ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Leave you address below…that’s how we know high your BS meter is

“That’s how we know high your”???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think US Soccer will give ECNL a cold shoulder to deny any reasonable transit plan. It is just not politically correct and will make them look bad. Let's wait one more week.

US Club and ECNL are going to allow showcases/tournaments to be based of school year. This will ultimately fall on individual clubs to decide do they want to have some extra Q3/4 kids on their rosters that can’t play in league or nationals. But would allow teams to prepare a year early if they choose.

It’s not a terrible plan for ECNL

[Anonymous]

Also, for teams that have already formed BY teams at tryouts, it’s not difficult to add trapped players to their rosters for tournaments and showcases, and decide whether they want to use them or not in 2025.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think US Soccer will give ECNL a cold shoulder to deny any reasonable transit plan. It is just not politically correct and will make them look bad. Let's wait one more week.

US Club and ECNL are going to allow showcases/tournaments to be based of school year. This will ultimately fall on individual clubs to decide do they want to have some extra Q3/4 kids on their rosters that can’t play in league or nationals. But would allow teams to prepare a year early if they choose.

Allow and mandate are two different things. Just because a tournament can doesn’t mean they will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, for teams that have already formed BY teams at tryouts, it’s not difficult to add trapped players to their rosters for tournaments and showcases, and decide whether they want to use them or not in 2025.

If no league game, I would rather have my kid play in the older group. The level is much higher. It will prepare him better for college recruiting next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, for teams that have already formed BY teams at tryouts, it’s not difficult to add trapped players to their rosters for tournaments and showcases, and decide whether they want to use them or not in 2025.

If no league game, I would rather have my kid play in the older group. The level is much higher. It will prepare him better for college recruiting next year.

They could do both play league games with older team and play tournaments with SY team. If this is real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, for teams that have already formed BY teams at tryouts, it’s not difficult to add trapped players to their rosters for tournaments and showcases, and decide whether they want to use them or not in 2025.

If no league game, I would rather have my kid play in the older group. The level is much higher. It will prepare him better for college recruiting next year.

They could do both play league games with older team and play tournaments with SY team. If this is real.

That's a lousy cop out. Hard to establish chemistry with players when you only are with them for a weekend. That doesn't put those kids at showcases in a position to do well in front of scouts.

Just rip the band-aid off.

[Anonymous]

1000 this ⬆️

[Anonymous]

💯 coming and going between two teams in the course of one year is what they are trying to fix. Showcases only would make that worse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, for teams that have already formed BY teams at tryouts, it’s not difficult to add trapped players to their rosters for tournaments and showcases, and decide whether they want to use them or not in 2025.

If no league game, I would rather have my kid play in the older group. The level is much higher. It will prepare him better for college recruiting next year.

They could do both play league games with older team and play tournaments with SY team. If this is real.

No, my kid does not want to practice with the younger group to play in the showcase. He can have a decent time on his current NL team. In fact, he wants to try out the current #1 younger NL team in our conference after SY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, for teams that have already formed BY teams at tryouts, it’s not difficult to add trapped players to their rosters for tournaments and showcases, and decide whether they want to use them or not in 2025.

If no league game, I would rather have my kid play in the older group. The level is much higher. It will prepare him better for college recruiting next year.

They could do both play league games with older team and play tournaments with SY team. If this is real.

That's a lousy cop out. Hard to establish chemistry with players when you only are with them for a weekend. That doesn't put those kids at showcases in a position to do well in front of scouts.

Just rip the band-aid off.

Hopefully they have laid out a good plan to US Soccer and I am sure that it has to have been discussed before next week with them. Just go 100% SY next year and be done with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t the trapped players only allowed to play ecnl during the HS season? So then what happens to the kids who in the fall in VA played ECNL on the team below 3 are dropped to NCSL to allow 3 to play in the younger age group?

Doesn’t it mess with team cohesion?

The trapped player are only allowed to play with the u14 group when the rest of the team is playing high school. How each club handles that situation is handled differently. Some clubs don’t take advantage of the trapped players at all, which could skew u14 results across the league.

ECNL wouldnt'. be doing this if they thought their existing very limited solution was an actual solution. It's clear they don't like it.

ECNL has always had solutions for trapped players. The clubs also have/had solutions for trapped players.

ECNL has very little visibility into what clubs do. And clubs have very little visibility in what ECNL does.

The SY change was based out of ECNL honchos own experience. One has a kid that was a trapped 8th grader (boy). And now that the SY change seems to be assured for his HS years, ECNL’s leadership is already turning their advocacy / astroturf efforts to foreign players in NCAA (a largely boys only issue).

This was never about your kid. Never about girls (the only successful league in ECNL). Never about clubs (the clubs were only polled after ECNL started pushing the agenda in committee at USSF).

Even the cutoff date “debate” shows that it isn’t about our kids, it’s about their kids. I get it. If I had the ability to use the levers of power to create better opportunities for my own kid, I’d think about it for sure, and I might use those levers for personal benefit too. I’d like to think otherwise, but I just don’t know.

Don’t kid yourself. ECNL isn’t in the solutions game. It’s a league. Not an NGO or some charity organization.

I don’t care why ECNL is doing it. They just need to do it. Waiting around to make the change on some team in 2025 that will be changed in 2026 by the movement of trapped players is pointless to everyone’s development

It's not pointless. It's just another year of youth soccer. If you have good coaches/strong league, this BY/SY change shouldn't matter.

Exactly! I don’t understand what people mean by “wasted” year? What makes it a waste? If your child is part of a club that is helping them improve and doing extra work on the side they are not wasting anything.

You have to understand the POV from the poster. PP clearly believes the change to SY will have a dramatic increase in their child’s marketability and exposure to colleges.

The only way that is rationalized is if the player is on a lower level team currently, and not starting / maybe bubble. If the kid was top 1/3, 80% play time player for their top tier team, they’d know that the change will have zero impact on their outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully, we will know the ECNL's decision next week. I am fine either way. Both have advantages. But if I target college recruiting, I would prefer my kid to stay in the older group for one more year so he can get much better training. The older team beats the younger team 5 goals easily.

I know Q3/Q4 RL parents would like the switch soon, so their kids can join the younger NL team. We have 2 RL teams, and I think 3/4 Q3/Q4 RL players can transit to the younger NL team. And one RL player (Oct.) should be able to start in the younger NL team.

That isn’t what will happen.

Every club has internal rankings. Kids don’t move from RL to NL (permanently) because of an age change. And those internal rankings won’t change because of an age change either. If your kid is #40 in u15 today, they might move up a bit or down a bit in u15 after the age change, but they aren’t going from #40 to #14.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think US Soccer will give ECNL a cold shoulder to deny any reasonable transit plan. It is just not politically correct and will make them look bad. Let's wait one more week.

US Club and ECNL are going to allow showcases/tournaments to be based of school year. This will ultimately fall on individual clubs to decide do they want to have some extra Q3/4 kids on their rosters that can’t play in league or nationals. But would allow teams to prepare a year early if they choose.

This is absolutely not going to happen.

Tournaments would be insane. Showcases an argument could be made for, but it won’t happen. The customer is the parent, not the player, not the college coaches. Clubs are not going to drop players from a roster so that they can bring guest red shirts on for a showcase. That doesn’t help anyone. Parents will be pissed all around, including the parents of the redshirt, who may get a “guest player” allotment of minutes, and will play like crap because they aren’t welcome on the team, and don’t gel with the team, so now the team lays a turd of a showcase in front of the coaches.

Parents are the customer! Parents are paying clubs to make their A+ to B- talented children marketable to college coaches. Clubs that play roster games for showcase always lose their customers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not think US Soccer will give ECNL a cold shoulder to deny any reasonable transit plan. It is just not politically correct and will make them look bad. Let's wait one more week.

US Club and ECNL are going to allow showcases/tournaments to be based of school year. This will ultimately fall on individual clubs to decide do they want to have some extra Q3/4 kids on their rosters that can’t play in league or nationals. But would allow teams to prepare a year early if they choose.

This is absolutely not going to happen.

Tournaments would be insane. Showcases an argument could be made for, but it won’t happen. The customer is the parent, not the player, not the college coaches. Clubs are not going to drop players from a roster so that they can bring guest red shirts on for a showcase. That doesn’t help anyone. Parents will be pissed all around, including the parents of the redshirt, who may get a “guest player” allotment of minutes, and will play like crap because they aren’t welcome on the team, and don’t gel with the team, so now the team lays a turd of a showcase in front of the coaches.

Parents are the customer! Parents are paying clubs to make their A+ to B- talented children marketable to college coaches. Clubs that play roster games for showcase always lose their customers.

You are an idiot. ECNL team roaster is about 20 to 22 players. Coach brings in new players all the time. Nobody gives a f**k to a bench player.