ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[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.

Thoses aren’t the players this change was for. 🤣

Every starter Q4 family I know is not happy with the change.

Then they are the cut your nose off to spite your face crowd, which sadly exist.

I have met more than a few Q4 parents that don’t understand the trapped issue, they just think people are trying to make their kid play down.

Those are called dumb people. It’s play with people in your own grade / peers - which is better for college recruiting purposes. Of course if your kid is really good - they can keep playing up. But they’ll be playing against even older kids soon.

They do understand it and it's not always bad. That's what critics don't get. While not perfect, many clubs had a good experience for trapped players. It also doesn't matter on top teams where they often don't let their kids play HS until/unless they have committed to college. In those cases, they AREN'T trapped. ... So, for those who do play HS, under the BY system, Sept-Q4 play come in at a big advantage (if they survive the RAE game), because they become the oldest freshmen with the most experience, playing against kids who have been bigger, stronger the whole time.

[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.

At my ECNL club in the midwest I haven’t heard any complaints about the change.

On the girls side at my club we have really strong ECNL/PreECNL Team 1 teams and not so strong Team 2s (RL).

At U9 our Team 1 at a minimum tie the U10 Team 2. By U10 our girls Team 1 is beating the U11 2nd Team + beating or tying the U12 2nd Team.

In my daughters age (2015) there is little chance that a Team 2 2014 with a Sept-December will come down and play on our team and that chance goes down even further with the change not happening until mid-2026.

Now, the older 2014 Team 1 team does have some Sept-December girls, but because of the existing effects of RAE the majority of the 2014 team has birthdays January-Aug. I think they have 3 that are eligible to come down, and my daughters team will have 2 that go down to the 2016 Team 1 team.

Right now our 2015 Team 1 is playing up 9V9 and our 2015 Team 2 is playing 7V7.

This upcoming season, the 2014 team 1 will move to 11V11, they will pick up the top players from team 2 bc the roster size expands. They will literally not give 2 shits when their bday is, there are only like 2 players from Team 2 that can play at the level. The U11 second Team keeps playing 9v9 during this upcoming season and loses their 2 best players.

The following season when the change occurs it will be the 2015 first year playing U11, and bc the roster expansion, instead of pulling from the 2015 Team 2 for the roster expansion, they will absorb the Team 1 2014 players that move down….this actually makes it worse for our Team 2 2015, bc we would normally fill the spots with the top 2015 Team 2 players, but instead will be getting those from the 2014 Team 1.

RAE is real. When trying out for the team at the youngest age the older girls Jan-Aug had a development advantage (of course there are exceptions). Then the Team 1 girls have better coaching, training, and competition and now aren’t just bigger and stronger, but now more technical.

At 11 and 12 when age becomes less of a factor bc kids hit puberty at differnt times, no coach is going to pick a kid based on birthday.

TLDR; RAE is real and will change how teams are picked at the youngest age group in 2026. The 2018 Top Team will be compromised of Q4 2017’s who move down. Because there are already roster size changes in the younger ages as teams move from 7v7, 9v9 to 11v11, Team 1 players aren’t worried about losing their spot. At least at my club…on the girls the side.

This isn’t a lame duck season…clubs are going to pick the best players to win.

The Boys side rolls deeper and has stronger Team 2s, so I can’t really speak to that, but for the girls it’s a minor shuffle of Team 1 players and Q4 team 2 players won’t move to Team 1 because of the change. But they will not be trapped which is what this is all about. Moving forward RAE will favor Sept-Dec. like when I was growing up.

This is what I’ve seen as well. A Q4 ECNL RL starter that moves “down” to ECNL team in most cases is probably joining a team that is equal to or a bit superior to his or her current team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading all this and how boldly parents of September to December kids explain the challenges of being trapped now and the benefits of playing with like-grade peers going forward, alongside the flippant comments made about August kids who will now be both the very youngest on their teams and always forced to play with a grade above them, is maddening. Anyone who thinks that it is reasonable to be stranding these August kids without any September to December grade peers and with no consideration for them to play with their enrolled grade is kidding themselves. These kids won’t enter the sport because they will never be able to do so with their friends/classmates, which is the entry point to any youth sport. If they happen to get lucky and find a local league that lets them enter on a team with grade peers post-fall 2026 (not at all a given with AYSO and US Youth Soccer committed to shift to 9/1), they likely don’t ever make the jump to competitive because they are again not making that jump with any grade peers/friends. And for those of them who are middle school age and have already committed themselves to the sport, they may well still quit because of the issues with being the sole remaining group of trapped players and, again, social dynamics involved with the team shuffles. Friendship and, at a minimum, being able to relate with your peers on a team is huge for adolescents, too, even at competitive levels. This decision is monumentally punitive to these August kids across the youth soccer spectrum and anyone who tries to deny this reality or somehow gloats in the predicament these kids will find themselves in very soon should be ashamed.

Spot on. Hopefully there will be something done to accommodate, but we will see. There are a lot of keyboard warriors on anonymous forums that don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading all this and how boldly parents of September to December kids explain the challenges of being trapped now and the benefits of playing with like-grade peers going forward, alongside the flippant comments made about August kids who will now be both the very youngest on their teams and always forced to play with a grade above them, is maddening. Anyone who thinks that it is reasonable to be stranding these August kids without any September to December grade peers and with no consideration for them to play with their enrolled grade is kidding themselves. These kids won’t enter the sport because they will never be able to do so with their friends/classmates, which is the entry point to any youth sport. If they happen to get lucky and find a local league that lets them enter on a team with grade peers post-fall 2026 (not at all a given with AYSO and US Youth Soccer committed to shift to 9/1), they likely don’t ever make the jump to competitive because they are again not making that jump with any grade peers/friends. And for those of them who are middle school age and have already committed themselves to the sport, they may well still quit because of the issues with being the sole remaining group of trapped players and, again, social dynamics involved with the team shuffles. Friendship and, at a minimum, being able to relate with your peers on a team is huge for adolescents, too, even at competitive levels. This decision is monumentally punitive to these August kids across the youth soccer spectrum and anyone who tries to deny this reality or somehow gloats in the predicament these kids will find themselves in very soon should be ashamed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading all this and how boldly parents of September to December kids explain the challenges of being trapped now and the benefits of playing with like-grade peers going forward, alongside the flippant comments made about August kids who will now be both the very youngest on their teams and always forced to play with a grade above them, is maddening. Anyone who thinks that it is reasonable to be stranding these August kids without any September to December grade peers and with no consideration for them to play with their enrolled grade is kidding themselves. These kids won’t enter the sport because they will never be able to do so with their friends/classmates, which is the entry point to any youth sport. If they happen to get lucky and find a local league that lets them enter on a team with grade peers post-fall 2026 (not at all a given with AYSO and US Youth Soccer committed to shift to 9/1), they likely don’t ever make the jump to competitive because they are again not making that jump with any grade peers/friends. And for those of them who are middle school age and have already committed themselves to the sport, they may well still quit because of the issues with being the sole remaining group of trapped players and, again, social dynamics involved with the team shuffles. Friendship and, at a minimum, being able to relate with your peers on a team is huge for adolescents, too, even at competitive levels. This decision is monumentally punitive to these August kids across the youth soccer spectrum and anyone who tries to deny this reality or somehow gloats in the predicament these kids will find themselves in very soon should be ashamed.

Spot on. Hopefully there will be something done to accommodate, but we will see. There are a lot of keyboard warriors on anonymous forums that don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

According to the joint statement of USYS, US Club and AYSO, 68% of kids live in areas where September 1 is the cutoff for kindergarten. That means nearly 70% of kids born in August will be playing with their school grade (or could have played with their school grade if the parents started the kids when they could have. Everyone knows that the other 32% of August kids will be "trapped" - but the soccer organizations are trying to get this to as close to a school grade competition NATIONALLY as possible. They clearly aren't trying to ensure that everyone gets to play with their school grade. If they were doing that, they'd do grad year - which would help out the many summer birthday kids who don't start "on time."

Most of us do know the difference between a hole in the ground and an anus. That's actually the part that upsets the August parents.

[Anonymous]

Pages 4 and 5 of this are a good summary.

https://issuu.com/usys/docs/march_2025_full_circle?fr=sYTc5OTY3NTY5MTY&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR2NtQajoGySZkb-nC2vOHTUJ2HO1mtvp6rgMr_wJ9qkhhyitqCIsf1sijI_aem_9Th047TZvZGmIY90WoKBkQ

[Anonymous]

To choose a date that only helps 68 percent (and this percentage is overinflated because many August kids in 9/1 or later cutoff states don’t enroll in Kindergarten right upon turning 5) when they could have returned to the historical 8/1 date (which sweeps in all August kids and gets much closer to 100% than 68% that are able to play with their grade) while simultaneously trumpeting the benefits of having kids play soccer with their classmates/friends/same grade peers is cruel and nonsensical. And likewise the parents that champion this outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To choose a date that only helps 68 percent (and this percentage is overinflated because many August kids in 9/1 or later cutoff states don’t enroll in Kindergarten right upon turning 5) when they could have returned to the historical 8/1 date (which sweeps in all August kids and gets much closer to 100% than 68% that are able to play with their grade) while simultaneously trumpeting the benefits of having kids play soccer with their classmates/friends/same grade peers is cruel and nonsensical. And likewise the parents that champion this outcome.

Just a heads up - "100 to 68" is a completely misleading stat. I'll let you figure out why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To choose a date that only helps 68 percent (and this percentage is overinflated because many August kids in 9/1 or later cutoff states don’t enroll in Kindergarten right upon turning 5) when they could have returned to the historical 8/1 date (which sweeps in all August kids and gets much closer to 100% than 68% that are able to play with their grade) while simultaneously trumpeting the benefits of having kids play soccer with their classmates/friends/same grade peers is cruel and nonsensical. And likewise the parents that champion this outcome.

Just a heads up - "100 to 68" is a completely misleading stat. I'll let you figure out why.

I don't blame them for wanting an advantage for their child but to chastise other parents for their own misfortune is ridiculous. The late starting August parents already have the advantage in academics and now they want to have it on the playing fields outside of a school setting. The self-entitlement is astounding.

[Anonymous]

This thread has been taken over by the 8/1 whiners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread has been taken over by the 8/1 whiners.

There's an easy solution. Get your kid promoted in school. Boom - he or she is with his peers and everything is "fair" again.

[Anonymous]

Play up on the D team works too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Play up on the D team works too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all sound so stupid saying Q4 kids have been playing up and Q1 kids have been playing down. They have been playing according to the rules of their age group. Some of you are such whiners. Your kids must be insufferable.

Typical insecure person missing the point…

Um you have made your point crazy girl dad, over and over and over for 700+ pages. It’s just a stupid one. Being the youngest on a team while playing within your own age group is not playing up, and being the oldest on a team, while still playing within one’s own age group is not playing down. The trapped player thing is understandable, but the rest of you whining about how your child has been at such a disadvantage all this time are just that – whiners.

[Anonymous]

I don't have an August kid, but I can't see why most people wouldn't just agree that August kids who started kindergarten in 8/1 cutoff states should get waivers to play with their class. This wouldn't reward redshirting. It doesn't impact competitiveness much even at young ages, as these kids shouldn't be worried about interstate play until they're older anyway. Problem solved.