ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

Im ok with GY for HS Seniors.

Im not ok with GY for HS age in general. But this would never happen. If GY was implemented at the club level they'd lose players left and right when they see it's not worth playing when all the top players are playing down. Clubs want more players to make more money not less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

9/1+30 makes it easy for coaches and clubs to group players because only players in a certain grade will be in that group. (Unless they were held back in school. In this case they have to play with their age)

9/1+30 makes things almost as easy as BY is to group players. With the added benefit of no trapped players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

Your over complicating it, it doesn't matter if they held an August birthday back in a school district that has a later cutoff that is irrelevant. All that matters is your current grade and age. Either way this would work if everyone followed the same set of rules. This is not going to be something that ECNL implements on their own.

Allowing hold backs ruins the integrity of the system and makes it a nonstarter for those that want an ethically morally robust system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

Im ok with GY for HS Seniors.

Im not ok with GY for HS age in general. But this would never happen. If GY was implemented at the club level they'd lose players left and right when they see it's not worth playing when all the top players are playing down. Clubs want more players to make more money not less.

Like how basketball, football, lacrosse are losing players left and right?… I agree GY is not a good idea but players will play regardless because they like to play.

GY wouldn’t be a take over of holdbacks it would be less than 5% of players because most parents and kids do not want to be held back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

If it were only that simple. Genuine birth certificates are produced by government agencies, bear a unique official seal, registrar's signature, and security features like watermarks or micro-printing. Schools don't give out official documents on what grade a kid is in and a registration system couldn't accept willy nilly papers like report cards or random novelty student IDs. I'm afraid card registration systems wouldn't work so then anyone could cheat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

Im ok with GY for HS Seniors.

Im not ok with GY for HS age in general. But this would never happen. If GY was implemented at the club level they'd lose players left and right when they see it's not worth playing when all the top players are playing down. Clubs want more players to make more money not less.

I emailed ECNL commissioner already because I have a son with a July bday and we started late for kindergarten.

He said all 1st year high school seniors will be eligible to play ECNL for their senior season.

Idk what 1st year seniors means?

But sounds like GY for U19s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

Why would ECNL make a rule like this.

Because nobody wants to see kids get screwed when they're olders just because parents want wins as youngers. Also college coaches want all players on the field at a game to be graduating the same year. This makes it easier for them to evaluate talent.

This is an argument for straight grade year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

Im ok with GY for HS Seniors.

Im not ok with GY for HS age in general. But this would never happen. If GY was implemented at the club level they'd lose players left and right when they see it's not worth playing when all the top players are playing down. Clubs want more players to make more money not less.

Like how basketball, football, lacrosse are losing players left and right?… I agree GY is not a good idea but players will play regardless because they like to play.

GY wouldn’t be a take over of holdbacks it would be less than 5% of players because most parents and kids do not want to be held back.

Football, Basketball, and Lacrosse are all more closely aligned with HS than Club.

Soccer is more closely aligned with Club than HS. Clubs make more money by separating players at every age/grade and creating multiple levels of play.

GY would change soccer into another HS controlled sport. Im sure the private schools would love it because they could recruit and encourage playing down. I mean "reclassing"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

This plus system only solves this if it is like plus 365. That's why it is more fair to have age groups that are only 365 days without exceptions, even for the holdbacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

Im ok with GY for HS Seniors.

Im not ok with GY for HS age in general. But this would never happen. If GY was implemented at the club level they'd lose players left and right when they see it's not worth playing when all the top players are playing down. Clubs want more players to make more money not less.

Like how basketball, football, lacrosse are losing players left and right?… I agree GY is not a good idea but players will play regardless because they like to play.

GY wouldn’t be a take over of holdbacks it would be less than 5% of players because most parents and kids do not want to be held back.

Football, Basketball, and Lacrosse are all more closely aligned with HS than Club.

Soccer is more closely aligned with Club than HS. Clubs make more money by separating players at every age/grade and creating multiple levels of play.

GY would change soccer into another HS controlled sport. Im sure the private schools would love it because they could recruit and encourage playing down. I mean "reclassing"

Not on a phone but, 100% agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

Why would ECNL make a rule like this.

Because nobody wants to see kids get screwed when they're olders just because parents want wins as youngers. Also college coaches want all players on the field at a game to be graduating the same year. This makes it easier for them to evaluate talent.

This is an argument for straight grade year.

No it's not

9/1+30 requires a valid birth cert and proof of age. You can hold your kid back all you want but they'll be forced to play with their age according to their birth cert.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

Im ok with GY for HS Seniors.

Im not ok with GY for HS age in general. But this would never happen. If GY was implemented at the club level they'd lose players left and right when they see it's not worth playing when all the top players are playing down. Clubs want more players to make more money not less.

I emailed ECNL commissioner already because I have a son with a July bday and we started late for kindergarten.

He said all 1st year high school seniors will be eligible to play ECNL for their senior season.

Idk what 1st year seniors means?

But sounds like GY for U19s

It’s always been GY for seniors (even if they didn’t call it that) and it should be. Anyone in high school should be able to play club soccer. Age groups are usually u17 then right to u19 to accommodate for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

This plus system only solves this if it is like plus 365. That's why it is more fair to have age groups that are only 365 days without exceptions, even for the holdbacks.

9/1+30 Holdback or exceptions as you call them can only occur between 9/1 and 8/1 of that year and only with proof of grade.

See how it works? You get a 365 window, no playing down, and no trapped players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

9/1+30 makes it easy for coaches and clubs to group players because only players in a certain grade will be in that group. (Unless they were held back in school. In this case they have to play with their age)

9/1+30 makes things almost as easy as BY is to group players. With the added benefit of no trapped players.

9/1 or 8/1 which is the winner without exceptions is easiest and does its best to stop cheating by not allowing kids more than a full year older than other players to play down by only having kids in a 365 day cohort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages. It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages. On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it. Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team. They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers. They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced. Big advantage.

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.

If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up. I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.

Not true at all, the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group. They don't want to sign up for that.

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase.

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.

Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.

Not true. My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday. She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids. She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade. Plus, her friends are in her current team. She will choose to stay with her team. There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team. None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade. None. If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).

Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade.

That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.

I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".

Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.

It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.

However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.

It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30

Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?

Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.

Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.

Ohh I agree with this. That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this. But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care. The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment. And even then they wouldn't care until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.

This plus system only solves this if it is like plus 365. That's why it is more fair to have age groups that are only 365 days without exceptions, even for the holdbacks.

9/1+30 Holdback or exceptions as you call them can only occur between 9/1 and 8/1 of that year and only with proof of grade.

See how it works? You get a 365 window, no playing down, and no trapped players.

That is more than 365. It is 365 plus 30 or 60.