ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

The leagues may know but have been holding it from the clubs (to prevent leaks no doubt). At this point I'm not even sure what I want as a parent of a u15b trapped q4 in RL.

Really, I'd like to switch to a MLS2 club but all are an annoying drive away for practice.

[Anonymous]

ECNL knows people will switch leagues. MLSN knows people will switch leagues. GA knows people are switching leagues. They want to withhold the bleeding to one big year, not both years. That’s why they should have just ripped the bandaid.

[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.

But previous to the BY switch, we were.....SY. During that time all 4 qtrs were almost evenly represented.

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:

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?

But previous to the BY switch, we were.....SY. During that time all 4 qtrs were almost evenly represented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

But previous to the BY switch, we were.....SY. During that time all 4 qtrs were almost evenly represented.

That would be interesting. Please show the evidence of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

But previous to the BY switch, we were.....SY. During that time all 4 qtrs were almost evenly represented.

That would be interesting. Please show the evidence of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

But previous to the BY switch, we were.....SY. During that time all 4 qtrs were almost evenly represented.

That would be interesting. Please show the evidence of this.

https://www.termedia.pl/Journal/-78/pdf-52572-10?filename=22_03664_Article.pdf

I can't link the graph, but it's about page 5 of this pdf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

But previous to the BY switch, we were.....SY. During that time all 4 qtrs were almost evenly represented.

That would be interesting. Please show the evidence of this.

https://www.termedia.pl/Journal/-78/pdf-52572-10?filename=22_03664_Article.pdf

I can't link the graph, but it's about page 5 of this pdf.

The 08's were 8/9 when the switch to BY was made, you can see how much 4th qtr represenation they had compared to the 04's. It's drastic.

[Anonymous]

Need to know the plan so we can contact coach to tryout.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Need to know the plan so we can contact coach to tryout.

The plan hasn't been announced yet. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Need to know the plan so we can contact coach to tryout.

The plan hasn't been announced yet. Sorry.

Depend on the outcome, we will contact different teams. I hope ECNL can release its plan soon.

[Anonymous]

We will get ECNL plan next Wednesday.

[Anonymous]

Did you contact the 8 ball for that specific day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We will get ECNL plan next Wednesday.

This better not be in reference to the podcast lol