ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So does your DOC create teams with the thought that something is in the works for 25/26?

It will be a big roster. They will take any Q3/Q4 without cutting any Q1/Q2

This, if true, is not the blessing Q3/Q4 parents think it is. Big rosters mean limited minutes, and “development projects” get less than their fair share. This sounds like a recipe to be underdeveloped in 26/27 when you’re supposed to be the most developed in your age group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DOC/Coach at my club emailed ECNL rep about age group changes. They did respond and say they are getting plans in place to change up the age groups. But when he asked for 25/26 or 26/27 there has been no response.

He has not followed up but if it was a hard NO for 25/26 they would have said that.

He believes something is in the works.

The most important question is who are "they."? My understanding is that "they" isn't only US Club or ECNL - and it's USYS/USCS/AYSO who are working on a universal set of rules to allow some/all Q4s play down next year - at the club's discretion. Hopefully that group of people can agree on something good before we get too far into May.

USYS largest league already posted they are transitioning to 9/1 in Spring 26. Most teams will be formed and play up for fall have the option to stay as they are.

Where is it the USYS is starting spring 26???

It’s not. PP is wishcasting. One rec league in Cali, that is sanctioned by USYS, has said they are going 9/1 in spring 26.

[Anonymous]

Fall 2026 SY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DOC/Coach at my club emailed ECNL rep about age group changes. They did respond and say they are getting plans in place to change up the age groups. But when he asked for 25/26 or 26/27 there has been no response.

He has not followed up but if it was a hard NO for 25/26 they would have said that.

He believes something is in the works.

The most important question is who are "they."? My understanding is that "they" isn't only US Club or ECNL - and it's USYS/USCS/AYSO who are working on a universal set of rules to allow some/all Q4s play down next year - at the club's discretion. Hopefully that group of people can agree on something good before we get too far into May.

USYS largest league already posted they are transitioning to 9/1 in Spring 26. Most teams will be formed and play up for fall have the option to stay as they are.

Where is it the USYS is starting spring 26???

It’s not. PP is wishcasting. One rec league in Cali, that is sanctioned by USYS, has said they are going 9/1 in spring 26.

They are not just a rec league and many ECNL clubs have their other comp teams in this youth league.

But if cal south can do it that means they have USYS blessing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DOC/Coach at my club emailed ECNL rep about age group changes. They did respond and say they are getting plans in place to change up the age groups. But when he asked for 25/26 or 26/27 there has been no response.

He has not followed up but if it was a hard NO for 25/26 they would have said that.

He believes something is in the works.

The most important question is who are "they."? My understanding is that "they" isn't only US Club or ECNL - and it's USYS/USCS/AYSO who are working on a universal set of rules to allow some/all Q4s play down next year - at the club's discretion. Hopefully that group of people can agree on something good before we get too far into May.

USYS largest league already posted they are transitioning to 9/1 in Spring 26. Most teams will be formed and play up for fall have the option to stay as they are.

Where is it the USYS is starting spring 26???

If cal south can do, then ECNL can do too. BY parents hope nothing change in 25/26.

It’s not. PP is wishcasting. One rec league in Cali, that is sanctioned by USYS, has said they are going 9/1 in spring 26.

They are not just a rec league and many ECNL clubs have their other comp teams in this youth league.

But if cal south can do it that means they have USYS blessing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL isn’t going to give clubs with late tryouts an advantage over clubs/states that have already held tryouts by announcing any changes for 25/26. Someone claims there’s “top secret” info ECNL is going to allow “flexibility” for 25/26, but there’s no way that’s being announced until ECNL tryouts have concluded.

It seems to be accepted that once clubs hold tryouts - rosters can't be adjusted and things are set in stone. That may not be a safe assumption. Just sayin.

Because of the new RL league rosters will not be set in stone. This will give the clubs the ability to move players up or down from week to week. Also ECNL allows rosters up to 30 only 18 are game eligible nothing is set in stone with ECNL.

This is true. Clubs that have both RL and NL are supposed to treat the age groups like a pool.

That is absolutely not how it works. At least not here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL isn’t going to give clubs with late tryouts an advantage over clubs/states that have already held tryouts by announcing any changes for 25/26. Someone claims there’s “top secret” info ECNL is going to allow “flexibility” for 25/26, but there’s no way that’s being announced until ECNL tryouts have concluded.

It seems to be accepted that once clubs hold tryouts - rosters can't be adjusted and things are set in stone. That may not be a safe assumption. Just sayin.

Because of the new RL league rosters will not be set in stone. This will give the clubs the ability to move players up or down from week to week. Also ECNL allows rosters up to 30 only 18 are game eligible nothing is set in stone with ECNL.

This is true. Clubs that have both RL and NL are supposed to treat the age groups like a pool.

That is absolutely not how it works. At least not here.

That’s exactly how it works at my kid’s club and the other top ECNL clubs in her region - they treat the age group like a pool and some girls are moved on and off the top team throughout the season.

[Anonymous]

Our ecnl team hasn’t seen a regional player since tryouts last year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL isn’t going to give clubs with late tryouts an advantage over clubs/states that have already held tryouts by announcing any changes for 25/26. Someone claims there’s “top secret” info ECNL is going to allow “flexibility” for 25/26, but there’s no way that’s being announced until ECNL tryouts have concluded.

It seems to be accepted that once clubs hold tryouts - rosters can't be adjusted and things are set in stone. That may not be a safe assumption. Just sayin.

Because of the new RL league rosters will not be set in stone. This will give the clubs the ability to move players up or down from week to week. Also ECNL allows rosters up to 30 only 18 are game eligible nothing is set in stone with ECNL.

This is true. Clubs that have both RL and NL are supposed to treat the age groups like a pool.

That is absolutely not how it works. At least not here.

At VDA it is, it's normal there for NL players to go down to RL if they're at the bottom end of the roster to get playing time, especially around U15 where their rosters get pretty big. And maybe on some RARE occasion will an RL player go up to NL.

[Anonymous]

This isn’t even a SY vs BY debate. This is a forum with delusional Q4 ECNL RL or second team parents who think this means their kid is going to move to the NL team an age group below and take the place of the existing Q1 majority. Which sorry, is just not happening on the girls side. Full stop. The Q4 ECNL NL first team kids will move down an age group and be leaders on the team and Q1 ECNL NL Parents from the current teams are EXCITED for that because the team will be better. They will lose their Current ECNL - NL Q4s to the first team below and it’s basically a wash on roster spots.

I think the theory of the delusional Q4 ECNL Second Team parent is that RAE negatively impacted my kid (which is true) and now it’s going to be in my kids favor (which is not true).

Part of RAE is that we create a self fulfilling prophecy….Q1 kids aren’t actually better soccer players BECAUSE they were born in Q1, they are better soccer players because at the youngest age they had developmental advantages over their peers and made the top team. AND THEN…the top team got better training, coaching, competition and yes, they become better and more skilled soccer players. Which is why on the girls side of almost every ECNL club, the year younger pre-ecnl NL team beats the year older pre-ecnl RL team, and this certainly is true for the ECNL NL and RL teams.

Think of High School Girls, the freshman NL players make varsity over sophomore RL players, because by high school age/size doesn’t matter. The Freshman NL player is probably better than every Sophomore-Senior RL player.

ECNL -RL parents you know this true which is why the forum is now dominated by Q4 second team parents wanting this change to happen right now for 2025. They dont even have trapped players right now. They know every year their kid is on the second team, their chances of ever making a NL/1st team decreases, bc the current NL girls are getting technically better and a higher soccer IQ and it is no longer about age or size.

The news of waiting until 2026 crushed these Q4 RL parents because it’s never going to happen for most of their kids. It was never about being trapped to most of the people here, they think they will magically have RAE in their favor, but unless you’ve got a 2018, or maybe 2017 it doesn’t really matter.

DOC's talking to your Q4 daughter?...my guess is she's on the NL team and he's talking to her about going to the NL team the age group below in 2026. Which would be a normal conversation, they are also talking to the NL Q4s on the age below you about moving down to the younger NL team. I highly doubt clubs are telling Q4 Second Team Parents that their kid is going to make the younger NL team that is currently beating them when they play. Fantasy Land.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t even a SY vs BY debate. This is a forum with delusional Q4 ECNL RL or second team parents who think this means their kid is going to move to the NL team an age group below and take the place of the existing Q1 majority. Which sorry, is just not happening on the girls side. Full stop. The Q4 ECNL NL first team kids will move down an age group and be leaders on the team and Q1 ECNL NL Parents from the current teams are EXCITED for that because the team will be better. They will lose their Current ECNL - NL Q4s to the first team below and it’s basically a wash on roster spots.

I think the theory of the delusional Q4 ECNL Second Team parent is that RAE negatively impacted my kid (which is true) and now it’s going to be in my kids favor (which is not true).

Part of RAE is that we create a self fulfilling prophecy….Q1 kids aren’t actually better soccer players BECAUSE they were born in Q1, they are better soccer players because at the youngest age they had developmental advantages over their peers and made the top team. AND THEN…the top team got better training, coaching, competition and yes, they become better and more skilled soccer players. Which is why on the girls side of almost every ECNL club, the year younger pre-ecnl NL team beats the year older pre-ecnl RL team, and this certainly is true for the ECNL NL and RL teams.

Think of High School Girls, the freshman NL players make varsity over sophomore RL players, because by high school age/size doesn’t matter. The Freshman NL player is probably better than every Sophomore-Senior RL player.

ECNL -RL parents you know this true which is why the forum is now dominated by Q4 second team parents wanting this change to happen right now for 2025. They dont even have trapped players right now. They know every year their kid is on the second team, their chances of ever making a NL/1st team decreases, bc the current NL girls are getting technically better and a higher soccer IQ and it is no longer about age or size.

The news of waiting until 2026 crushed these Q4 RL parents because it’s never going to happen for most of their kids. It was never about being trapped to most of the people here, they think they will magically have RAE in their favor, but unless you’ve got a 2018, or maybe 2017 it doesn’t really matter.

DOC's talking to your Q4 daughter?...my guess is she's on the NL team and he's talking to her about going to the NL team the age group below in 2026. Which would be a normal conversation, they are also talking to the NL Q4s on the age below you about moving down to the younger NL team. I highly doubt clubs are telling Q4 Second Team Parents that their kid is going to make the younger NL team that is currently beating them when they play. Fantasy Land.

Talk about delusional

[Anonymous]

Lol which part? The part about how in 2026 all of the sudden Q4 RL kids are going to have RAE in their favor and magically make the younger NL team they've never beat?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol which part? The part about how in 2026 all of the sudden Q4 RL kids are going to have RAE in their favor and magically make the younger NL team they've never beat?

All of it, you are taking your own bias's and applying it to every Q4 player. You should teach a creative writing course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol which part? The part about how in 2026 all of the sudden Q4 RL kids are going to have RAE in their favor and magically make the younger NL team they've never beat?

First, the idea that there will just be like for like Q4 to Q4 substitution between teams. I don't know the birthdays of every kid but from what I have seen at our very big club, there are very few Q4s on any NL team (or at least the two my kids play on).

Second, the top RL team (our club has at least 3 RL teams in each age group) very regularly plays the NL team a year below them to a draw, in tournaments, games and scrimmages. Meaning, I would say each team wins and loses about half the time (or draws). My DD's team is mid-table and my DS's team is top 2 or 3 in the table in a very competitive part of the country.

I don't know how many of these RL kids are Q4 but my hunch is the talented but smaller kids, because they are Q4, are overweight on these RL teams vs. NL and many will put pressure on the bottom end of the NL team the age below them.

[Anonymous]

Regional players are overweight?