ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Lots of parents (and kids) obsess over “playing up”, but there are many documented cases of a player benefitting greatly from playing down a year. In fact, several current and former members of the English NT played down when they were 15, 16 years old.

If you happen to be a very late developer (e.g., a 15 year old with the body of a 13 year old) with top technical and tactical skills, playing up or even at your age group could be detrimental to your development.

I once watched an MLS Next U15 match where one team was filled with very developed players. They had multiple 6+ feet +
170+ lbs + muscular players with a HORRIFIC touch and ball control. They could get away with the bad touches because they had the physical capacity to compensate. A highly skilled underdeveloped kid would stand no chance against these players, but this doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be able to eventually compete against these players.

I think “highly skilled” and “underdeveloped” need to be defined here. But assuming “underdeveloped” means younger / smaller.

If that is the case, you’re probably watching crap soccer and highly skilled is probably, “the cream of the crap.” Will a bigger / older kid be tough for a smaller skilled kid, sure. But “stand no chance” is silly. See Barca v Man United UCL finals. See Argentina v France WC24, see Lisandro Martinez v Haaland, etc etc etc.

Many truly “highly skilled” players play up 2 years, and do just fine.

First, professionals playing at Barca are fully developed- so that is not a comparison.

The idea that a u15 team is playing great soccer is laughable. I love how parents believe their team plays smart soccer bc they pass it around the back before playing a long ball. I have watched the top MLSnext and ECNL teams in the U14-U15 age group. their soccer iq and technical ability is generally crap. Lets be honest, the smaller technical kid will not win you games, so he is not going to be played as much, if at all. Yes, in 5 years that kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team...but noone cares...and most of the kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. That kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team in 5 years...but noone cares...and most of the technical kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. Hence, why our national team always sucks. Its 'pay to play' and 'play to win'.....there is no focus on development...and no, your club is not an exception.

Agreed. It takes a very long time before an athleticism gap can be bridged with technical skills and soccer IQ if you prioritize winning.

I can speak to the play at U13 ECNL/GA. They are *developing* skills, and some players are more skilled than others, but they aren't there yet. The teams that win the most, and the highest ranked teams from other areas who come to our tournaments follow the same pattern. Two ultra fast wings, two ultra fast outside backs, two huge/tough center backs, a striker with a powerful shot, midfielders who win balls, and one (maybe two) technical center mids. The play is the same on repeat. Backs recover the ball and consolidate possession among them, pass to the technical center mid, center mid makes a couple good moves to create space, launches a long diagonal ball to a fast wing, wing goes to goal if ahead or to end line if not, cross to striker. The other team does the same back at you. There is usually ONE technical, high IQ player on each team, and a bunch of athletes who are building their technical skills. There are teams with more technical players on the field, trying to play more creatively, and they lose.

If you aren't an athletic early developer, as as middle-schooler, you are going to struggle getting experience on good teams and developing a confident self-image as a player no matter how skilled you are.

[Anonymous]

There is no podcast today yet.

[Anonymous]

For those that didn't see the other message on DCUM sounds like McLean showed some cards with an announcement that implies MLSN and GA were going SY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those that didn't see the other message on DCUM sounds like McLean showed some cards with an announcement that implies MLSN and GA were going SY

No, it just relays what USCS releases. So it only applies to younger. We are still waiting for the official announcement from ECNL, GA, and MLS. I hope it can come soon.

[Anonymous]

Is there any real news?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those that didn't see the other message on DCUM sounds like McLean showed some cards with an announcement that implies MLSN and GA were going SY

No, it just relays what USCS releases. So it only applies to younger. We are still waiting for the official announcement from ECNL, GA, and MLS. I hope it can come soon.

In the email, MLSN/GA, NAL/Aspire are specifically mentioned in the FAQ. It does not directly say those are changing to SY, but it doesn't sound like it only applies to younger either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those that didn't see the other message on DCUM sounds like McLean showed some cards with an announcement that implies MLSN and GA were going SY

Link?

[Anonymous]

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1264315.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Lots of parents (and kids) obsess over “playing up”, but there are many documented cases of a player benefitting greatly from playing down a year. In fact, several current and former members of the English NT played down when they were 15, 16 years old.

If you happen to be a very late developer (e.g., a 15 year old with the body of a 13 year old) with top technical and tactical skills, playing up or even at your age group could be detrimental to your development.

I once watched an MLS Next U15 match where one team was filled with very developed players. They had multiple 6+ feet +
170+ lbs + muscular players with a HORRIFIC touch and ball control. They could get away with the bad touches because they had the physical capacity to compensate. A highly skilled underdeveloped kid would stand no chance against these players, but this doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be able to eventually compete against these players.

I think “highly skilled” and “underdeveloped” need to be defined here. But assuming “underdeveloped” means younger / smaller.

If that is the case, you’re probably watching crap soccer and highly skilled is probably, “the cream of the crap.” Will a bigger / older kid be tough for a smaller skilled kid, sure. But “stand no chance” is silly. See Barca v Man United UCL finals. See Argentina v France WC24, see Lisandro Martinez v Haaland, etc etc etc.

Many truly “highly skilled” players play up 2 years, and do just fine.

First, professionals playing at Barca are fully developed- so that is not a comparison.

The idea that a u15 team is playing great soccer is laughable. I love how parents believe their team plays smart soccer bc they pass it around the back before playing a long ball. I have watched the top MLSnext and ECNL teams in the U14-U15 age group. their soccer iq and technical ability is generally crap. Lets be honest, the smaller technical kid will not win you games, so he is not going to be played as much, if at all. Yes, in 5 years that kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team...but noone cares...and most of the kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. That kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team in 5 years...but noone cares...and most of the technical kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. Hence, why our national team always sucks. Its 'pay to play' and 'play to win'.....there is no focus on development...and no, your club is not an exception.

Agreed. It takes a very long time before an athleticism gap can be bridged with technical skills and soccer IQ if you prioritize winning.

I can speak to the play at U13 ECNL/GA. They are *developing* skills, and some players are more skilled than others, but they aren't there yet. The teams that win the most, and the highest ranked teams from other areas who come to our tournaments follow the same pattern. Two ultra fast wings, two ultra fast outside backs, two huge/tough center backs, a striker with a powerful shot, midfielders who win balls, and one (maybe two) technical center mids. The play is the same on repeat. Backs recover the ball and consolidate possession among them, pass to the technical center mid, center mid makes a couple good moves to create space, launches a long diagonal ball to a fast wing, wing goes to goal if ahead or to end line if not, cross to striker. The other team does the same back at you. There is usually ONE technical, high IQ player on each team, and a bunch of athletes who are building their technical skills. There are teams with more technical players on the field, trying to play more creatively, and they lose.

If you aren't an athletic early developer, as as middle-schooler, you are going to struggle getting experience on good teams and developing a confident self-image as a player no matter how skilled you are.

You described trinity rodman, and basically the “highest level” college soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Lots of parents (and kids) obsess over “playing up”, but there are many documented cases of a player benefitting greatly from playing down a year. In fact, several current and former members of the English NT played down when they were 15, 16 years old.

If you happen to be a very late developer (e.g., a 15 year old with the body of a 13 year old) with top technical and tactical skills, playing up or even at your age group could be detrimental to your development.

I once watched an MLS Next U15 match where one team was filled with very developed players. They had multiple 6+ feet +
170+ lbs + muscular players with a HORRIFIC touch and ball control. They could get away with the bad touches because they had the physical capacity to compensate. A highly skilled underdeveloped kid would stand no chance against these players, but this doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be able to eventually compete against these players.

I think “highly skilled” and “underdeveloped” need to be defined here. But assuming “underdeveloped” means younger / smaller.

If that is the case, you’re probably watching crap soccer and highly skilled is probably, “the cream of the crap.” Will a bigger / older kid be tough for a smaller skilled kid, sure. But “stand no chance” is silly. See Barca v Man United UCL finals. See Argentina v France WC24, see Lisandro Martinez v Haaland, etc etc etc.

Many truly “highly skilled” players play up 2 years, and do just fine.

First, professionals playing at Barca are fully developed- so that is not a comparison.

The idea that a u15 team is playing great soccer is laughable. I love how parents believe their team plays smart soccer bc they pass it around the back before playing a long ball. I have watched the top MLSnext and ECNL teams in the U14-U15 age group. their soccer iq and technical ability is generally crap. Lets be honest, the smaller technical kid will not win you games, so he is not going to be played as much, if at all. Yes, in 5 years that kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team...but noone cares...and most of the kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. That kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team in 5 years...but noone cares...and most of the technical kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. Hence, why our national team always sucks. Its 'pay to play' and 'play to win'.....there is no focus on development...and no, your club is not an exception.

Agreed. It takes a very long time before an athleticism gap can be bridged with technical skills and soccer IQ if you prioritize winning.

I can speak to the play at U13 ECNL/GA. They are *developing* skills, and some players are more skilled than others, but they aren't there yet. The teams that win the most, and the highest ranked teams from other areas who come to our tournaments follow the same pattern. Two ultra fast wings, two ultra fast outside backs, two huge/tough center backs, a striker with a powerful shot, midfielders who win balls, and one (maybe two) technical center mids. The play is the same on repeat. Backs recover the ball and consolidate possession among them, pass to the technical center mid, center mid makes a couple good moves to create space, launches a long diagonal ball to a fast wing, wing goes to goal if ahead or to end line if not, cross to striker. The other team does the same back at you. There is usually ONE technical, high IQ player on each team, and a bunch of athletes who are building their technical skills. There are teams with more technical players on the field, trying to play more creatively, and they lose.

If you aren't an athletic early developer, as as middle-schooler, you are going to struggle getting experience on good teams and developing a confident self-image as a player no matter how skilled you are.

You described trinity rodman, and basically the “highest level” college soccer.

It's a shame that highly athletic players like Rodman don't get credit for actually how technically skilled they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Lots of parents (and kids) obsess over “playing up”, but there are many documented cases of a player benefitting greatly from playing down a year. In fact, several current and former members of the English NT played down when they were 15, 16 years old.

If you happen to be a very late developer (e.g., a 15 year old with the body of a 13 year old) with top technical and tactical skills, playing up or even at your age group could be detrimental to your development.

I once watched an MLS Next U15 match where one team was filled with very developed players. They had multiple 6+ feet +
170+ lbs + muscular players with a HORRIFIC touch and ball control. They could get away with the bad touches because they had the physical capacity to compensate. A highly skilled underdeveloped kid would stand no chance against these players, but this doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be able to eventually compete against these players.

I think “highly skilled” and “underdeveloped” need to be defined here. But assuming “underdeveloped” means younger / smaller.

If that is the case, you’re probably watching crap soccer and highly skilled is probably, “the cream of the crap.” Will a bigger / older kid be tough for a smaller skilled kid, sure. But “stand no chance” is silly. See Barca v Man United UCL finals. See Argentina v France WC24, see Lisandro Martinez v Haaland, etc etc etc.

Many truly “highly skilled” players play up 2 years, and do just fine.

First, professionals playing at Barca are fully developed- so that is not a comparison.

The idea that a u15 team is playing great soccer is laughable. I love how parents believe their team plays smart soccer bc they pass it around the back before playing a long ball. I have watched the top MLSnext and ECNL teams in the U14-U15 age group. their soccer iq and technical ability is generally crap. Lets be honest, the smaller technical kid will not win you games, so he is not going to be played as much, if at all. Yes, in 5 years that kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team...but noone cares...and most of the kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. That kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team in 5 years...but noone cares...and most of the technical kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. Hence, why our national team always sucks. Its 'pay to play' and 'play to win'.....there is no focus on development...and no, your club is not an exception.

Agreed. It takes a very long time before an athleticism gap can be bridged with technical skills and soccer IQ if you prioritize winning.

I can speak to the play at U13 ECNL/GA. They are *developing* skills, and some players are more skilled than others, but they aren't there yet. The teams that win the most, and the highest ranked teams from other areas who come to our tournaments follow the same pattern. Two ultra fast wings, two ultra fast outside backs, two huge/tough center backs, a striker with a powerful shot, midfielders who win balls, and one (maybe two) technical center mids. The play is the same on repeat. Backs recover the ball and consolidate possession among them, pass to the technical center mid, center mid makes a couple good moves to create space, launches a long diagonal ball to a fast wing, wing goes to goal if ahead or to end line if not, cross to striker. The other team does the same back at you. There is usually ONE technical, high IQ player on each team, and a bunch of athletes who are building their technical skills. There are teams with more technical players on the field, trying to play more creatively, and they lose.

If you aren't an athletic early developer, as as middle-schooler, you are going to struggle getting experience on good teams and developing a confident self-image as a player no matter how skilled you are.

You described trinity rodman, and basically the “highest level” college soccer.

It's a shame that highly athletic players like Rodman don't get credit for actually how technically skilled they are.

What????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Lots of parents (and kids) obsess over “playing up”, but there are many documented cases of a player benefitting greatly from playing down a year. In fact, several current and former members of the English NT played down when they were 15, 16 years old.

If you happen to be a very late developer (e.g., a 15 year old with the body of a 13 year old) with top technical and tactical skills, playing up or even at your age group could be detrimental to your development.

I once watched an MLS Next U15 match where one team was filled with very developed players. They had multiple 6+ feet +
170+ lbs + muscular players with a HORRIFIC touch and ball control. They could get away with the bad touches because they had the physical capacity to compensate. A highly skilled underdeveloped kid would stand no chance against these players, but this doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be able to eventually compete against these players.

I think “highly skilled” and “underdeveloped” need to be defined here. But assuming “underdeveloped” means younger / smaller.

If that is the case, you’re probably watching crap soccer and highly skilled is probably, “the cream of the crap.” Will a bigger / older kid be tough for a smaller skilled kid, sure. But “stand no chance” is silly. See Barca v Man United UCL finals. See Argentina v France WC24, see Lisandro Martinez v Haaland, etc etc etc.

Many truly “highly skilled” players play up 2 years, and do just fine.

First, professionals playing at Barca are fully developed- so that is not a comparison.

The idea that a u15 team is playing great soccer is laughable. I love how parents believe their team plays smart soccer bc they pass it around the back before playing a long ball. I have watched the top MLSnext and ECNL teams in the U14-U15 age group. their soccer iq and technical ability is generally crap. Lets be honest, the smaller technical kid will not win you games, so he is not going to be played as much, if at all. Yes, in 5 years that kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team...but noone cares...and most of the kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. That kid will prolly be way above everyone on the team in 5 years...but noone cares...and most of the technical kids will quit by that time or be relegated to play crap soccer. Hence, why our national team always sucks. Its 'pay to play' and 'play to win'.....there is no focus on development...and no, your club is not an exception.

Agreed. It takes a very long time before an athleticism gap can be bridged with technical skills and soccer IQ if you prioritize winning.

I can speak to the play at U13 ECNL/GA. They are *developing* skills, and some players are more skilled than others, but they aren't there yet. The teams that win the most, and the highest ranked teams from other areas who come to our tournaments follow the same pattern. Two ultra fast wings, two ultra fast outside backs, two huge/tough center backs, a striker with a powerful shot, midfielders who win balls, and one (maybe two) technical center mids. The play is the same on repeat. Backs recover the ball and consolidate possession among them, pass to the technical center mid, center mid makes a couple good moves to create space, launches a long diagonal ball to a fast wing, wing goes to goal if ahead or to end line if not, cross to striker. The other team does the same back at you. There is usually ONE technical, high IQ player on each team, and a bunch of athletes who are building their technical skills. There are teams with more technical players on the field, trying to play more creatively, and they lose.

If you aren't an athletic early developer, as as middle-schooler, you are going to struggle getting experience on good teams and developing a confident self-image as a player no matter how skilled you are.

You described trinity rodman, and basically the “highest level” college soccer.

It's a shame that highly athletic players like Rodman don't get credit for actually how technically skilled they are.

What????

Reread the pp

[Anonymous]

New podcast talks about everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New podcast talks about everything.

Literally talks about nothing

[Anonymous]

BY crowd about to go into meltdown…