Follow the Money: The Commercialization of Youth Soccer, Seen From Three Sidelines

Most weeks I stand on three different sidelines.

On Saturdays I'm the president of a nonprofit community club, where the job is keeping registration fees low enough that any kid in town can play. On weekday afternoons I'm a varsity head coach at a private school. And in between, I'm on the phone with families trying to figure out the college pathway — what it costs, who's competing for the spots, and whether the investment is going to pay off.

For a long time I thought of those as three different worlds with three different sets of problems. They aren't. They're the same story told from three angles, and it has a name: the commercialization of youth soccer.

It's worth breaking that phrase into its parts, because each one has a real term behind it, and once you can name them you start seeing them everywhere.

1. Professionalization: from volunteer dads to licensed coaches

When I started coaching, the typical youth coach was a parent with a whistle and a bag of balls. Today, at the competitive level, coaches are increasingly paid, licensed through US Soccer, and educated in methodology — some with degrees in the sport.

I want to be honest: a lot of this is good. Kids deserve coaches who understand development, who don't run players as punishment, and who know the difference between a 9-year-old and a 15-year-old. I've spent years earning licenses and studying the game because I believe coaching quality matters.

But professional coaches cost money, and that cost lands on families. Professionalization is the engine. Everything below runs on it.

2. Pay-to-play: the price of the pathway

"Pay-to-play" is the model where families fund the competitive pathway directly — club fees, tournament fees, showcases, travel, private training, camps.

The numbers back up what every parent already feels. According to the Aspen Institute's Project Play survey, the average U.S. family spent about $1,016 on a child's primary sport in 2024 — up 46% from 2019 — and roughly $1,500 once you add in everything else that child plays. Soccer families were among those paying significantly more. Registration, travel and lodging for non-local events, and camps and private lessons drove the increase.

And those are averages. Anyone who has done a full season of competitive club soccer with out-of-state showcases knows the real number for that family can be several times higher.

3. The gentrification of soccer

Here's the uncomfortable part. Soccer is the world's game — cheapest sport there is, all you need is a ball. In most of the world, the best players come from the neighborhoods with the least money.

In the U.S. competitive pathway, it often runs the other way. As costs rise, the competitive level drifts toward upper-middle and upper-income families. That's what people mean by the gentrification of soccer: the game stays accessible at the rec level, but the road to the top increasingly runs through a family's checkbook.

The data shows the cracks. Project Play found that rural families spend far less than urban and suburban families, largely because they have fewer expensive club options nearby — which also means fewer pathways. And U.S. Soccer–commissioned research has found that Latino and Black children are about three times more likely than white children to stop playing because they feel unwelcome.

When the talent pool is filtered by income, we don't just lose fairness. We lose players.

4. Athletic migration: the "brawn drain"

At the top of the pyramid, the competition for college roster spots isn't just domestic anymore. Athletic migration — athletes crossing borders to chase opportunity, sometimes called the "brawn drain" — has reshaped college soccer, especially on the men's side.

According to the NCAA's September 2023 report, Trends in the Participation of International Student-Athletes, about 34% of Division I men's soccer first-year players in the 2021-22 cohort came from outside the U.S. — one of the highest shares of any NCAA sport. Across full rosters, about 19% of all Division I men's soccer players were international in 2023-24. The share on women's soccer rosters is much lower.

Let me be clear: international players earn their spots, and they make college soccer better. This isn't a complaint about them. It's a fact American families need to know before they spend ten years and tens of thousands of dollars assuming a Division I men's roster is the finish line. Your son isn't only competing with the kid from the next town. He's competing with the best 18-year-olds from Europe, Africa, and Latin America.

5. Academic capitalism: schools as businesses

The last piece ties it together. Academic capitalism is the term researchers use for schools and universities operating more like businesses — chasing revenue, tuition, and enrollment growth. That includes recruiting full-paying international students.

Athletics is part of that business model at every level. At the college level, a roster spot can be an enrollment tool. At the high school level, especially in private schools, athletics programs and international enrollment can be part of how the institution sustains itself. None of that is sinister. It's economics. But it means decisions about who plays, where, and why aren't always purely about the soccer.

Putting it together

Line those five pieces up and you get one picture:

1. Coaching becomes a profession → it costs money.
2. Families pay for the pathway → the competitive game shifts up the income ladder.
3. Colleges and schools operate as businesses → they recruit globally for both talent and tuition.
4. The finish line gets more crowded → families spend more to keep up.

That cycle is the commercialization of youth soccer. The money, the class shift, and the international recruiting aren't three problems. They're one.

What I'd tell a parent

I'm not going to pretend I'm outside this. I'm a paid coach. I run a business in the youth soccer space. FeetToCompete charges players for its Pro tier. I'm part of the economy I'm describing — which is exactly why I think it's worth saying out loud.

So here's my honest advice:

• Pay for development, not logos. Ask any program what your child will learn this season and how they'll know it's working. If the answer is mostly about tournaments and exposure, be careful.
• Know the real odds. If the plan is a Division I scholarship, look at who is actually on those rosters. Division II, Division III, NAIA, and junior college are real, excellent paths — and many are less crowded.
• Don't let price stand in for quality. The most expensive option is not automatically the best one. Some of the best development in this country happens in community clubs run by volunteers and modest-salary coaches.
• Keep the free game alive. Pickup, futsal, the backyard, the school field. The players who love the game most usually played the most when nobody was charging for it.
• Measure progress honestly. That's why we built FeetToCompete the way we did: coach tools are free so every player on a roster gets tracked, regardless of what their family can spend.

The game will keep changing. The question for all of us — clubs, schools, colleges, coaches, and parents — is whether we let money decide who gets to find out how good they can be.

I'd rather the ball decide.

---

Keith Rambo is the founder of FeetToCompete, president of Northern Burlington Soccer Club, and a high school varsity head coach in New Jersey. He is a US Soccer licensed coach.

Sources

• Aspen Institute Project Play — Family spending on youth sports rises 46% over five years
• Aspen Institute Project Play — State of Play 2025
• Youth Sports Business Report — Key takeaways, including U.S. Soccer–commissioned research on players feeling unwelcome
• Bacdayan, B. (2025), "Impact of International Student-Athlete Participation on Men's Collegiate Soccer," Claremont McKenna College — citing NCAA international participation data
• NCAA, Trends in the Participation of International Student-Athletes (Sept. 2023), as summarized by Borderless