Is Sinclair simply "once in a generation"

Yes.

Canada is fortunate to have a "Sinclair". As far as I know, Brazil, Sweden, Germany, and Norway have each had one or at most two players as good as her, and the US has had two or three players as good as her.

The question isn't "how come we don't have more Sinclairs", but rather "what can we do to improve the development of elite Canadian female players"?

Here are the two realistic, short term, relatively easy improvements.

1. Get the top female players into youth teams within a professional environment at a younger age. That means the MLS clubs taking an interest in female players. Whitecaps do. I don't think Toronto FC or Montreal Impact do. So that's the first thing that needs to happen - the MLS teams need to all see a value in developing the womens game, even if their womens teams cannot turn a profit on their own. This will help in our biggest three cities, but not outside of them - but at least that's an improvement on the current situation. If FC Edmonton, and future D2 teams/clubs in Calgary, Hamilton, and Ottawa do the same, we will be on the way to more comprehensive national coverage.

2. Increase the number of W-League teams in Canada. All Canadian leagues are tough to build, and using the US pyramid has proven more successful. The W-League isn't professional, but the atmosphere it provides is better than lower levels. There are W-League teams in Victoria, Vancouver, London, Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, and Quebec. What is needed is W-League teams in Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, and Halifax. The travel costs for Vic & Van would decrease a bit with three other western Canadian teams. The eastern Canadian ones are already together in one division. Getting the W-League teams in the same clubs with PDL teams would allow these clubs to cut administrative costs, and increase their community presence. It wouldn't be a huge step, but it would be a positive one.

Here are the two difficult or impossible things that would GREATLY improve the womens game in Canada, but aren't likely to ever happen:

1. Keep our athletes in Canada during their university years, so they commit to playing for Canada rather than being poached by the US. When Canadian kids spend time living in the US, and when the Canadian development system is relatively poor, their emotional attachment to Canada weakens, just like it weakens allegiance to Canada when people play on teams called "Toronto Serbia". It sucks when we lose top players that should otherwise be playing for us. Most of our top elite female soccer players spend their 17-22 year-old years developing in the US university system. It's the same problem that Europeans face when their top junior hockey players come to Canada. The only way to keep top athletes in Canadian universities is to offer bigger scholarships, and that's only going to happen if university soccer actually becomes a spectator sport (which is almost certainly not going to happen). So we're going to continue to lose our top university-aged female athletes to the US university system.

2. Create either a professional league, or some professional teams with high Canadian content (ie 75% or more) quotas. A stable womens pro league in either Canada or North America would be best, but we all know how unlikely a Canadian one is, and I assume most people here know how much trouble the WPS is currently having in the US. If the WPS can survive, then having the three Canadian MLS teams enter teams in it would be a MASSIVE boost to the Canadian womens game, in terms of player fitness, development, and in giving young girls something to strive for.

Much of our current roster is currently playing "pro" in places like Sweden and Norway. Those countries can afford "pro" womens soccer because they have low travel costs, not because the womens game there attracts large crowds. So how could the womens game professionalise in a huge country like Canada?

Either paying customers or philanthropy is needed. Womens teams can't operate at a profit, but instead must be subsidised by either wealthy benefactors, or profitable mens teams. Womens soccer needs to be "sold" to MLS teams as a means of increasing their brand within their communities. They would need to think that running a pro womens programme at a loss is more than compensated for by the increased sales they make for the MLS team and in terms of their merchandise, broadcasting, coverage in media, etc.

MLS clubs already have sales and marketing departments, and are building training facilities, so there's no cost there. The cost is in personnel and travel. Manager, coach, 2 x assistants, trainer/ equipment manager, and a roster of 25 pro players is 30 people. At an average of $50K each that's $1.5 million in salaries. If they had 15 away games, took a staff of 20 to each, and the cost of each trip was $30K (flights plus hotels) that's $600,000. Is it worth it to an MLS club to run a womens programme that costs about $2.1 million, considering they're only going to recoup part of that in ticket sales to womens games? I'd like to see it, but it's not my money.

How many fans would pay to watch a fully pro womens team at Swangard on weekends when the MLS team was playing away? I don't know. But if the Whitecaps had a WPS franchise, and staggered the schedule around the MLS schedule, I don't think it's unrealistic to think they could get 5,000 fans at Swangard, times $10, times 15 home games. That's $750,000. It's not $2.1 million, but it is a third of it.

I went to elementary school with Christine Sinclair. Even though she was a year younger than me, she schooled us all at soccer when we plyed on lunch hour break. She was better then all the boys !!! Even the ones who played soccer on a team and were 2-3 years older than her. She has a special talent. A special talent that got developed. She had a passion for it, which remained. Most girl loose it shortly after adolesence.

A talent, determination, and a development =Christine Sinclair. Nothing much more to it.

Less competition as well, as there are globally far less women involved in organized professional team sports than men.

Christine Sinclair has the physical attributes most female soccer players lack: she's big, strong and fast. She's certainly talented skill wise, but she wouldn't be better than 99% of females players in the world like she is now if she wasn't able to run faster than everyone else, and muscle everyone off the ball. You can't teach that. She's the Lebron James of women's soccer, a physical specimen.

But she's one of the taller women players on the field at any time.

Chris said:

Soccerpro said: Christine Sinclair has the physical attributes most female soccer players lack: she's big, strong and fast. She's certainly talented skill wise, but she wouldn't be better than 99% of females players in the world like she is now if she wasn't able to run faster than everyone else, and muscle everyone off the ball. You can't teach that. She's the Lebron James of women's soccer, a physical specimen.

There must be more to it than that. 5'9" is tall for a woman, but when you're talking about athletes it's not THAT tall.

Agreed. Her (fantastic) goal on the flick over the head from Tancredi was two-touch - one to control, one to slide the ball past the keeper. Contrast that with the touches from Tancredi and Julien, and THAT'S why Sinclair is so good. Her size and strength are important, but not as important as her touch on the ball.

Solar said: I believe that CSA is trying a new model for long term development so that Canadians can produce more/better athletes for this sport.

http://www.canadasoccer.com/wellness-to-world-cup-p144329

I remember reading about this in the Province saying how they want to change it from the top to the bottom.

I don't know much about funding; but I would suspect women's development does not get a whole lot of money. The girls have to work jobs and such and do not get full time support in order to train year round. With the WPS gone, there is another place they can't go.

Remember what Canada did at the Winter Olympics when they actually funded the program for a few years; we can develop elite athletes if we get the funding and elite support behind it.

stilty said: Probably not much funding. First thing my wife said when we were watching the warmup on Sunday was, Wow, the US is so pro. Then we heard/read somewhere how the US squad gets paid. So they don't have to worry about rent/mortgage, food, utilities, etc. They can just focus on training. Then they have the trainers, medical staff, etc. It made us even more proud of the Canadian girls for them to perform so well with limited resources.

yes. For us to have a 7th ranked team in the world with poor support is a testament to our potential in Women's soccer.

Unlikely that our government will do much. HOWEVER, they did buck up when Vancouver had the olympics so as to not be "embarassed". perhaps they will roll out some funding so the 2015 World Cup will see a vastly improved Canadian side that has a shot to get to the final 4.

Yeah, we get the same funding that North Korea gets from FIFA. There needs to be corporate or government help.