ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:large club director I spoke with today, has GA and NPL. He thinks GA might stay birth year! So they would drop NPL from the platform. Keep platform teams at BY and other teams at SY. He said US soccer has been awful at providing direction.

Why keep the "large club" anonymous? Your name is anonymous, so nobody would ever know it was you who leaked this "information" anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:large club director I spoke with today, has GA and NPL. He thinks GA might stay birth year! So they would drop NPL from the platform. Keep platform teams at BY and other teams at SY. He said US soccer has been awful at providing direction.

Sure buddy…

What's so unbelievable about that? GA has been silent and US Soccer's leadership definitely sucks. It would be business suicide, but entirely believable they go this route.

It's not unbelievable. But someone else also reported that they, a parent of a Q4 girl, talked to a GA club about GA's plans for 26-27. The parent said they were going to switch to the GA team, but told them they didn't want to switch just to have to switch again in 26-27 to a SY team (which she wants to do when it's an option). The GA club told the parent not to worry, that GA was also changing to SY for 26-27. That was also a believable story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:large club director I spoke with today, has GA and NPL. He thinks GA might stay birth year! So they would drop NPL from the platform. Keep platform teams at BY and other teams at SY. He said US soccer has been awful at providing direction.

Why keep the "large club" anonymous? Your name is anonymous, so nobody would ever know it was you who leaked this "information" anyway.

Because it’s a BY just making stuff up to make other BY parents feel better

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:large club director I spoke with today, has GA and NPL. He thinks GA might stay birth year! So they would drop NPL from the platform. Keep platform teams at BY and other teams at SY. He said US soccer has been awful at providing direction.

Sure buddy…

What's so unbelievable about that? GA has been silent and US Soccer's leadership definitely sucks. It would be business suicide, but entirely believable they go this route.

So you think an organization would commit “business suicide” to make some BY parents happy?

[Anonymous]

Sounds like in both these cases the clubs did what soccer clubs always do, told the parents what they want to hear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:large club director I spoke with today, has GA and NPL. He thinks GA might stay birth year! So they would drop NPL from the platform. Keep platform teams at BY and other teams at SY. He said US soccer has been awful at providing direction.

Sure buddy…

What's so unbelievable about that? GA has been silent and US Soccer's leadership definitely sucks. It would be business suicide, but entirely believable they go this route.

So you think an organization would commit “business suicide” to make some BY parents happy?

In the short term (2-3) years won’t make a big difference. Lots of players who are Jan-Aug who lose spots or for other various reasons who may want to stick with BY for the age advantage.
Long term they would need to create a youth development (pre-GA) platform.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:large club director I spoke with today, has GA and NPL. He thinks GA might stay birth year! So they would drop NPL from the platform. Keep platform teams at BY and other teams at SY. He said US soccer has been awful at providing direction.

Sure buddy…

What's so unbelievable about that? GA has been silent and US Soccer's leadership definitely sucks. It would be business suicide, but entirely believable they go this route.

So you think an organization would commit “business suicide” to make some BY parents happy?

In the short term (2-3) years won’t make a big difference. Lots of players who are Jan-Aug who lose spots or for other various reasons who may want to stick with BY for the age advantage.
Long term they would need to create a youth development (pre-GA) platform.

Landed the triple backflip flawlessly for that mental gymnastics

[Anonymous]

MLS Next 2 replacing ECNL on boys side so this doesn't really matter for boys at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MLS Next 2 replacing ECNL on boys side so this doesn't really matter for boys at all.

Nobody joining Next 2 over ECNL on boys side. Sorry

Nobody flocking to McLean with Next 2 over VDA, Arlington, or Pipeline.

Next 2= RL. That’s it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLS Next 2 replacing ECNL on boys side so this doesn't really matter for boys at all.

Nobody joining Next 2 over ECNL on boys side. Sorry

Nobody flocking to McLean with Next 2 over VDA, Arlington, or Pipeline.

Next 2= RL. That’s it.

Its happening at our club. Though MLS Next may follow US Club 9/1 cutoff. No one seems to know about MLS Next age cutoffs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the big picture why does it matter if a league uses BY to pick a small handfull of players? Wouldnt it make it easier to play SY and focus in on the tiny pool of players who play up and ALSO are starters? vs the half a million kids in the sea of players??

The we need BY to identify players seems like a bad argument to me.

That was supposed to be the point of switching to BY to begin with, the intention was to be able to "identify and better understand RAE" so that it would improve our national teams, what ended up happening was that they lost almost all Q4 kids from the YNT, but if a kid made it that far under the circumstances they usually made the team but that is a whole other topic. Q1 kids that are actually good and not relying on their age associated size advantage should be able to play up as well. If we care about our national teams and don't have some myopic view because we are deluded into thinking our kid is YNT material, we will want all of our kids to be challenged at home before we send them abroad.

That’s not what happened…where do you come up with this?!

The distribution on the YNT improved after BY switch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:large club director I spoke with today, has GA and NPL. He thinks GA might stay birth year! So they would drop NPL from the platform. Keep platform teams at BY and other teams at SY. He said US soccer has been awful at providing direction.

US Soccer DID provide direction. Then ECNL astroturfed a revolt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:large club director I spoke with today, has GA and NPL. He thinks GA might stay birth year! So they would drop NPL from the platform. Keep platform teams at BY and other teams at SY. He said US soccer has been awful at providing direction.

Why keep the "large club" anonymous? Your name is anonymous, so nobody would ever know it was you who leaked this "information" anyway.

Because it’s a BY just making stuff up to make other BY parents feel better

Us vs them! 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the big picture why does it matter if a league uses BY to pick a small handfull of players? Wouldnt it make it easier to play SY and focus in on the tiny pool of players who play up and ALSO are starters? vs the half a million kids in the sea of players??

The we need BY to identify players seems like a bad argument to me.

That was supposed to be the point of switching to BY to begin with, the intention was to be able to "identify and better understand RAE" so that it would improve our national teams, what ended up happening was that they lost almost all Q4 kids from the YNT, but if a kid made it that far under the circumstances they usually made the team but that is a whole other topic. Q1 kids that are actually good and not relying on their age associated size advantage should be able to play up as well. If we care about our national teams and don't have some myopic view because we are deluded into thinking our kid is YNT material, we will want all of our kids to be challenged at home before we send them abroad.

That’s not what happened…where do you come up with this?!

The distribution on the YNT improved after BY switch.

I’m not going to go over it again moron I’ve posted the links to the study multiple times in this cesspool….surely you are trolling

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLS Next 2 replacing ECNL on boys side so this doesn't really matter for boys at all.

Nobody joining Next 2 over ECNL on boys side. Sorry

Nobody flocking to McLean with Next 2 over VDA, Arlington, or Pipeline.

Next 2= RL. That’s it.

Its happening at our club. Though MLS Next may follow US Club 9/1 cutoff. No one seems to know about MLS Next age cutoffs.

I’ve seen hints that they may be following the 9/1 cutoff, should know something soon with ID camps coming up.