Claudio Reyna's role as youth technical director for US Soccer, and with it the concept of structure and directed teaching as a means of producing talented players, is getting the once over by people asking relevant questions. How do you turn kids into stars? Does rigid structure stifle creativity? Will the US always be lacking because we don't have little Messis-in-waiting kicking a dirty ball around a dusty street like the youths of Argentina and Brazil?


All reasonable questions, and while Rob Hughes wonders about the benefits of locked down programs with their drills and regimentation, I find myself curious as to why there's no appreciation in America for the most important factor in the country's ability to produce world class talent:


Time.


The United States is a relative newcomer to this game of turning young players into world famous superstars. We've hardly had enough time to truly know where things are headed.


Common sense, if you're at all into that type of thing (and sometimes I wonder about American soccer fans...), tells us that the simple passing of time will lead to greater quantities of top level professional soccer players raised in America; participation is high, the sport is growing in exposure and relevance, and young players are likely to stick with the game longer than ever before because of those facts. If there are more and more top level pros, likely plying their trade in Europe at some point, then it stands to reason that one day, one of those pros will ascend to the level of "world class". It's more a numbers game than a matter of reaching down the youngest levels of organized soccer and moving things around in the hope of achieving better results. There are millions of American kids kicking balls around. A small portion of them will play professionally. A few will be stars, but most will show promise yet ultimately flame out or have undistinguished careers. None of that is unique to the United States.


It doesn't keep us from trying to "fix" it.


Because that's the major issue when it comes to American soccer, our youth programs, and the intense desire to produce better players. We just can't leave well enough alone. We're doers by nature, which means an irresistible desire to meddle, change, shift, rejigger, re-organize, and dictate, if only to make ourselves feel better that we're doing something. In some cases, it's the right thing to do. In others, the benefits are questionable.


Will the hiring of Claudio Reyna, and whatever change he affects, make a difference or be just another example of rearranging the deck chairs on a cruise ship that every indication shows is slowly steaming in the right direction?


As has been pointed out by others, it would seem the more important concern for Reyna and US Soccer should be access to the game rather than coaching standards for kids already playing it. I believe that Reyna is committed to providing access to soccer for kids who might not otherwise be able to get it. That alone would make his hiring a success in my mind, whether he established a universal curriculum for coaching or not. I hope he succeeds in that area.


American soccer culture, one that connects the youngest players all the way up to the professional game as it's played here, is just beginning to sprout. Roots laid down by decades of youth participation sat underutilized for too long for a fully functioning culture to exist; while that's no longer the case, it does mean that for all the players produced by the US in the past forty years or so, none of them benefited from growing up in an environment that was fully immersive. Academies run by professional clubs were non-existent until recently, just one example of changes to the landscape.


That, more than new programs, higher standards, universal curriculum and the like, will push America towards producing better soccer players.


Provided we give it time. Nobody likes to be patient.