ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Help me understand then what the harm would have been to move the cutoff to 8/1?

There would be more misalignment . It's very clear.

How?

But I agree we're beating a dead horse. It is what it is. But if you had to pick the lesser of two bad options, it would seem picking the option that gave kids the best opportunity to be aligned with their grade makes the most sense. They missed the mark with that.

The decision has been made. Can we please stop discussing the 9/1 v. 8/1 cutoff decision? It's over.

Not if you want to get to 1000.

[Anonymous]

Has ECNL posted anything official yet about what dates they will use? I was told they would send something out end of spring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has ECNL posted anything official yet about what dates they will use? I was told they would send something out end of spring.

They don't have to. They are under the US Club umbrella - and US Club officially said it would be 9/1 to 8/31 beginning in the fall of 2026. ECNL and US Club are effectively the same thing.

[Anonymous]

I'm still waiting on GA??? Any updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has ECNL posted anything official yet about what dates they will use? I was told they would send something out end of spring.

They don't have to. They are under the US Club umbrella - and US Club officially said it would be 9/1 to 8/31 beginning in the fall of 2026. ECNL and US Club are effectively the same thing.

They actually do have to since they already have exceptions built in. Their specific instruction will impact plenty of families/teams.

[Anonymous]

US club had to take the 9/1 stance because they know parents would’ve looked for the advantage at the 8/1 cutoff for their kids to have the edge. Parents were already talking about playing down before the 9/1 cutoff at my daughter’s club. I do feel bad for the misaligned August kids. 8/1 cutoff would’ve continued teams not having their full squads during 8th grade and senior year.

[Anonymous]

In 5 years it’ll just be GY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Help me understand then what the harm would have been to move the cutoff to 8/1?

There would be more misalignment . It's very clear.

How?

Look at the math. With 9/1 there are less misaligned kids. Saying but but they can play up does not eliminate that they are misaligned.

So if it were 8/1, the misaligned kids would be the Aug. kids who started "on time" in the 9/1 states. In that case, those Aug. kids would be stuck in a grouping with kids a grade below. But, they would be able to play up with their grade.

With a 9/1 cutoff, the misaligned kids would be the Aug. kids who started "late" in a 9/1 state. In that case, those Aug. kids would be stuck in a grouping with kids a grade above them. But, they would not have the option to play down with their correct grade.

With 9/1, the misaligned kids don't have the ability to play down a grade.

With 8/1, the misaligned kids would have the ability to play up with their grade.

So it may be correct to say you have less misaligned kids with a 9/1 cutoff (how much less I still don't know), but it is a fact that misaligned kids at a 9/1 cutoff have no option to play with their grade. While the misaligned kids with a 8/1 cutoff do.

But I agree we're beating a dead horse. It is what it is. But if you had to pick the lesser of two bad options, it would seem picking the option that gave kids the best opportunity to be aligned with their grade makes the most sense. They missed the mark with that.

My son is a September baby and he has no option to play with his grade. We are in a 10/1 cutoff district. I hear everyone say “but he can play up”. Which is theoretically true if he is a top player and his club allows it. But who knows what will really happen. And if he ends up playing with the school grade below him (as the rule would require), he isn’t “trapped” in the sense many people are using on this chain, but presumably he would also miss out on showcases for his recruiting year, because his team will be younger than him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In 5 years it’ll just be GY

In 5 years is ECNL and GY even going to be relevant? Is GA the new DA?

[Anonymous]

Will mls and ga.change to SY?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 5 years it’ll just be GY

In 5 years is ECNL and GY even going to be relevant? Is GA the new DA?

Lol sure

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will mls and ga.change to SY?

I heard from a source that they will be switching too…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Help me understand then what the harm would have been to move the cutoff to 8/1?

There would be more misalignment . It's very clear.

How?

Look at the math. With 9/1 there are less misaligned kids. Saying but but they can play up does not eliminate that they are misaligned.

So if it were 8/1, the misaligned kids would be the Aug. kids who started "on time" in the 9/1 states. In that case, those Aug. kids would be stuck in a grouping with kids a grade below. But, they would be able to play up with their grade.

With a 9/1 cutoff, the misaligned kids would be the Aug. kids who started "late" in a 9/1 state. In that case, those Aug. kids would be stuck in a grouping with kids a grade above them. But, they would not have the option to play down with their correct grade.

With 9/1, the misaligned kids don't have the ability to play down a grade.

With 8/1, the misaligned kids would have the ability to play up with their grade.

So it may be correct to say you have less misaligned kids with a 9/1 cutoff (how much less I still don't know), but it is a fact that misaligned kids at a 9/1 cutoff have no option to play with their grade. While the misaligned kids with a 8/1 cutoff do.

But I agree we're beating a dead horse. It is what it is. But if you had to pick the lesser of two bad options, it would seem picking the option that gave kids the best opportunity to be aligned with their grade makes the most sense. They missed the mark with that.

My son is a September baby and he has no option to play with his grade. We are in a 10/1 cutoff district. I hear everyone say “but he can play up”. Which is theoretically true if he is a top player and his club allows it. But who knows what will really happen. And if he ends up playing with the school grade below him (as the rule would require), he isn’t “trapped” in the sense many people are using on this chain, but presumably he would also miss out on showcases for his recruiting year, because his team will be younger than him.

Hopefully parents and coaches complain and ECNL just goes grad year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will mls and ga.change to SY?

I heard from a source that they will be switching too…

Only makes sense. Why do things differently? That’s not how soccer works in America.

[Anonymous]

There are so many crappy fact patterns created under a SY structure with a strict 12-month birthdate range. First and foremost it is terrible for the outlier kids boxed out from playing with grade, and practically speaking, bad for clubs (lost players = lost $$$; hassle for clubs and coaches to deal with the parents demanding a solution for the outlier kids) and bad for the US Soccer talent pipeline. GY with guardrails is the only viable way long term. Or stick with BY where at least the grade division is more balanced with 7 months (Jan - July) and 5 months (Aug - Dec).