Most of the MLS academies have really only been developing (or trying to develop) players for the highest level for about 10 years (there may be some longer, and some less). The youth system is jacked up. Pay for play kills the system for kids who have a natural knack and understanding of the game because of their inherited love of the game, whose parents simply can't afford the high per month fees and travel. If you have a kid who is serious about it, it goes higher as you start with private coaching for improved technical instruction. Camps. Keep adding it on. I know for a fact there are some tremendous players who are stuck in Rec soccer because their parents simply can't afford to move them to a competitive club where they'll get better coaching (usually better than the avg rec team), a more competitive atmosphere to challenge them.
Just read an article called the "5 Pillars" and where US soccer fails in the 5th pillar which is technical instruction. US has superior athletes and kids who develop more athletic skill because they play several different sports that develop different abilities but the technical instruction at the youth level is lacking because coaches for groups as young as U8 are focused on winning.
My son plays for TSC. He is on the 3rd team out of 6 (because he is a GK). His coach, Donovan Ricketts, former Jamaican National, TRFC GK coach, career accomplishments go on for a while), told the parents up front he did not care about results and at this age (U12) the thing he was focused on the most was improved technical ability and beginning to understand the tactical game so that is starts to come naturally.
My son's coach the previous 2 years mentioned something after the loss last night that the US model where a lot of kids have a goal to play in college is what holds the US back. Most national team players in other countries are already in their 1st pro contracts by age 18 or 19 and competing against much higher levels of player with more time dedicated to training and they reach their peak earlier. US players who go the college route end up playing for 4 years but don't get to compete against the best players until age 23-24 and that puts them behind.
There's also the argument to put a relegation model in place for the top 3 divisions of US soccer. The reasoning behind this thinking is that it would push players who might play in college into a pro team if they have the opportunity to help a division 2 team play its way in to a top tier league through results. Again, this is the model used in most places around the world. The US' soccer divisions are driven by $$$. If relegation were real here, the New England Revolution might make more of a push to develop players and bring in better players. Teams like Cincinnati FC would get the bump up to MLS. It would actually raise the level of USL soccer if promotion were an enticement.
There are lots of things that US Soccer needs to fix. Start at the bottom and work your way up. And look at how Germany develops a 10 year plan and sticks to it. (Heck, look at the way Union, BA, and Jenks develop their youth programs to feed players into the HS programs...it's a smaller version). If you get the youth programs developing along the same technical trajectories and teaching the same technical aspects that you want the USMNT and USWNT using, you will see results.
And build around Pulisic. That kid is special. Give him 4-5 years and his name will be on the Ballon d'Or list.