ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It might be that Q1/Q2 players will tend to move to MLSNext (Tier 1 or 2) and Q3/Q4 to play ECNL?

It is irrational to think that MLSN will stay with BY registration and alienate themselves from Q3/Q4 players, especially when they are valued in markets that we would like to sell their abilities too.

Wut?

MLSN is a pro pathway. They’re aligned with FIFA not rec leagues. Don’t be stupid. It would be irrational for them to make a switch. The reason USSF threw their hands up and said “you F’er pick for yourself” is explicitly because not all the member bodies agreed…the ones that wanted a switch have already made their decisions public, those that didn’t haven’t made an announcement…because there is nothing for them to announce…

Here we go again Mr. insecurity has had too much to drink on this beautiful Sunday afternoon! Save your energy for tryouts bud!

[Anonymous]

MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

you speak as if you know but you don’t know

[Anonymous]

How does bio banding work? Is there any thing to stop a club from using it on a q1 fully developed kid so they can play down?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

you speak as if you know but you don’t know

At this point the BY crowd is just left with delusional wishful thinking…the power of positive thinking…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

That's like buying a cow just to drink milk.

MLSN will stay top dog no matter its BY or SY. All that trouble just to stay BY ? For what ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

That's like buying a cow just to drink milk.

MLSN will stay top dog no matter its BY or SY. All that trouble just to stay BY ? For what ?

Exactly! The BY crowd thinks MLSN cares about them and will save them…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

Why can't people understand that kids playing for clubs not leagues. You don't sign up for MLSN, you sign up for club A B or C. And no club or coach in their right mind is going to break up teams and regroup them, just so they can play MLSN. Academies, sure. They can do whatever they want. They could go BY and just play up a SY. But it would be total logistical chaos for a club to try and do this every year for their U12 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

That's like buying a cow just to drink milk.

MLSN will stay top dog no matter its BY or SY. All that trouble just to stay BY ? For what ?

There is absolutely no incentive for pay to play MLSN team to stay in BY. As long as MLS Academy BY team is fine to play against pay to play MLSN SY team, then it is just pure stupid for MLSN to stay in BY alone.

[Anonymous]

What are the odds that ECNL clubs will allow for some 'exceptions' in the 2025-2026 year to allow trapped players to play on their SY team (vs. having to wait a full year to get to that team). Has anybody heard local clubs talking about whether they will start making exceptions vs. waiting 18 months to start on this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

That's like buying a cow just to drink milk.

MLSN will stay top dog no matter its BY or SY. All that trouble just to stay BY ? For what ?

There is absolutely no incentive for pay to play MLSN team to stay in BY. As long as MLS Academy BY team is fine to play against pay to play MLSN SY team, then it is just pure stupid for MLSN to stay in BY alone.

MLSN will do whatever MLS tells them to do. What don’t you understand about that. If that means everyone else is SY and they have to recruit for players for their By teams then that’s what they will do.

I’ve talked with my sons coach/director at MLSN club he doesn’t see it as an issue because MLSN has biobanding and they will just recruit the best kids within BY system and add additional SY strong players with biobanding if needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN will add U11-12 for BY feeder system. GA going to add biobanding option.
Both plan on staying birth year.

Why can't people understand that kids playing for clubs not leagues. You don't sign up for MLSN, you sign up for club A B or C. And no club or coach in their right mind is going to break up teams and regroup them, just so they can play MLSN. Academies, sure. They can do whatever they want. They could go BY and just play up a SY. But it would be total logistical chaos for a club to try and do this every year for their U12 kids.

If you think clubs would pull out of MLSN because they have to potentially redo rosters at U13 you’re strongly mistaken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of Aug parents were pumped thinking their kid would be the only group allowed to play against kids a grade below, but then that dream was crushed with a 9/1 cut off

There is probably a loud very small minority of August parents you are referring to. Our ENCL team in California has two August players and we are both trilled we don't have to deal with switching teams etc. Probably like other have said with California having a 9/1 school cutoff we get to stay with the team we have been part of for years. If some older kids come down then so be it. I guess the people that were hoping for 8/1 cutoff don't get a lot of playing time and thus feel worried. Can't blame parents worrying about their kids.

Now if it is about parents who kids are already good and they want to go down and dominate even more than that is just foolish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the odds that ECNL clubs will allow for some 'exceptions' in the 2025-2026 year to allow trapped players to play on their SY team (vs. having to wait a full year to get to that team). Has anybody heard local clubs talking about whether they will start making exceptions vs. waiting 18 months to start on this?

No official word from ECNL as of yet. They are sanctioned by US Club so I don’t know what they could do in the interim unless they went rogue. Which is highly unlikely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of Aug parents were pumped thinking their kid would be the only group allowed to play against kids a grade below, but then that dream was crushed with a 9/1 cut off

There is probably a loud very small minority of August parents you are referring to. Our ENCL team in California has two August players and we are both trilled we don't have to deal with switching teams etc. Probably like other have said with California having a 9/1 school cutoff we get to stay with the team we have been part of for years. If some older kids come down then so be it. I guess the people that were hoping for 8/1 cutoff don't get a lot of playing time and thus feel worried. Can't blame parents worrying about their kids.

Now if it is about parents who kids are already good and they want to go down and dominate even more than that is just foolish.

That is assuming they get to keep their spot after Sept to Dec kids from the age above now come down to tryout for the team. Not saying Aug kids can’t make it because my team has a very talented December kid who is one of the strongest players. Thinking of them playing the age group below doesn’t even sound fair.