CRUZ CONTROL: Bleak Future on Pitch for U.S.

To all the 10-year old girls reading this, you can take down your Mia Hamm and Julie Foudy posters; I’ve got new idols you can worship.

They each go by one name; Marta, Daniela, Cristiane, and they play on the "greatest team you’ve never heard of." (Sorry Nike, it was a brilliant marketing strategy, but you chose the wrong team!)

In case you were too busy watching the Mets find new historically lamentable ways to blow a season, you might have missed the 2007 edition of the FIFA Women’s World Cup.

The United States Women’s National team, entering the tournament with a 51-game winning streak and pretentious, gold-colored “victory” jerseys, were soundly booted out of the tournament 4-0 by a Brazilian side that eerily emulated the flair of their male counterparts.

The final scoreline was no aberration. This was not a case of the U.S. coming out flat or being hampered by poor refereeing. This was a clinical and ruthless annihilation by the samba-ing ladies of the south. If you don’t believe me, just look at the YouTube highlights of the game.

Aforementioned Marta (who by the way, is only 21 years of age), scoring one of the best goals ever in a World Cup, men’s or women’s, popped the ball and flicked it behind American defender (doing her best impression of static molasses) Tina Ellertson, then beat her to the ball, dummied another defender, and coolly struck it into the net for the final Brazilian goal.

But it wasn’t just the SportsCenter-worthy highlights that made this game historic; it was the way the Brazilians dominated possession not through sheer athleticism, but rather through actual soccer skill and finesse (imagine that?) that serves as a metaphorical reminder to the U.S. women that their ship has indeed sailed.

I’m sorry to have to be the harbinger of bad news, but it has to be said: The rest of the world has not only caught up to the American women in soccer, they’ve actually surpassed and outclassed them. And who’s to blame? There are a number of culprits, of course, but the systems of American youth and collegiate soccer are the chief offenders.

Title IX, the breakthrough ruling that completely changed the landscape of collegiate athletics, allowed the United States to gain an early competitive advantage in women’s soccer.

In the US, soccer has always been viewed as a recreational sport for both young boys and girls. In other parts of the world (including traditional soccer havens like Europe and South America), soccer was strictly viewed as a sport for boys, and thus, traditional powerhouses in men’s soccer were slow to develop proper infrastructures for their women.

Due to its advantages in resources, the U.S. National Team program focused more on developing girls who were physically superior to their global counterparts, choosing speed and strength over soccer skill (dribbling, possession) and finesse. For years it worked brilliantly, as the U.S. women took home the 1999 World Cup Title and inspired a generation of young girls to pursue their athletic talents.

Unfortunately, that game is over. A major shift in attitude and gender roles across the world has led to countries paying proper respect to the women’s game and allowing their female athletes to flourish in suitable athletic environments.

Unlike the youth and collegiate system here, the game is taught in other parts of the world with particular attention to possession-based attacking, to precision-based strategy, and to understanding the fundamentals of the beautiful game.

And although there have been several attempts at establishing a legitimate top-flight professional league for women here in the States, each experiment has ultimately failed financially due to lack interest.

Meanwhile, over in Europe, historic soccer clubs like Arsenal FC have established their own soccer academies just for women and provide their ladies with ample game experience to hone their skills: Arsenal has won nine premier league titles and just recently recorded a historical quadruple, as the Arsenal ladies not only won their domestic and two domestic cups, but were hailed as champions of Europe after winning the UEFA Women’s Cup.

And what’s even more surprising is that most European women’s clubs have trouble turning a profit, as even the Arsenal ladies, easily the most the successful club in English women’s soccer, only averages attendances in the hundreds.

But the collegiate system of women’s soccer has failed the US National team in other, more transparent ways. For one, players from the youth level all the way up to the college ranks are evaluated on endurance, physical stature, and speed.

Sure, if a young girl displays some fine dribbling moves, she may get another look, but if she ultimately cannot fare well in timed shuttle springs or doesn’t fit a perceived notion of what a women’s soccer player should look like, her skills are simply tossed aside.

On the current national team roster, the most dominant player is Abby Wambach, a genetic marvel at 5’11, who can simply overpower defenders with her physical attributes.

Unfortunately, she was locked down in the game against Brazil because the U.S. lacked the creative midfielders to feed her and control the ball through traffic.

The sad thing is, there are girls right here in our country who have skills similar to those displayed by the Brazilian women.

Unfortunately, many of those young players can’t display their talents because their families don’t have the economic resources to pay for summer soccer camps and private professional trainers. And that’s where our system truly fails.

There is no such thing as economic exclusivity in other countries. The Brazilian Soccer Federation doesn’t even give their women’s program enough money to schedule friendlies or training matches. Yet there, they are showing a global audience how to truly play the game. Our system does a poor job of finding “diamonds-in-the-rough.” And the future doesn’t look so kind to our women either.

Players like Kristine Lilly and Brianna Scurry (both are 36 years of age), while solid players for the U.S. in the past, have no business on the pitch in 2007. But they’re there because there are no viable youth replacements coming up through the collegiate system that are better than them.

Oh, I forgot to mention, Daniela is only 23. Marta is only 21. They’re going to be highlighting the world stage for quite some time. I wish I could say the same for the U.S. women.

But don’t fret, 10-year-olds, yellow and blue soccer jerseys look better anyway.

—Staff writer Mauricio A. Cruz can be reached at cruz2@fas.harvard.edu.