ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't be surprised to see 9/1 across every platform. The leagues and coaches were already complaining about having to do more work to accommodate the change, now that it seems official, I can't imagine they would want to have 2 different registrations and the work to compete them separate would involve.

I thought they were trying to eliminate trapped players? Most August birthdays I know are in the class below. Not to mention was 8/1-7/31 for the longest time. What a bunch of idiots.

Nope. They’re trying to increase participation. And because the majority of states use 9/1 for when kids are required to do to school - that’s the date they chose to align with.

Why would EC and L want to increase participation?

College rosters are shrinking, a number of these programs will either leave division one or be eliminated, so why would you want to increase the pool of applicants when the number of seats is shrinking?

Sounds like a great way to destroy or dilute your business model and strategic advantage.

Growing participation is literally in the first sentence in the last statement from the soccer organizations.

https://www.ussoccer.com/ecosystem-review/player-registration

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't be surprised to see 9/1 across every platform. The leagues and coaches were already complaining about having to do more work to accommodate the change, now that it seems official, I can't imagine they would want to have 2 different registrations and the work to compete them separate would involve.

I thought they were trying to eliminate trapped players? Most August birthdays I know are in the class below. Not to mention was 8/1-7/31 for the longest time. What a bunch of idiots.

Nope. They’re trying to increase participation. And because the majority of states use 9/1 for when kids are required to do to school - that’s the date they chose to align with.

This is a really dumb one. What August kid is ever going to participate in soccer at all if when they go to sign up for the Kindergarten soccer team they are told by the league “oh sorry, you can’t play with your classmates on this team, you will have to find a first grade team that has room for you and where your kid knows nobody! But we still want you to participate in soccer. Good luck!” What a joke.

And importantly, states with 9/1 school cutoffs do NOT require August kids to enroll just days after turning 5. It is not a requirement. It just means that if you do want to enroll in Kindergarten that year you must turn 5 by 9/1.

You can say it's dumb, but it wasn't that long ago that 8/1-7/31 was the basis of the age matrix. They purposely changed it to 9/1 after having copious meetings about what the best decision was for soccer as a whole. Yes, there will be SOME August kids who will have to play with the "grade up." But there will be more August kids who play with their grade. That's how the decision was made - and it's time to stop complaining and start living with the decision.

[Anonymous]

When the heck is the ECNL going to announce their path forward? Who's got a crystal ball handy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When the heck is the ECNL going to announce their path forward? Who's got a crystal ball handy!

US Club / ECNL are hopefully considering making some changes for next year - rather than having an entire year (25/26) using a lame duck system.

[Anonymous]

The lame duck year sucks. I hope they make changes! I seriously doubt they can after so many states have held tryouts and given offers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The lame duck year sucks. I hope they make changes! I seriously doubt they can after so many states have held tryouts and given offers.

💯

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't be surprised to see 9/1 across every platform. The leagues and coaches were already complaining about having to do more work to accommodate the change, now that it seems official, I can't imagine they would want to have 2 different registrations and the work to compete them separate would involve.

I thought they were trying to eliminate trapped players? Most August birthdays I know are in the class below. Not to mention was 8/1-7/31 for the longest time. What a bunch of idiots.

Nope. They’re trying to increase participation. And because the majority of states use 9/1 for when kids are required to do to school - that’s the date they chose to align with.

This is a really dumb one. What August kid is ever going to participate in soccer at all if when they go to sign up for the Kindergarten soccer team they are told by the league “oh sorry, you can’t play with your classmates on this team, you will have to find a first grade team that has room for you and where your kid knows nobody! But we still want you to participate in soccer. Good luck!” What a joke.

And importantly, states with 9/1 school cutoffs do NOT require August kids to enroll just days after turning 5. It is not a requirement. It just means that if you do want to enroll in Kindergarten that year you must turn 5 by 9/1.

You can say it's dumb, but it wasn't that long ago that 8/1-7/31 was the basis of the age matrix. They purposely changed it to 9/1 after having copious meetings about what the best decision was for soccer as a whole. Yes, there will be SOME August kids who will have to play with the "grade up." But there will be more August kids who play with their grade. That's how the decision was made - and it's time to stop complaining and start living with the decision.

I disagree that the 9/1 was decided because it was best for soccer as a whole. If people believed there was a best decision for soccer as a whole, then USSF would not have punted on making a decision. In fact, their entire basis for not making a decision was because there is no one size fits all solution that would be "best". A few of the leagues intentions of their plan to go to 9/1 have leaked out (even though the specifics, and whether or not there are carve outs for Aug. kids haven't been announced) but it is still a wait and see as to what the other leagues and organizations will do.

[Anonymous]

Is tomorrow a podcast day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The lame duck year sucks. I hope they make changes! I seriously doubt they can after so many states have held tryouts and given offers.

How many states have had tryout already? It can’t be that many out of 50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lame duck year sucks. I hope they make changes! I seriously doubt they can after so many states have held tryouts and given offers.

How many states have had tryout already? It can’t be that many out of 50.

San Diego Surf was the main one I believe.

[Anonymous]

I am sure San Diego Surf can adjust rosters should any transition plan come out. It is possible the clubs were told of a plan before any announcement is released from the league to the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't be surprised to see 9/1 across every platform. The leagues and coaches were already complaining about having to do more work to accommodate the change, now that it seems official, I can't imagine they would want to have 2 different registrations and the work to compete them separate would involve.

I thought they were trying to eliminate trapped players? Most August birthdays I know are in the class below. Not to mention was 8/1-7/31 for the longest time. What a bunch of idiots.

Nope. They’re trying to increase participation. And because the majority of states use 9/1 for when kids are required to do to school - that’s the date they chose to align with.

This is a really dumb one. What August kid is ever going to participate in soccer at all if when they go to sign up for the Kindergarten soccer team they are told by the league “oh sorry, you can’t play with your classmates on this team, you will have to find a first grade team that has room for you and where your kid knows nobody! But we still want you to participate in soccer. Good luck!” What a joke.

And importantly, states with 9/1 school cutoffs do NOT require August kids to enroll just days after turning 5. It is not a requirement. It just means that if you do want to enroll in Kindergarten that year you must turn 5 by 9/1.

You can say it's dumb, but it wasn't that long ago that 8/1-7/31 was the basis of the age matrix. They purposely changed it to 9/1 after having copious meetings about what the best decision was for soccer as a whole. Yes, there will be SOME August kids who will have to play with the "grade up." But there will be more August kids who play with their grade. That's how the decision was made - and it's time to stop complaining and start living with the decision.

I disagree that the 9/1 was decided because it was best for soccer as a whole. If people believed there was a best decision for soccer as a whole, then USSF would not have punted on making a decision. In fact, their entire basis for not making a decision was because there is no one size fits all solution that would be "best". A few of the leagues intentions of their plan to go to 9/1 have leaked out (even though the specifics, and whether or not there are carve outs for Aug. kids haven't been announced) but it is still a wait and see as to what the other leagues and organizations will do.

Very good points.

Also, it may be beating a dead horse, but to reiterate again — contrary to the “stop complaining and start living with it” commenter, with an 8/1 cutoff the younger August kids CAN still play up with their grade. This seems especially likely to be permitted by clubs under a SY system because of the symmetries with aligning kids with their actual grade. So it’s wrong to say that 9/1 allows more August kids to play with their grade. 8/1 does that, by allowing all August kids (older and younger) to play with their grade. 9/1 only does it if it is paired with waivers for older August kids to play with their grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't be surprised to see 9/1 across every platform. The leagues and coaches were already complaining about having to do more work to accommodate the change, now that it seems official, I can't imagine they would want to have 2 different registrations and the work to compete them separate would involve.

I thought they were trying to eliminate trapped players? Most August birthdays I know are in the class below. Not to mention was 8/1-7/31 for the longest time. What a bunch of idiots.

Nope. They’re trying to increase participation. And because the majority of states use 9/1 for when kids are required to do to school - that’s the date they chose to align with.

This is a really dumb one. What August kid is ever going to participate in soccer at all if when they go to sign up for the Kindergarten soccer team they are told by the league “oh sorry, you can’t play with your classmates on this team, you will have to find a first grade team that has room for you and where your kid knows nobody! But we still want you to participate in soccer. Good luck!” What a joke.

And importantly, states with 9/1 school cutoffs do NOT require August kids to enroll just days after turning 5. It is not a requirement. It just means that if you do want to enroll in Kindergarten that year you must turn 5 by 9/1.

You can say it's dumb, but it wasn't that long ago that 8/1-7/31 was the basis of the age matrix. They purposely changed it to 9/1 after having copious meetings about what the best decision was for soccer as a whole. Yes, there will be SOME August kids who will have to play with the "grade up." But there will be more August kids who play with their grade. That's how the decision was made - and it's time to stop complaining and start living with the decision.

I disagree that the 9/1 was decided because it was best for soccer as a whole. If people believed there was a best decision for soccer as a whole, then USSF would not have punted on making a decision. In fact, their entire basis for not making a decision was because there is no one size fits all solution that would be "best". A few of the leagues intentions of their plan to go to 9/1 have leaked out (even though the specifics, and whether or not there are carve outs for Aug. kids haven't been announced) but it is still a wait and see as to what the other leagues and organizations will do.

Very good points.

Also, it may be beating a dead horse, but to reiterate again — contrary to the “stop complaining and start living with it” commenter, with an 8/1 cutoff the younger August kids CAN still play up with their grade. This seems especially likely to be permitted by clubs under a SY system because of the symmetries with aligning kids with their actual grade. So it’s wrong to say that 9/1 allows more August kids to play with their grade. 8/1 does that, by allowing all August kids (older and younger) to play with their grade. 9/1 only does it if it is paired with waivers for older August kids to play with their grade.

Assuming all of those arguments are true, why did USYS, AYSO and US Club all agree to use 9/1 as the cutoff beginning in 26/27? Could it possibly be that 9/1 is what the MAJORITY of states use, so it's the best date to use for that (effectively business) reason?

It really is a shame when August birthdays are from a state with a 7/31 cutoff for school. It's not fair. Since 2016, having fall birthdays playing with the grade up wasn't fair either. It's never really fair. But if you're a great soccer player, none of this really matters right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would this affect all of travel?

It's not going to happen, so no. However, most clubs mix NCSL and ECNL, and NCSL would have to go along with it as well for it to work. Otherwise, clubs would break off and just have an ECNL side and am NCSL side.

The only way it would happen is if US Soccer switched back, which would be a shocking move at this point given the initial move to birth year.

This comment didn't age very well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would this affect all of travel?

It's not going to happen, so no. However, most clubs mix NCSL and ECNL, and NCSL would have to go along with it as well for it to work. Otherwise, clubs would break off and just have an ECNL side and am NCSL side.

The only way it would happen is if US Soccer switched back, which would be a shocking move at this point given the initial move to birth year.

This comment didn't age very well.

To be fair, the majority of the comments in this thread will not age well