ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

What do you all not understand about USSF saying no changes for 25/26?

Do you think USSF didn’t mean it? They wrote that in there SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE the ECNL clubs SPECIFICALLY ASKED for that time when USSF polled the clubs.

ECNL and USClub were trying to force an immediate shift to SY. They own the competition committee at USSF. Once it got to the board level (Cindy Cone is affiliated with an ECNL club!) the board said slow your roll, let’s check with the people responsible for making this change.

They polled the clubs, the clubs from all bodies and leagues and found 41% prefer BY, 47% prefer SY and 12% prefer “other.” So 53% of the clubs didn’t want SY to 47% that wanted SY.

82% of the clubs said they were not ready for a change!

USSF said “starting in the Fall of 2026 members and leagues will have reasonable flexibility…”

So what do you think ECNL is going to present to USSF to get an exception that they didn’t already considering the President of USSF is ECNL, the competition committee that pushed for a straight SY change is ECNL and US Club. And that when USSF went around the committee and the leagues and polled the clubs themselves they found that 82% of the clubs wanted to wait and that the SY change was not nearly as widely held as ECNL claimed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You’re right not 40 to 14 but what about 20 to 14? Feels like that might happen a lot?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You’re the idiot. Coach’s bring guests all the time. Guest get guest play time, and if they don’t, the coach and club gets lit up.

But coaches don’t bring older kids that are out of age cutoff and shouldn’t be on the team to play in a showcase for the team “all the time.” They Never Do! And when they do, they’re penalized, fined, and sometimes kicked out of leagues. Parents move kids over that sort of stuff. Maybe you should check have the threads in this forum from when some of the local clubs did that.

I get it, GY is your passion project. It’s a stupid one. And there are pretty obvious reasons why it’s not a thing anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You’re right not 40 to 14 but what about 20 to 14? Feels like that might happen a lot?

Maybe, but it has to be at the margins.

But you have to remember, NL kids are moving first, so when you have a 13 on one team with BY who now joins a SY based team with another 13, #14 is 15, etc. The movement from 20 to 14 would be extreme, but possible.

Sounds like your clubs’s NL roster is 18? Yea maybe #20 on the second team (if second team is RL) can move to NL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You’re the idiot. Coach’s bring guests all the time. Guest get guest play time, and if they don’t, the coach and club gets lit up.

But coaches don’t bring older kids that are out of age cutoff and shouldn’t be on the team to play in a showcase for the team “all the time.” They Never Do! And when they do, they’re penalized, fined, and sometimes kicked out of leagues. Parents move kids over that sort of stuff. Maybe you should check have the threads in this forum from when some of the local clubs did that.

I get it, GY is your passion project. It’s a stupid one. And there are pretty obvious reasons why it’s not a thing anymore.

Your reading comprehension already shows you have a low IQ. I usually do not like to talk to such low-class people. I will stop here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You’re the idiot. Coach’s bring guests all the time. Guest get guest play time, and if they don’t, the coach and club gets lit up.

But coaches don’t bring older kids that are out of age cutoff and shouldn’t be on the team to play in a showcase for the team “all the time.” They Never Do! And when they do, they’re penalized, fined, and sometimes kicked out of leagues. Parents move kids over that sort of stuff. Maybe you should check have the threads in this forum from when some of the local clubs did that.

I get it, GY is your passion project. It’s a stupid one. And there are pretty obvious reasons why it’s not a thing anymore.

Your reading comprehension already shows you have a low IQ. I usually do not like to talk to such low-class people. I will stop here.

Proved my point wi the your idiotic response.

Go back to your DPL forum hole, and maybe watch your kid’s old rec videos when they looked so promising with their 1 goal per weekend average. Perhaps you can console yourself to sleep, knowing that it is the universe that is against you and your GY mission that will sure get your 2x held back “high class” redshirted player the looks that you’ve known they deserved since that glorious season on the MYS’s Kindergarten 3v3 team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

What do you all not understand about USSF saying no changes for 25/26?

Do you think USSF didn’t mean it? They wrote that in there SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE the ECNL clubs SPECIFICALLY ASKED for that time when USSF polled the clubs.

ECNL and USClub were trying to force an immediate shift to SY. They own the competition committee at USSF. Once it got to the board level (Cindy Cone is affiliated with an ECNL club!) the board said slow your roll, let’s check with the people responsible for making this change.

They polled the clubs, the clubs from all bodies and leagues and found 41% prefer BY, 47% prefer SY and 12% prefer “other.” So 53% of the clubs didn’t want SY to 47% that wanted SY.

82% of the clubs said they were not ready for a change!

USSF said “starting in the Fall of 2026 members and leagues will have reasonable flexibility…”

So what do you think ECNL is going to present to USSF to get an exception that they didn’t already considering the President of USSF is ECNL, the competition committee that pushed for a straight SY change is ECNL and US Club. And that when USSF went around the committee and the leagues and polled the clubs themselves they found that 82% of the clubs wanted to wait and that the SY change was not nearly as widely held as ECNL claimed.

Could that 12% be for grad year?

[Anonymous]

So many people on this thread are mentally unstable and seem to be trying to live through their child…it’s a game, relax…the change is probably coming and we’ll all adjust…

[Anonymous]

Probably coming? It is definitely coming. It’s just a matter of what exactly that change will be. My vote is ECNL will go SY for 26/27 with either a 8/1 or 9/1 cutoff, and that GA will do the same thing as ECNL. MLSN might stay BY, but my money would be on SY as well. I also think there may be some flexibility with late summer birthdays (see discussion from about 200 pages ago) but those numbers of players are much smaller than people here think so it will be statistically insignificant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

What do you all not understand about USSF saying no changes for 25/26?

Do you think USSF didn’t mean it? They wrote that in there SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE the ECNL clubs SPECIFICALLY ASKED for that time when USSF polled the clubs.

ECNL and USClub were trying to force an immediate shift to SY. They own the competition committee at USSF. Once it got to the board level (Cindy Cone is affiliated with an ECNL club!) the board said slow your roll, let’s check with the people responsible for making this change.

They polled the clubs, the clubs from all bodies and leagues and found 41% prefer BY, 47% prefer SY and 12% prefer “other.” So 53% of the clubs didn’t want SY to 47% that wanted SY.

82% of the clubs said they were not ready for a change!

USSF said “starting in the Fall of 2026 members and leagues will have reasonable flexibility…”

So what do you think ECNL is going to present to USSF to get an exception that they didn’t already considering the President of USSF is ECNL, the competition committee that pushed for a straight SY change is ECNL and US Club. And that when USSF went around the committee and the leagues and polled the clubs themselves they found that 82% of the clubs wanted to wait and that the SY change was not nearly as widely held as ECNL claimed.

Could that 12% be for grad year?

Yes, absolutely.

[Anonymous]

Let’s hope in a week all this speculation can end. People on here type just type what they want to happen. As if typing it makes it true. One more week….

[Anonymous]

Initially people seemed to have actual info. Not so much anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s hope in a week all this speculation can end. People on here type just type what they want to happen. As if typing it makes it true. One more week….

Yeah but are we gonna make it to 1000?

[Anonymous]

Definitely making it to 1000 as many on here start their “told you so” tyraid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Definitely making it to 1000 as many on here start their “told you so” tyraid

Oh for sure. And with all the options as to what’s going to happen being called out on this forum, someone has to be right.