Scholastic soccer is the most affordable and accessible option in the U.S., so it has the most potential and upside.

Problem is scholastic soccer in Maine (and elsewhere) limits itself to a 3-month season, which ignores the trends of youth sports.

#mesoccer https://twitter.com/mikewoitalla/status/1350115428014542848

Two-sport athletes who play those sports year-round are possible, and scholastic soccer could be the most accessible, player-friendly, and family-friendly option—if it wanted to be.

Here’s how:

Step one: Get rid of hands-off rules and periodize sports seasons (concurrent high-intensity and low-intensity sessions, depending on seasons)

Step two: Scale model down to middle schools and elementary schools.

For example: Soccer player who also plays basketball has high-intensity soccer sessions from 3p-4:30p followed by low-intensity basketball sessions 5p-6p August-November.

Flip levels of intensity during basketball season.

This is athlete-friendly because it requires less travel from session to session since facilities are on the same campus. So more time spent on the field and the court.

It’s also more athlete-friendly because it’s much less expensive (maybe charge a nominal fee to cover coaches’ stipends during “off-season” sessions), and because of school-organized transportation.

It’s also family-friendly, especially at the younger ages.

Why not combine the relative affordability of publicly-provided after-school care with two after-school sessions in soccer and basketball? Parents’ and players’ schedules are done by supper, not just beginning.

The third—and most difficult and most time-consuming—step: Invest in year-round facilities that reflect our climate.

We. Need. More. Indoor. Fields. In. Maine.

Anyway, scholastic sports could be the most affordable and accessible option available.

But until it chooses to be, private organizations—and all the well-known shortcomings that come with them—will fill that gap.