ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you all been reading this forum? Birth month/quartile has nothing to do with it. Those Q1 players just train harder, have higher soccer IQ and just come from better genetic stock than any Q4 player. In fact, those Q1 players may be the best players to ever play for their respective clubs.

Yeah and the BY parents aren’t worried about the change to SY but object to it only because it’s too difficult to implement

I'm not sure how youth soccer survived when it changed from SY to BY in the fall of 2017. Guess it was a miracle.

Well technically for 4th qtr kids the dream did die lol

Q4 kids were pulled off their existing teams and told to play with kids the next grade up - as the youngest kids. It was good times.

Oh, you mean largely what is going to happen to older August born kids if they go with a 9/1 date - lose all their grade peers from BY team and play up a grade and be very youngest.

Most August kids are on the younger side for their grade. That’s why they want to do 9/1. The Majority of Aug 2011 are 8th graders.

They said they can fix everyone’s problems only can fix most. I understand the idea of allowing 8/1 and kids play up. They don’t want to do that.

What is basis for your statement that most/majority of August kids are on the younger side for their grade?

Also, when/where did they say they don’t want younger August kids to play up? Kids don’t have to if they don’t want to!

Meaning with the variety of school start dates the Amorite of August 2011s would be 8th graders. Obviously not all. That’s the way Us Club sees it.

They also said that on the ECNL podcast not a direct quote but along the lines of we know we 9/1 doesn’t work for everyone but works best for the majority.

This is a faulty assumption. The focus on how many states in the U.S. use a 9/1 school cutoff date does not necessarily correlate to a majority of August born kids being young for their grade. Many many August kids don’t start school just days after turning 5 and instead wait a year to enroll in Kindergarten, even in states where you have to have turned 5 by 9/1 in order to enroll. Hence why the 8/1 date was in place for decades before the move to BY registration in 2017, capturing those older August kids as well as the states with 8/1 cutoffs across the nation.

Absolutely agree. While the actual cutoff might be 9/1. School districts will let kids with August birthdays start late, making the cutoff really 8/1. We are talking about a month here.

If 9/1 is the cutoff, I hope there is a waiver process or rule that X number of players born earlier in the year AND in the same grade can play on the team.

Exactly. A school cutoff date is not a compulsory start date. Many, many people hold back August b-days, and even June and July.

Yup, and that's well and fine for schooling purposes and once you start holding back for multiple months, well sorry you won't be aligned with the "typical" age group.

Don’t disagree at all. But you can’t tell me Aug. kids are not aligned with the “typical” age group if they start late.

Aug kids are not aligned with the “typical age group if they start late.

Sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you all been reading this forum? Birth month/quartile has nothing to do with it. Those Q1 players just train harder, have higher soccer IQ and just come from better genetic stock than any Q4 player. In fact, those Q1 players may be the best players to ever play for their respective clubs.

Yeah and the BY parents aren’t worried about the change to SY but object to it only because it’s too difficult to implement

I'm not sure how youth soccer survived when it changed from SY to BY in the fall of 2017. Guess it was a miracle.

Well technically for 4th qtr kids the dream did die lol

Q4 kids were pulled off their existing teams and told to play with kids the next grade up - as the youngest kids. It was good times.

Oh, you mean largely what is going to happen to older August born kids if they go with a 9/1 date - lose all their grade peers from BY team and play up a grade and be very youngest.

Most August kids are on the younger side for their grade. That’s why they want to do 9/1. The Majority of Aug 2011 are 8th graders.

They said they can fix everyone’s problems only can fix most. I understand the idea of allowing 8/1 and kids play up. They don’t want to do that.

What is basis for your statement that most/majority of August kids are on the younger side for their grade?

Also, when/where did they say they don’t want younger August kids to play up? Kids don’t have to if they don’t want to!

Meaning with the variety of school start dates the Amorite of August 2011s would be 8th graders. Obviously not all. That’s the way Us Club sees it.

They also said that on the ECNL podcast not a direct quote but along the lines of we know we 9/1 doesn’t work for everyone but works best for the majority.

This is a faulty assumption. The focus on how many states in the U.S. use a 9/1 school cutoff date does not necessarily correlate to a majority of August born kids being young for their grade. Many many August kids don’t start school just days after turning 5 and instead wait a year to enroll in Kindergarten, even in states where you have to have turned 5 by 9/1 in order to enroll. Hence why the 8/1 date was in place for decades before the move to BY registration in 2017, capturing those older August kids as well as the states with 8/1 cutoffs across the nation.

Absolutely agree. While the actual cutoff might be 9/1. School districts will let kids with August birthdays start late, making the cutoff really 8/1. We are talking about a month here.

If 9/1 is the cutoff, I hope there is a waiver process or rule that X number of players born earlier in the year AND in the same grade can play on the team.

Exactly. A school cutoff date is not a compulsory start date. Many, many people hold back August b-days, and even June and July.

It's called Young Fives, everyone and means basically 2 years of kindergarten for a lot of kids. BUT people shouldn't get overly freaked out about grade even with the BY-SY switch when it comes to athletics. Just go by the cutoff date. All the shifting is parents over-worrying/trying to control way too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you all been reading this forum? Birth month/quartile has nothing to do with it. Those Q1 players just train harder, have higher soccer IQ and just come from better genetic stock than any Q4 player. In fact, those Q1 players may be the best players to ever play for their respective clubs.

Yeah and the BY parents aren’t worried about the change to SY but object to it only because it’s too difficult to implement

I'm not sure how youth soccer survived when it changed from SY to BY in the fall of 2017. Guess it was a miracle.

Well technically for 4th qtr kids the dream did die lol

Q4 kids were pulled off their existing teams and told to play with kids the next grade up - as the youngest kids. It was good times.

Oh, you mean largely what is going to happen to older August born kids if they go with a 9/1 date - lose all their grade peers from BY team and play up a grade and be very youngest.

Most August kids are on the younger side for their grade. That’s why they want to do 9/1. The Majority of Aug 2011 are 8th graders.

They said they can fix everyone’s problems only can fix most. I understand the idea of allowing 8/1 and kids play up. They don’t want to do that.

What is basis for your statement that most/majority of August kids are on the younger side for their grade?

Also, when/where did they say they don’t want younger August kids to play up? Kids don’t have to if they don’t want to!

Meaning with the variety of school start dates the Amorite of August 2011s would be 8th graders. Obviously not all. That’s the way Us Club sees it.

They also said that on the ECNL podcast not a direct quote but along the lines of we know we 9/1 doesn’t work for everyone but works best for the majority.

This is a faulty assumption. The focus on how many states in the U.S. use a 9/1 school cutoff date does not necessarily correlate to a majority of August born kids being young for their grade. Many many August kids don’t start school just days after turning 5 and instead wait a year to enroll in Kindergarten, even in states where you have to have turned 5 by 9/1 in order to enroll. Hence why the 8/1 date was in place for decades before the move to BY registration in 2017, capturing those older August kids as well as the states with 8/1 cutoffs across the nation.

Absolutely agree. While the actual cutoff might be 9/1. School districts will let kids with August birthdays start late, making the cutoff really 8/1. We are talking about a month here.

If 9/1 is the cutoff, I hope there is a waiver process or rule that X number of players born earlier in the year AND in the same grade can play on the team.

Exactly. A school cutoff date is not a compulsory start date. Many, many people hold back August b-days, and even June and July.

Yup, and that's well and fine for schooling purposes and once you start holding back for multiple months, well sorry you won't be aligned with the "typical" age group.

Don’t disagree at all. But you can’t tell me Aug. kids are not aligned with the “typical” age group if they start late.

Well I was specifically replying to July/June... which is obviously the exact reason why GY poses so many problems. SY +60 poster feeling vindicated now, but I'm ready for a formal annoucement.

SY+60 here, It only took a month for people to catch up.

😂😂😂 I’m now for SY + 60!

It may sound great, but it's really not needed, except at rec and youngest age groups, where it already happens. Most beginning rec programs basically are flexible around grades and friends. With club soccer, tho, all the machinations around this take it a bit too far and make the sport toxic with overbearing parents seeking special accommodations. Play with your 12-month group OR just have 18/24 month windows frankly, otherwise all your efforts cost the youngest wanting to play a spot!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you all been reading this forum? Birth month/quartile has nothing to do with it. Those Q1 players just train harder, have higher soccer IQ and just come from better genetic stock than any Q4 player. In fact, those Q1 players may be the best players to ever play for their respective clubs.

Yeah and the BY parents aren’t worried about the change to SY but object to it only because it’s too difficult to implement

I'm not sure how youth soccer survived when it changed from SY to BY in the fall of 2017. Guess it was a miracle.

Well technically for 4th qtr kids the dream did die lol

Q4 kids were pulled off their existing teams and told to play with kids the next grade up - as the youngest kids. It was good times.

Oh, you mean largely what is going to happen to older August born kids if they go with a 9/1 date - lose all their grade peers from BY team and play up a grade and be very youngest.

Most August kids are on the younger side for their grade. That’s why they want to do 9/1. The Majority of Aug 2011 are 8th graders.

They said they can fix everyone’s problems only can fix most. I understand the idea of allowing 8/1 and kids play up. They don’t want to do that.

What is basis for your statement that most/majority of August kids are on the younger side for their grade?

Also, when/where did they say they don’t want younger August kids to play up? Kids don’t have to if they don’t want to!

Meaning with the variety of school start dates the Amorite of August 2011s would be 8th graders. Obviously not all. That’s the way Us Club sees it.

They also said that on the ECNL podcast not a direct quote but along the lines of we know we 9/1 doesn’t work for everyone but works best for the majority.

This is a faulty assumption. The focus on how many states in the U.S. use a 9/1 school cutoff date does not necessarily correlate to a majority of August born kids being young for their grade. Many many August kids don’t start school just days after turning 5 and instead wait a year to enroll in Kindergarten, even in states where you have to have turned 5 by 9/1 in order to enroll. Hence why the 8/1 date was in place for decades before the move to BY registration in 2017, capturing those older August kids as well as the states with 8/1 cutoffs across the nation.

Absolutely agree. While the actual cutoff might be 9/1. School districts will let kids with August birthdays start late, making the cutoff really 8/1. We are talking about a month here.

If 9/1 is the cutoff, I hope there is a waiver process or rule that X number of players born earlier in the year AND in the same grade can play on the team.

Exactly. A school cutoff date is not a compulsory start date. Many, many people hold back August b-days, and even June and July.

Yup, and that's well and fine for schooling purposes and once you start holding back for multiple months, well sorry you won't be aligned with the "typical" age group.

Don’t disagree at all. But you can’t tell me Aug. kids are not aligned with the “typical” age group if they start late.

Well I was specifically replying to July/June... which is obviously the exact reason why GY poses so many problems. SY +60 poster feeling vindicated now, but I'm ready for a formal annoucement.

SY+60 here, It only took a month for people to catch up.

😂😂😂 I’m now for SY + 60!

It may sound great, but it's really not needed, except at rec and youngest age groups, where it already happens. Most beginning rec programs basically are flexible around grades and friends. With club soccer, tho, all the machinations around this take it a bit too far and make the sport toxic with overbearing parents seeking special accommodations. Play with your 12-month group OR just have 18/24 month windows frankly, otherwise all your efforts cost the youngest wanting to play a spot!

I was more complementing his gif…that’s the reason I’m pro SY + 60

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My only request to US Soccer is to enforce for refs strong teaching and training regarding “off side”.

I have seen, across the whole country, so many refs that simply don’t understand that concept.

They call when the open player is at off position when receiving, and that’s incorrect.

“Off side” should be called if at the time the passing player releases the ball, the receiver is in off position.

Yes, refs don’t see to understand off side. But neither do you 🤣.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you all been reading this forum? Birth month/quartile has nothing to do with it. Those Q1 players just train harder, have higher soccer IQ and just come from better genetic stock than any Q4 player. In fact, those Q1 players may be the best players to ever play for their respective clubs.

Yeah and the BY parents aren’t worried about the change to SY but object to it only because it’s too difficult to implement

I'm not sure how youth soccer survived when it changed from SY to BY in the fall of 2017. Guess it was a miracle.

Well technically for 4th qtr kids the dream did die lol

Q4 kids were pulled off their existing teams and told to play with kids the next grade up - as the youngest kids. It was good times.

Oh, you mean largely what is going to happen to older August born kids if they go with a 9/1 date - lose all their grade peers from BY team and play up a grade and be very youngest.

Most August kids are on the younger side for their grade. That’s why they want to do 9/1. The Majority of Aug 2011 are 8th graders.

They said they can fix everyone’s problems only can fix most. I understand the idea of allowing 8/1 and kids play up. They don’t want to do that.

What is basis for your statement that most/majority of August kids are on the younger side for their grade?

Also, when/where did they say they don’t want younger August kids to play up? Kids don’t have to if they don’t want to!

Meaning with the variety of school start dates the Amorite of August 2011s would be 8th graders. Obviously not all. That’s the way Us Club sees it.

They also said that on the ECNL podcast not a direct quote but along the lines of we know we 9/1 doesn’t work for everyone but works best for the majority.

This is a faulty assumption. The focus on how many states in the U.S. use a 9/1 school cutoff date does not necessarily correlate to a majority of August born kids being young for their grade. Many many August kids don’t start school just days after turning 5 and instead wait a year to enroll in Kindergarten, even in states where you have to have turned 5 by 9/1 in order to enroll. Hence why the 8/1 date was in place for decades before the move to BY registration in 2017, capturing those older August kids as well as the states with 8/1 cutoffs across the nation.

Absolutely agree. While the actual cutoff might be 9/1. School districts will let kids with August birthdays start late, making the cutoff really 8/1. We are talking about a month here.

If 9/1 is the cutoff, I hope there is a waiver process or rule that X number of players born earlier in the year AND in the same grade can play on the team.

Exactly. A school cutoff date is not a compulsory start date. Many, many people hold back August b-days, and even June and July.

Yup, and that's well and fine for schooling purposes and once you start holding back for multiple months, well sorry you won't be aligned with the "typical" age group.

Don’t disagree at all. But you can’t tell me Aug. kids are not aligned with the “typical” age group if they start late.

Well I was specifically replying to July/June... which is obviously the exact reason why GY poses so many problems. SY +60 poster feeling vindicated now, but I'm ready for a formal annoucement.

SY+60 here, It only took a month for people to catch up.

😂😂😂 I’m now for SY + 60!

It may sound great, but it's really not needed, except at rec and youngest age groups, where it already happens. Most beginning rec programs basically are flexible around grades and friends. With club soccer, tho, all the machinations around this take it a bit too far and make the sport toxic with overbearing parents seeking special accommodations. Play with your 12-month group OR just have 18/24 month windows frankly, otherwise all your efforts cost the youngest wanting to play a spot!

I was more complementing his gif…that’s the reason I’m pro SY + 60

Ah ... Ok and in that case ...

Ah ... ok

https://media3.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExeXJqaTNxM285Mmhqc2ZuOWZ4dnZ0a3cxczdmZXVwamFucDAweHJhayZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/gVoBC0SuaHStq/giphy.gif

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yea…this is a follow-on to previous finnegan research.

Nothing changed. Clubs suck at Talent ID. NT are solid at it. The older the cohort, the more even the distribution. Etc etc etc.

Nothing mind blowing or surprising in this research. You move the window to SY,
And in about 7 years Q2 and part of Q3 look a lot like Q4 does currently.

Clubs suck at talent ID because parents pay them to suck at it, and because lots of coaches are complete soccer idiots. But be honest, would you go through 3-4 years of losing more matches than not so the club could properly develop your kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yea…this is a follow-on to previous finnegan research.

Nothing changed. Clubs suck at Talent ID. NT are solid at it. The older the cohort, the more even the distribution. Etc etc etc.

Nothing mind blowing or surprising in this research. You move the window to SY,
And in about 7 years Q2 and part of Q3 look a lot like Q4 does currently.

Clubs suck at talent ID because parents pay them to suck at it, and because lots of coaches are complete soccer idiots. But be honest, would you go through 3-4 years of losing more matches than not so the club could properly develop your kid?

The real question is why can't you develop a kid AND win?

[Anonymous]

Today is the day of the start. Let’s keep the chatter focused. Any information from the meeting over next few days is appreciated.

[Anonymous]

⬆️ THIS!

[Anonymous]

Do we have a plant at these meetings? I doubt any announcement is going to be a clear and concise path forward on the age change topic for the leagues. Just some more suggestions and then more waiting on what the leagues are going to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do we have a plant at these meetings? I doubt any announcement is going to be a clear and concise path forward on the age change topic for the leagues. Just some more suggestions and then more waiting on what the leagues are going to do.

I think this is correct. I hope we don’t have to wait long for league plans after US Soccer website guidelines but probably a week or two unless they are on the ball and ready. I am sure ECNL is ready whatever the plan is to be.

[Anonymous]

I’m starting to speculate that they absolutely know the plans and the details but are dragging their feet to get as many clubs through ID sessions and tryouts to avoid turnover for 25/26…I have a trapped kid that I plan to move to the better club the year the age change happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m starting to speculate that they absolutely know the plans and the details but are dragging their feet to get as many clubs through ID sessions and tryouts to avoid turnover for 25/26…I have a trapped kid that I plan to move to the better club the year the age change happens.

I think everyone knows there will be turnover, which is the same every year regardless of a monumental change. I just don’t think they know specifically what they’re going to do yet.

[Anonymous]

I am positive all leagues already know/have the plan and if we don't hear during the AGM we'll hear soon after