nation is trying to defeat the entire world at its favorite sport, it cannot afford to direct a disproportionate share of its finest athletes elsewhere.
The Verdict
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defense has proven several important points.
Better coaching matters.
Better technical development matters.
Lower youth-soccer costs matter.
Better scouting matters.
A stronger professional-academy system matters.
Public investment and accessible facilities matter.
Soccer culture matters.
The prosecution concedes every point.
But the defense asks you to take one additional and illogical step: to conclude that because those factors matter, losing thousands of America’s most gifted young athletes to other sports does not.
That conclusion is impossible to accept.
America’s finest athletic talent is divided among more major sports than the talent of almost any elite soccer nation. Football and basketball capture many of the fastest, quickest, most coordinated and most explosive boys. Baseball, hockey, Olympic sports and numerous individual sports take additional portions of the pool.
Soccer then develops what remains through a system that is frequently expensive, fragmented and difficult to navigate.
Despite all of that, the United States still produces a competitive national team.
That fact does not weaken the prosecution’s case.
It strengthens it.
Imagine what American soccer could become if it improved its development system and persuaded more of the country’s finest young male athletes to choose soccer.
Would the United States automatically dominate?
No.
Would every great football or basketball prospect become a great soccer player?
No.
Would some fail to develop elite touch, tactical awareness or decision-making?
Certainly.
But across hundreds and eventually thousands of gifted children, the United States would produce more exceptional players.
Some would become faster defenders.
Some would become explosive wingers.
Some would become creative midfielders.
Some would possess the rare combination of technique, vision, speed, balance and competitiveness that defines the world’s greatest players.
The United States has enough population, wealth, diversity and sporting ability to become a consistent top-five men’s soccer nation.
What it does not currently have is a soccer system receiving and developing a sufficiently large portion of its finest young male athletes.
Technique does not make athleticism irrelevant.
Athleticism does not replace technique.
The greatest soccer players require both.
The verdict is therefore clear:
The primary reason the United States is not yet an elite men’s soccer nation is that too many of its best young male athletes are playing other sports.
Fix the coaching.
Fix the development system.
Fix pay-to-play.
Build the fields.
Improve the academies.
But do not pretend those reforms negate the central problem.
They will succeed most fully only when America’s best young athletes finally see soccer as one of their first choices—not one of their remaining choices.
The jury may now deliberate.