ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amazing how some poeple think being on an ECNL team with 30 players is better than getting moved to the second team....

The science says 75% of players will now be born From September 1 - January on top teams within 2 cycles.

Good luck to all.

I am so curious about this. As the parent of a child who is likely to be higher ranked team 2 player instead of lower ranked team 1 player, I have been telling myself he will get more playing time! But is that just a consolation thought?

What age group? Most of the first teams won’t be cutting or replacing existing players, just absorbing the team 1 q4 players who move down from the current age group above and losing the a few who are eligible to go to the age group below. So it will likely be relatively smooth. Obviously there are some normal movements from season to season + Naturally roster sizes grow from 7v7 to 9v9 to 11v11 so lots of age groups will still need to expand. It’s really not a big deal except trapped players won’t be trapped and the youngest age first team will be basically all q4s from the first and second team above.

Most first teams will be cutting and replacing existing players.

Nobody will get cut. It will be a big roster, then people will adjust.

It makes sense to me that competitive clubs will add SeptQ4 players -- but that's no guarantee they're better than the existing Jan-Aug ones, especially the older you go up the age groups -- the same as if they were all competing to join the HS team as freshmen.

More boys playing so the pool is deeper, will amount to a huge shake up, less so on girls side because there are fewer players but just as many "high" level teams.

Closing in on 1,000 pages says age cutoff change is going to change the youth soccer career path of all but a handful kid playing soccer going forward.

Change is fun theater!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amazing how some poeple think being on an ECNL team with 30 players is better than getting moved to the second team....

The science says 75% of players will now be born From September 1 - January on top teams within 2 cycles.

Good luck to all.

I am so curious about this. As the parent of a child who is likely to be higher ranked team 2 player instead of lower ranked team 1 player, I have been telling myself he will get more playing time! But is that just a consolation thought?

What age group? Most of the first teams won’t be cutting or replacing existing players, just absorbing the team 1 q4 players who move down from the current age group above and losing the a few who are eligible to go to the age group below. So it will likely be relatively smooth. Obviously there are some normal movements from season to season + Naturally roster sizes grow from 7v7 to 9v9 to 11v11 so lots of age groups will still need to expand. It’s really not a big deal except trapped players won’t be trapped and the youngest age first team will be basically all q4s from the first and second team above.

Most first teams will be cutting and replacing existing players.

Nobody will get cut. It will be a big roster, then people will adjust.

It makes sense to me that competitive clubs will add SeptQ4 players -- but that's no guarantee they're better than the existing Jan-Aug ones, especially the older you go up the age groups -- the same as if they were all competing to join the HS team as freshmen.

More boys playing so the pool is deeper, will amount to a huge shake up, less so on girls side because there are fewer players but just as many "high" level teams.

Closing in on 1,000 pages says age cutoff change is going to change the youth soccer career path of all but a handful kid playing soccer going forward.

Change is fun theater!

Hey, this change was all about growing the game

[Anonymous]

I know this is an atypical situation but curious what others think. My DD is Sept 2012 birthday and currently is a starter on her U13 ECNL team, but she’s not a standout (middle third of roster). She started school early, so she’s already playing with kids in the same grade. With Q4 2011 players likely to move down to her team, maybe she loses her starting spot and/or falls to bottom half of squad. If so, is it better for her to try to stay with the 2011-12 team or drop to the 2012-13 team, knowing that she’d then be playing with kids a grade below her (because she started school early) and off-cycle for recruiting. She wants to play in college, but not P4 is probably not attainable or even a goal (Ivy or D3 more likely goal, depending on her academics).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know this is an atypical situation but curious what others think. My DD is Sept 2012 birthday and currently is a starter on her U13 ECNL team, but she’s not a standout (middle third of roster). She started school early, so she’s already playing with kids in the same grade. With Q4 2011 players likely to move down to her team, maybe she loses her starting spot and/or falls to bottom half of squad. If so, is it better for her to try to stay with the 2011-12 team or drop to the 2012-13 team, knowing that she’d then be playing with kids a grade below her (because she started school early) and off-cycle for recruiting. She wants to play in college, but not P4 is probably not attainable or even a goal (Ivy or D3 more likely goal, depending on her academics).

We are in a similar position. I have asked the question a couple times, but no real feedback (just a “you will be fine because at least DC may have 2 options - play up or down”)…. So I hope to hear what folks have to say!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amazing how some poeple think being on an ECNL team with 30 players is better than getting moved to the second team....

The science says 75% of players will now be born From September 1 - January on top teams within 2 cycles.

Good luck to all.

I am so curious about this. As the parent of a child who is likely to be higher ranked team 2 player instead of lower ranked team 1 player, I have been telling myself he will get more playing time! But is that just a consolation thought?

What age group? Most of the first teams won’t be cutting or replacing existing players, just absorbing the team 1 q4 players who move down from the current age group above and losing the a few who are eligible to go to the age group below. So it will likely be relatively smooth. Obviously there are some normal movements from season to season + Naturally roster sizes grow from 7v7 to 9v9 to 11v11 so lots of age groups will still need to expand. It’s really not a big deal except trapped players won’t be trapped and the youngest age first team will be basically all q4s from the first and second team above.

Most first teams will be cutting and replacing existing players.

Nobody will get cut. It will be a big roster, then people will adjust.

It makes sense to me that competitive clubs will add SeptQ4 players -- but that's no guarantee they're better than the existing Jan-Aug ones, especially the older you go up the age groups -- the same as if they were all competing to join the HS team as freshmen.

Q3:4 players who currently play ECNL or on top Ga clubs will be able to come down and be very competitive for spots. Players on true RL 2nd teams will have a harder time.

Here's where the most interesting part comes in. The best in this group of SeptQ4 on 1st teams already may rather want to stick playing with their current teams rather than playing with younger players, especially since they've played years at that level and the culture of soccer equates playing up as a badge of honor and a sign of you're d1 material. Of course now they'd be playing with some even older kids BUT this would be much like HS, where there's even a greater gap. It'll all be very case by case.

Sure

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amazing how some poeple think being on an ECNL team with 30 players is better than getting moved to the second team....

The science says 75% of players will now be born From September 1 - January on top teams within 2 cycles.

Good luck to all.

I am so curious about this. As the parent of a child who is likely to be higher ranked team 2 player instead of lower ranked team 1 player, I have been telling myself he will get more playing time! But is that just a consolation thought?

What age group? Most of the first teams won’t be cutting or replacing existing players, just absorbing the team 1 q4 players who move down from the current age group above and losing the a few who are eligible to go to the age group below. So it will likely be relatively smooth. Obviously there are some normal movements from season to season + Naturally roster sizes grow from 7v7 to 9v9 to 11v11 so lots of age groups will still need to expand. It’s really not a big deal except trapped players won’t be trapped and the youngest age first team will be basically all q4s from the first and second team above.

Most first teams will be cutting and replacing existing players.

Nobody will get cut. It will be a big roster, then people will adjust.

+1. This is also my guess for how clubs transition to manage parent complaints and keep kids from quitting. The team 1, Q1/2, kids who are currently there largely because of early developer advantages will get cut ... eventually. And Q4 team 2 kids who are good enough to move up to team 1 in the new age group will move up, but they may need to change clubs (or at least threaten it) as the clubs will first just want to slide down team 1/2 players in their current tier. Clubs tend to give the benefit of the doubt to new customers and squeaky wheels. In their mind, Q4 team 2 kids are already stigmatized as second tier, even if they could move down and outplay team 1 from the year behind. So in year one we will have bloated rosters, and then in year two they will tell the excess bench players they are moving down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is an atypical situation but curious what others think. My DD is Sept 2012 birthday and currently is a starter on her U13 ECNL team, but she’s not a standout (middle third of roster). She started school early, so she’s already playing with kids in the same grade. With Q4 2011 players likely to move down to her team, maybe she loses her starting spot and/or falls to bottom half of squad. If so, is it better for her to try to stay with the 2011-12 team or drop to the 2012-13 team, knowing that she’d then be playing with kids a grade below her (because she started school early) and off-cycle for recruiting. She wants to play in college, but not P4 is probably not attainable or even a goal (Ivy or D3 more likely goal, depending on her academics).

We are in a similar position. I have asked the question a couple times, but no real feedback (just a “you will be fine because at least DC may have 2 options - play up or down”)…. So I hope to hear what folks have to say!!!

So your daughter is a 7th grader and her options are to play within the new age cutoff and be playing with a bunch of 6th graders and be misaligned. Or, to play “up” under the new system to be with fellow 7th graders and most of her current team but not a standout?

I think it would be harder to be the oldest and potentially one of the only 7th graders on a team because that team won’t be looked at for recruiting purposes until a year after her peers would have been. Now if she were a 6th grader on a team full of 7th graders (think Aug holdbakcs) then that’s arguably an advantage, but certainly a better spot to be in than the reverse.

I think it’s probably best to try and play “up” with her current team and stay within her same grad year. Playing with grads a year prior might be a disadvantage for recruiting and put her in a bind come her Sr year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ECNL will be giving flexibility for all showcases for Q3/4 players and it sounds like league games will be included as well. How many players per team per game is still being determined. No mandate will change for the age group this will strictly a club based and parent based decision.

Will be part of the updates ECNL rules for 25/26 will come out whenever they typically release their new league policy changes.

On one hand, if you let all Sept 1+ birthdays move down with their SY classmates, you've effectively made the change a year early. But if you limit the number, you could have the odd result of having the best Sept 1+ kids play down, and leave the rest on the BY team. Tough call.

[Anonymous]

Not judging, just wondering the thought process…why the best Q4 to play down?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not judging, just wondering the thought process…why the best Q4 to play down?

How many Jan-Mar kids are playing up now? Very, very few at top teams in top leagues but more normal for smaller clubs and lower leagues.

A top Sept kid on a team will get knocked down the pecking order on a top team in fall 2026 when half the team is born Sept-Dec from the previous year especially for the boys. But it will most likely take a year of realizing this so maybe they try to hang for a year and then drop down in fall 2027.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not judging, just wondering the thought process…why the best Q4 to play down?

Lots of soccer podcasts and talks on this subject. The benefits of playing up/down(with age group).

If a kid is too dominant for their age group then going up definitely can have some added benefits.

I would say it depends on the skill level of each team at their club and if the player can now handle having even older kids competing against them.There is a reason we have age groups for sports after all.

I would try for my kid to play showcases and about with my recruited age group and split league games with each team depending on the level of team you would play against.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not judging, just wondering the thought process…why the best Q4 to play down?

How many Jan-Mar kids are playing up now? Very, very few at top teams in top leagues but more normal for smaller clubs and lower leagues.

A top Sept kid on a team will get knocked down the pecking order on a top team in fall 2026 when half the team is born Sept-Dec from the previous year especially for the boys. But it will most likely take a year of realizing this so maybe they try to hang for a year and then drop down in fall 2027.

I've been in 3 top teams (ECNL/MLS), and no player can play up. So Aug. parents to push the Aug. 1 cut-off agenda by saying Aug. players can always play up is a baseless claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not judging, just wondering the thought process…why the best Q4 to play down?

Number 1- if you drop the best Q4s down, you'd have a better chance of winning the soccer match. That's important to clubs because it makes the coaches look good and the parents are usually happier.

Number 2 - if Q4s would be a bigger contributor on the younger team, a rational Q4 parent would want the kid to do that. But if too many want it, you have to pick based on merit right?


Some clubs may keep it all status quo for 25/26, and that's fine. Some people just like to win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not judging, just wondering the thought process…why the best Q4 to play down?

How many Jan-Mar kids are playing up now? Very, very few at top teams in top leagues but more normal for smaller clubs and lower leagues.

A top Sept kid on a team will get knocked down the pecking order on a top team in fall 2026 when half the team is born Sept-Dec from the previous year especially for the boys. But it will most likely take a year of realizing this so maybe they try to hang for a year and then drop down in fall 2027.

I've been in 3 top teams (ECNL/MLS), and no player can play up. So Aug. parents to push the Aug. 1 cut-off agenda by saying Aug. players can always play up is a baseless claim.

That's your experience. Not all clubs are the same. They can still play up, happens all the time, especially on the girls side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not judging, just wondering the thought process…why the best Q4 to play down?

How many Jan-Mar kids are playing up now? Very, very few at top teams in top leagues but more normal for smaller clubs and lower leagues.

A top Sept kid on a team will get knocked down the pecking order on a top team in fall 2026 when half the team is born Sept-Dec from the previous year especially for the boys. But it will most likely take a year of realizing this so maybe they try to hang for a year and then drop down in fall 2027.

I've been in 3 top teams (ECNL/MLS), and no player can play up. So Aug. parents to push the Aug. 1 cut-off agenda by saying Aug. players can always play up is a baseless claim.

That's your experience. Not all clubs are the same. They can still play up, happens all the time, especially on the girls side.

"They" mean "WHO?" 70% of Aug. players have to play up to stay in their grade with an 8/1 cutoff. Is that possible? I pointed that out in my previous post. Don't tweak my post for your own agenda.