ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this arguing is so pointless since it won't happen for another year. GY is only way to go to avoid trapped players everywhere.

And then you get much larger age differences … great (and a problem)

MLS has biobanding. My kid competes with older boy who is 18 months older. There is always someone who wants to take the advantage. Just suck it up and grind.

How is this possible?

Biobanding has nothing to do with age but rather the size of the kid. I believe players can only go down one age group.
But some kids are older for the age group already not always the Q4 kids biobanding.

Big misconception here, biobanding has nothing to do with current size of kids. And based on a PP, MLSN rules on biobanding are just based on age, meaning can only play down one year and the total number allowed per team is 3.

[Anonymous]

List the competing threads…let’s target them all week until we get our answer. Let me guess…GA is taking over ECNL now that NVA bolted? Who can list our new threads to hit up? All in!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It shouldn’t be possible. That’s why grad year can’t happen.

Biobanding is worse the GY because you have the same problem of way older kids without them actually in the same grade.

Not sure being in the same grade helps in this case, except for the older kid. With GY, you could be an early summer b-day, a foot taller and it's OK, which wouldn't be true with biobanding.

What rule in MLSN late developer exception prohibits a tall kid playing down a year? Please cite it because pretty sure it doesn't exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It shouldn’t be possible. That’s why grad year can’t happen.

Biobanding is worse the GY because you have the same problem of way older kids without them actually in the same grade.

Not sure being in the same grade helps in this case, except for the older kid. With GY, you could be an early summer b-day, a foot taller and it's OK, which wouldn't be true with biobanding.

What rule in MLSN late developer exception prohibits a tall kid playing down a year? Please cite it because pretty sure it doesn't exist.

I couldn't find any info on the late developer program, other than it exists. You have to get approval from MLSN, but I have no idea what metrics they use do make a decision. I have read they measure the child and parents and can estimate where they are at in their growth pattern. To me it seems like a switch to SY would be easier to manage then individual waivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It shouldn’t be possible. That’s why grad year can’t happen.

Biobanding is worse the GY because you have the same problem of way older kids without them actually in the same grade.

Not sure being in the same grade helps in this case, except for the older kid. With GY, you could be an early summer b-day, a foot taller and it's OK, which wouldn't be true with biobanding.

What rule in MLSN late developer exception prohibits a tall kid playing down a year? Please cite it because pretty sure it doesn't exist.

I couldn't find any info on the late developer program, other than it exists. You have to get approval from MLSN, but I have no idea what metrics they use do make a decision. I have read they measure the child and parents and can estimate where they are at in their growth pattern. To me it seems like a switch to SY would be easier to manage then individual waivers.

There is a mechanism of doing an X-ray of a kids wrist and fingers and estimating their bone age relative to their actual age which will tell you both how late they are developing and how tall they are likely to be. My guess is this is not was MLSN is doing but its pretty commonly done in premiere league academies. No point in training a 10 year old keeper who will only ever be 5'10"!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know when US Soccer will put this website out with all the details?

They said after their AGM which runs through this weekend.

Yes, the AGM runs from February 27th to March 2nd.

https://www.ussocceragm.com/

Is anyone attending this and would be willing to report what happens here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know when US Soccer will put this website out with all the details?

They said after their AGM which runs through this weekend.

Yes, the AGM runs from February 27th to March 2nd.

https://www.ussocceragm.com/

Is anyone attending this and would be willing to report what happens here?

Doubt its open to the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know when US Soccer will put this website out with all the details?

They said after their AGM which runs through this weekend.

Yes, the AGM runs from February 27th to March 2nd.

https://www.ussocceragm.com/

Is anyone attending this and would be willing to report what happens here?

Doubt its open to the public.

The BOD meeting on Friday will be on their YouTube channel 8am-12pm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know when US Soccer will put this website out with all the details?

They said after their AGM which runs through this weekend.

Yes, the AGM runs from February 27th to March 2nd.

https://www.ussocceragm.com/

Is anyone attending this and would be willing to report what happens here?

Doubt its open to the public.

The BOD meeting on Friday will be on their YouTube channel 8am-12pm.

That's probably just the open session where they say how cool soccer is. And then they close it to talk business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know when US Soccer will put this website out with all the details?

They said after their AGM which runs through this weekend.

Yes, the AGM runs from February 27th to March 2nd.

https://www.ussocceragm.com/

Is anyone attending this and would be willing to report what happens here?

Doubt its open to the public.

The BOD meeting on Friday will be on their YouTube channel 8am-12pm.

That's probably just the open session where they say how cool soccer is. And then they close it to talk business.

Oh were definitely not going to be privy to anything of significance.

[Anonymous]

https://learning.ussoccer.com/articles/hip/article/relative-age-effect-tid-process

I went to the US Soccer learning center to just check it out and see if there was anything new. I found this article on the front page and this study was done in 2024. If you look at the data you can see why US soccer is interested in changing registration. The percentage of 4th qtr kids at talent ID camps has dropped preciptiously since they switched to BY. The distribution among each qtr was pretty even until you got down to the 2009 which at the time of the study was U13. U- 18 had around 25% 4th qtr participants, U-13 had around 7%. In 5 years they lost almost all 4th qtr kids, thats crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://learning.ussoccer.com/articles/hip/article/relative-age-effect-tid-process

I went to the US Soccer learning center to just check it out and see if there was anything new. I found this article on the front page and this study was done in 2024. If you look at the data you can see why US soccer is interested in changing registration. The percentage of 4th qtr kids at talent ID camps has dropped preciptiously since they switched to BY. The distribution among each qtr was pretty even until you got down to the 2009 which at the time of the study was U13. U- 18 had around 25% 4th qtr participants, U-13 had around 7%. In 5 years they lost almost all 4th qtr kids, thats crazy.

I'm sorry that was just the data from clubs. Data from the talent ID center was even more drastic. It does seem pretty even on the YNT though.

[Anonymous]

The players chosen for those talent ID centers are made by club coaches. It’s not a surprise that Q4 players have low representation. Most top ECNL teams have low Q4 representation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The players chosen for those talent ID centers are made by club coaches. It’s not a surprise that Q4 players have low representation. Most top ECNL teams have low Q4 representation

But before they switched to BY registration, 4th qtr participation was pretty even. If I am a NT director, I would want to an even cross-section across every qtr.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The players chosen for those talent ID centers are made by club coaches. It’s not a surprise that Q4 players have low representation. Most top ECNL teams have low Q4 representation

SD Surf and SDSC Surf B2010, two top ECNL teams in SD, have zero Q4 and one or zero Q3 players.