ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think clubs will try to stack their teams with strong September / October kids this year so they will have a slight advantage next year? Or are they more likely to build the best BY team they can without anticipating the GY change in 2026?

The Q1/Q2 bench will be replaced by good Q3/Q4 players who can join the younger team next year.

Nah, most clubs, facing parental pressure, will be forced to keep them on their current teams unless they are coming in from the outside.

In that case, it will be 22 22-player roster and bench Q1/Q2 will just sit out most of the games.

No, you misunderstand. The pressure is from the Sept-Q4 players. They don't want to play down (yet). They rather spend at least another year playing higher.

These will be the most sought after players - able to play up or come down to their new group.

I see Sept to Dec players currently starting on ECNL RL teams being able to go up to ECNL teams in the younger group.

So, younger team, but higher league.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever was going to be the youngest was always going to have a grievence.

There was a study done in Europe that concluded that 4Q players that are still playing elite / highly competitive soccer from 13 to 15 years old tend to outperform their peers when they reach 17-18 years old.

The bottom line is that the younger, disadvantaged kids just need to keep going and the situation will turn out more favorably for them in the long run.

The biobanding parents think the other way and feel pleased to see their kids crush the younger group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever was going to be the youngest was always going to have a grievence.

There was a study done in Europe that concluded that 4Q players that are still playing elite / highly competitive soccer from 13 to 15 years old tend to outperform their peers when they reach 17-18 years old.

The bottom line is that the younger, disadvantaged kids just need to keep going and the situation will turn out more favorably for them in the long run.

The biobanding parents think the other way and feel pleased to see their kids crush the younger group.

Probably feels like a BY Jan. Parent eh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think clubs will try to stack their teams with strong September / October kids this year so they will have a slight advantage next year? Or are they more likely to build the best BY team they can without anticipating the GY change in 2026?

The Q1/Q2 bench will be replaced by good Q3/Q4 players who can join the younger team next year.

Nah, most clubs, facing parental pressure, will be forced to keep them on their current teams unless they are coming in from the outside.

In that case, it will be 22 22-player roster and bench Q1/Q2 will just sit out most of the games.

No, you misunderstand. The pressure is from the Sept-Q4 players. They don't want to play down (yet). They rather spend at least another year playing higher.

This is True. September parent here.

December parent - happy for my DD to play down next year - she has played up for years.

Same here. My son is late December and a twin (born a bit early). Always the youngest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think clubs will try to stack their teams with strong September / October kids this year so they will have a slight advantage next year? Or are they more likely to build the best BY team they can without anticipating the GY change in 2026?

The Q1/Q2 bench will be replaced by good Q3/Q4 players who can join the younger team next year.

Nah, most clubs, facing parental pressure, will be forced to keep them on their current teams unless they are coming in from the outside.

In that case, it will be 22 22-player roster and bench Q1/Q2 will just sit out most of the games.

No, you misunderstand. The pressure is from the Sept-Q4 players. They don't want to play down (yet). They rather spend at least another year playing higher.

These will be the most sought after players - able to play up or come down to their new group.

I see Sept to Dec players currently starting on ECNL RL teams being able to go up to ECNL teams in the younger group.

So, younger team, but higher league.

Except this is may be unrealistic. There may not be a ECNL team close enough where it's an option and where it is you might find those teams already stacked where the bench is too good for ECRL and just itching to lose some players for a chance (regardless of their birth month).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever was going to be the youngest was always going to have a grievence.

There was a study done in Europe that concluded that 4Q players that are still playing elite / highly competitive soccer from 13 to 15 years old tend to outperform their peers when they reach 17-18 years old.

The bottom line is that the younger, disadvantaged kids just need to keep going and the situation will turn out more favorably for them in the long run.

The biobanding parents think the other way and feel pleased to see their kids crush the younger group.

Probably feels like a BY Jan. Parent eh?

The Q1 parent thing is so tired as well as assuming they are pro BY. Many parents have kids across the spectrum and see this from many vantage points.

[Anonymous]

I’m pretty sure ECNL showcases will be grad year. But we will all find out soon enough. A player or club does not have to play with their grad year team. That will be a decision for each family and club to decide.

Starting Fall 26….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think clubs will try to stack their teams with strong September / October kids this year so they will have a slight advantage next year? Or are they more likely to build the best BY team they can without anticipating the GY change in 2026?

The Q1/Q2 bench will be replaced by good Q3/Q4 players who can join the younger team next year.

Nah, most clubs, facing parental pressure, will be forced to keep them on their current teams unless they are coming in from the outside.

In that case, it will be 22 22-player roster and bench Q1/Q2 will just sit out most of the games.

No, you misunderstand. The pressure is from the Sept-Q4 players. They don't want to play down (yet). They rather spend at least another year playing higher.

These will be the most sought after players - able to play up or come down to their new group.

I see Sept to Dec players currently starting on ECNL RL teams being able to go up to ECNL teams in the younger group.

So, younger team, but higher league.

Except this is may be unrealistic. There may not be a ECNL team close enough where it's an option and where it is you might find those teams already stacked where the bench is too good for ECRL and just itching to lose some players for a chance (regardless of their birth month).

I agree that it depends where you’re located. We have four ECNL clubs in our area that also have RL teams in each age category. There are three MLS Next clubs as well.

If you are correct and there aren’t many or any options, the kid can always just play up with the team he has been playing with or play down to the younger team.

Either way, the Sept-Dec kids that are starters on an ECNL RL or ECNL club have more options than anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever was going to be the youngest was always going to have a grievence.

There was a study done in Europe that concluded that 4Q players that are still playing elite / highly competitive soccer from 13 to 15 years old tend to outperform their peers when they reach 17-18 years old.

The bottom line is that the younger, disadvantaged kids just need to keep going and the situation will turn out more favorably for them in the long run.

The biobanding parents think the other way and feel pleased to see their kids crush the younger group.

Probably feels like a BY Jan. Parent eh?

The Q1 parent thing is so tired as well as assuming they are pro BY. Many parents have kids across the spectrum and see this from many vantage points.

Tired? Ok buddy sorry your feelings are hurt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm just here waiting for the GA/MLSN announcement. Maybe they are waiting until we get to 1000????

Some think they won't announce anything because they aren't changing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoever was going to be the youngest was always going to have a grievence.

There was a study done in Europe that concluded that 4Q players that are still playing elite / highly competitive soccer from 13 to 15 years old tend to outperform their peers when they reach 17-18 years old.

The bottom line is that the younger, disadvantaged kids just need to keep going and the situation will turn out more favorably for them in the long run.

The biobanding parents think the other way and feel pleased to see their kids crush the younger group.

Probably feels like a BY Jan. Parent eh?

The Q1 parent thing is so tired as well as assuming they are pro BY. Many parents have kids across the spectrum and see this from many vantage points.

Tired? Ok buddy sorry your feelings are hurt

Feeling aren't hurt. It's just annoying to be frank and oversimplifies a lot of what's happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think clubs will try to stack their teams with strong September / October kids this year so they will have a slight advantage next year? Or are they more likely to build the best BY team they can without anticipating the GY change in 2026?

The Q1/Q2 bench will be replaced by good Q3/Q4 players who can join the younger team next year.

Nah, most clubs, facing parental pressure, will be forced to keep them on their current teams unless they are coming in from the outside.

In that case, it will be 22 22-player roster and bench Q1/Q2 will just sit out most of the games.

No, you misunderstand. The pressure is from the Sept-Q4 players. They don't want to play down (yet). They rather spend at least another year playing higher.

These will be the most sought after players - able to play up or come down to their new group.

I see Sept to Dec players currently starting on ECNL RL teams being able to go up to ECNL teams in the younger group.

So, younger team, but higher league.

The most sought after players?! lol. If they suck they suck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think clubs will try to stack their teams with strong September / October kids this year so they will have a slight advantage next year? Or are they more likely to build the best BY team they can without anticipating the GY change in 2026?

The Q1/Q2 bench will be replaced by good Q3/Q4 players who can join the younger team next year.

Nah, most clubs, facing parental pressure, will be forced to keep them on their current teams unless they are coming in from the outside.

In that case, it will be 22 22-player roster and bench Q1/Q2 will just sit out most of the games.

No, you misunderstand. The pressure is from the Sept-Q4 players. They don't want to play down (yet). They rather spend at least another year playing higher.

These will be the most sought after players - able to play up or come down to their new group.

I see Sept to Dec players currently starting on ECNL RL teams being able to go up to ECNL teams in the younger group.

So, younger team, but higher league.

The most sought after players?! lol. If they suck they suck.

You win most annoying comment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think clubs will try to stack their teams with strong September / October kids this year so they will have a slight advantage next year? Or are they more likely to build the best BY team they can without anticipating the GY change in 2026?

The Q1/Q2 bench will be replaced by good Q3/Q4 players who can join the younger team next year.

Nah, most clubs, facing parental pressure, will be forced to keep them on their current teams unless they are coming in from the outside.

In that case, it will be 22 22-player roster and bench Q1/Q2 will just sit out most of the games.

No, you misunderstand. The pressure is from the Sept-Q4 players. They don't want to play down (yet). They rather spend at least another year playing higher.

These will be the most sought after players - able to play up or come down to their new group.

I see Sept to Dec players currently starting on ECNL RL teams being able to go up to ECNL teams in the younger group.

So, younger team, but higher league.

The most sought after players?! lol. If they suck they suck.

You win most annoying comment

If they suck then they do indeed suck. That is factually correct.

[Anonymous]

You guys are all crazy tbh. Once they hit 15-16 it doesn’t matter any longer. And by the way, that’s when it really matters how your kiddo is playing. It’s entertaining as hell to read about all the parents going nuts about the by cs sy when none of it will matter in the end. Not to mention, the youth soccer landscape changes almost every year. Unless your child is a 2010 right now or an uncommitted 2009, just chill out on the age thing lol