This is a reprint of a piece I did back in January, and is posted here for the folks asking about USA Hockey's development system:

I'd like to introduce you to some folks involved in professional and developmental hockey for a reason: Since 1996 and the investment of USA Hockey (the sport's U.S. Soccer, if you will), hockey has established a sleek, efficient development system which works. Since we've been chatting about American youth development - and it's pretty clear by now that I don't think much of it - it wouldn't be right for me to criticize without pointing to a model which I believe works.
   
    Here's how hockey is structured in North America:
Basically, there are hockey youth tiers, much the same way that there are youth national teams in soccer. The USHL is the top youth tier - it's the equivalent of Canada's Major Junior leagues (Quebec, Ontario, Western) - with the caveat that USHL players retain their NCAA eligibility.
     Below them is the NAHL - this is a league where slightly younger players can compete against the other elite U-20 players not on an USHL roster- and below that are a number of regional junior leagues sanctioned by USA Hockey.
For simplicity's sake, let's just use the Eastern region as an example:
There's the Atlantic Junior League and the Eastern Junior League, each of which also has a lower circuit attached. There are similar leagues in every region of the USA. Think about this for a minute: Hockey has set up a path whereby our mythical Eastern player could start with an MJHL (Metropolitan Atlantic Junior League) club, move up to the parent AJHL; then, if, they're good enough, go to the NAHL or USHL. From there, they almost certainly will go to a Div I scholarship school and get a look at by the pros.
     This system works. And don't misunderstand: at the lower levels, as in soccer, its costs parents some money too - they've been the ones trucking the kids to rinks at ungodly hours and paying the freight. One regional junior program I'm aware of has costs in the neighborhood of $4000 a year to cover coaching, travel, hotels and ice time.
In contrast to American soccer, which has been reduced to cherry-picking high-school age students, hockey instead provides a development program that sends the best players to college at age 19 or 20 and gives them a solid underpinning for life in the pros.
     In addition, the USA Under-17 and Under-18 teams play in the NAHL and USHL, meaning that the tip-top players get real game experience against good opponents in meaningful settings. Their schedule is also adjusted so they can take part in international tournaments, and the USANTDP explicitly states that - in contrast to so many wrong-headed youth soccer leagues - that winning and losing are second to technique, tactics, and skill development.
    Case in point: In the seven years that the USANTDP has fielded its USHL team, 107 players have been drafted by the NHL. That's 15 players a year from just one team!
    Regg Simon, the GM and coach of the USHL's Des Moines franchise, and John Hynes, the coach of the USA U-18 national team, were kind enough to chat with me this past week about how hockey has improved its development structure.
    "It started out where there was no organization at all," says Simon. "The USA was starting to produce some players, but we had nothing to develop talent. USA Hockey took the lead and we've really made strides in the past 15-20 years.
Simon explained that hockey - much like youth soccer - starts the development track on a regional level.
"The top kids go to a trial in their region, and we whittle that down and take the top 250 kids for that age group to a national festival. There, scouts from the NHL, D1 colleges and guys like me watch them. These kids are identified at 14, and some will change and others will develop of course, but about 75% of the kids that you will see down the road come out of that pool of 250. Probably between 75-100 will get some sort of shot in the pros, and maybe 5-10 of them, again per age group, will have a lengthy career." 
Hynes says that his program helps bridge the gap between innate talent and professionalism.
 "There's a lot of work that goes into being a truly successful athlete," says Hynes. "You need talent but you also need a work ethic to drive that talent. A lot of times, the first year a kid is with us is spent is learning that you have to practice, watch video, eat right, and prep your body to play games. That's the biggest challenge - for some of these kids, it's their first introduction to training, nutrition and recovery."
"We try to put them in situations where they can take their talent and maximize it," says Hynes. "We try to get them out of their comfort zone, playing against older, bigger players, so they have to use their minds as well as their skill to succeed. It doesn't matter what sport you play in, there are always going to be kids who are talented when they're young but they never face any adversity. Sometimes, the coaches take from the kids - say a coach who has a guy that can score five goals a game but doesn't involve his teammates - down the road, that's a disservice to player. There's a whole different element to being an elite athlete."
What makes all the difference is that these players are trained to be professionals from a very early age.
"I get calls from ex-NHL players and they'll tell me that the stuff that got them ready for pro hockey they learned here in Des Moines," says Simon. "Our mantra is that we have to take these kids who were stars in their hometown, and help them to learn how to handle being around guys who are just as good as they are. They have to learn how to handle travel - take an eight-hour bus ride, get off and play your best. They have to handle the media, and everything else that the pros will throw at you. These kids are pros in every respect except that we don't pay them."
MLS' man in charge of player development, Alfonso Mondelo, agrees that things need to change for the sport of soccer.
    "Right now we're limited to what we have as far as the players available," says Mondelo.  "Youth soccer is mostly set up to develop players for the college game. The only true 'pro' programs we have are the ones that U.S. Soccer runs in Bradenton for the age-group programs. That's not enough to develop enough players for 12-14 teams and  therefore MLS will have to look very seriously to develop their own youth programs."
Mondelo says the biggest problem the sport has is finding the players in the first place. "The nation is so big, and that's compounded by the fact that youth soccer has gone into producing these 'super clubs.' They're not necessarily getting the best kids around - soccer is now a middle and upper-class sport, and we're not getting the minority or underprivileged players.
"We've also got he problem that there's not enough skilled coaches who put an emphasis on playing and developing. Years ago we said that the problem was that kids weren't getting enough games; now kids were playing 100 organized games a year and there is not enough time on spent on training and skills. We produce a lot of good athletes, but not a lot of soccer players."
    Mondelo adds that there's no secret as to what has to be done: take the model of U.S. Soccer's age-group residency programs and make 14 more of them, controlled by the clubs. "Will there be a need for a U-17 camp if you do this?" asks Mondelo. "I don't know - you could surely take the money you spend on that one team and use it to fund many others."
    This is, of course, exactly what USA Hockey did ten years ago.
    But there's another factor that good development programs address and it's an element that's often lacking in youth soccer.
"One of the things which gets overlooked with this age group is that coaches have to be not only a coach on the ice, but also a life mentor," says Hynes. " Our kids are 15-17 and they're in such development as a person. You have to deal with them emotionally - it might be their first time away from home, or their first girlfriend. You have to teach them how to get through adversity, and how to be a young man."
In case you have any doubts about the effacy of hockey's development program,  take a look at the NHL Central Scouting Mid-Term report, which came out on Tuesday.  It ranks ten USHL/NAHL skaters and another 10 USA national team players in their top 100 prospects. That means hockey's development programs have contributed 20 per cent of the top 100 prospects in all of North America - which is a stunning return on their investment. If soccer could post returns such as this, imagine where the sport would be?

    Like soccer, hockey was motivated to do all of this by a desire to produce players that could succeed on the international level. USA Hockey wants to win Olympic medals and youth championships as well as stock the pros. In this sense, the sport is possibly the most simpatico with American soccer's stated aims.
    This year, Sunil Gulati will almost certainly be elected to the US Soccer presidency. Gulati has been a key figure in player development over the past decade, with a hand in everything from the IMG/Bradenton programs that put our national teams in residency to Project 40 to MLS. As deputy commissioner at MLS' inception, Gulati handpicked the league's players, seeding MLS.
    Mr. Gulati's programs have undeniably borne some fruit, but I'd like to challenge him to take the next step. I'd like to challenge Mr. Gulati to investigate just what it is that USA Hockey has done, and how it consistently and successfully produces top-level collegiate and professional talent.
     Further, I'd like challenge soccer in America as a whole to take a step that the sport badly needs. In the past two weeks, you've heard from experts at all levels who say that one of the key components of development is nurturing players along a timeline and growing players that can be stars both in their hometowns and in the pros. The United States Soccer Federation has the money right now to do what USA Hockey did in 1996: They could and MUST launch a true national junior development league.
    Here's another thing to keep in mind: Hockey's junior teams have been put in markets where they are the big fish:  Markets such as Helena, Bozeman, Grand Forks and Sioux City might not light up Madison Avenue, but they have been caring and supportive of junior hockey. Couldn't markets such as Rochester, Hartford/New Britain, South Bend, Miami, Santa Clara and Portland do the same for soccer's youth?