ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Again it’s switching to SY…sorry but a lot of the BY parents are gonna be in for a rude awakening

[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.

This is right. My late bday DD U15 RL has no hope at this point. Wasn’t big enough or fast at age 7. I’m really not kidding—that’s when we say the big fast girls be allowed to do whatever they wanted on the field, and get moved to top teams and coaches. No delusions that SY will change anything here, that’s the only part of this I disagree with. This is especially true because the girls and women’s game is hugely physical with many coaches teaching to slam the body before getting the ball. It makes me sad because DD loves soccer so much, but unless she moved to Spain, has really no chance at higher level play.

[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.

A lot of good points about what's about to happen and perhaps over expectations, but it's won't be just Q4 RL players seeking spots on higher teams -- it's all the players on USYS top clubs and those who want to jump from GA (which happens each year anyway) -- ECNL gets better by recruiting the best from those leagues. There will be NL quality there and top clubs will take it if they can find it.

[Anonymous]

The funny part of all these amateur RAE professors is that everyone keeps missing the part that the studies focus on actual elite athletes and top level team selections

Not pay-to-play subpar players and teams

The studies are mainly about very good late developers with potential who get left off rosters of elite teams for good early bloomers with better current physicality performance and maturation.

It's not about every kick and run Mary, Tom and Jane being 1st or 4th quarter BY

[Anonymous]

"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). "

I think we are agreeing on this point. There aren't that many Q4s on any of the NL teams. Which is why you can GENERALLY (not absolutely) say at the club level if you are a Q4 NL player you will LIKELY easily have a spot on the younger NL team in 2026. Lets say the older team has 4 players that are moving down, the team below has 3 that are moving down. It's not 1:1 but no one is getting cut because of it. There are roster size changes moving from 7V7, 9V9, 11V11. In 2026 we'll lose 3, gain 4, and because of the increase in roster size, we'll still have spots open. I can gurantee you there is not going to be this crazy mass replacement of NL teams with RL players. At the PRE-ECNL level, I have no doubt that there will be 1-3 Q4 RL players that move to the NL team the age group below, they are the same players that would would make their current age NL team as the roster size expands, and would need to be the Top players on their current RL team. 2nd team players who are talented and skilled always move up to the first team as the roster size increases and sometimes based on talent beating out the bottom level of current team. It's crazy to think that all of the sudden coaches of existing NL teams who are beating the older RL teams will be making any major changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The funny part of all these amateur RAE professors is that everyone keeps missing the part that the studies focus on actual elite athletes and top level team selections

Not pay-to-play subpar players and teams

The studies are mainly about very good late developers with potential who get left off rosters of elite teams for good early bloomers with better current physicality performance and maturation.

It's not about every kick and run Mary, Tom and Jane being 1st or 4th quarter BY

RAE is just a theory that helps explain the reality, tho -- all the stats showing top teams tend to skew toward the oldest kids. This very true dynamic -- regardless of cause -- will provide lots of opportunity not typically present during this switch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The funny part of all these amateur RAE professors is that everyone keeps missing the part that the studies focus on actual elite athletes and top level team selections

Not pay-to-play subpar players and teams

The studies are mainly about very good late developers with potential who get left off rosters of elite teams for good early bloomers with better current physicality performance and maturation.

It's not about every kick and run Mary, Tom and Jane being 1st or 4th quarter BY

There has been plenty of studies among average populations with the same results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"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). "

I think we are agreeing on this point. There aren't that many Q4s on any of the NL teams. Which is why you can GENERALLY (not absolutely) say at the club level if you are a Q4 NL player you will LIKELY easily have a spot on the younger NL team in 2026. Lets say the older team has 4 players that are moving down, the team below has 3 that are moving down. It's not 1:1 but no one is getting cut because of it. There are roster size changes moving from 7V7, 9V9, 11V11. In 2026 we'll lose 3, gain 4, and because of the increase in roster size, we'll still have spots open. I can gurantee you there is not going to be this crazy mass replacement of NL teams with RL players. At the PRE-ECNL level, I have no doubt that there will be 1-3 Q4 RL players that move to the NL team the age group below, they are the same players that would would make their current age NL team as the roster size expands, and would need to be the Top players on their current RL team. 2nd team players who are talented and skilled always move up to the first team as the roster size increases and sometimes based on talent beating out the bottom level of current team. It's crazy to think that all of the sudden coaches of existing NL teams who are beating the older RL teams will be making any major changes.

Are people thinking the RL player that lacked the skill and IQ to be NL in '25 is all of a sudden going to be Pulisic or Wambach in '26 because of age cutoff shift?

[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.

Yes, I can confirm that. My daughter is September, she plays pre-ECNL U12.

We have been told she is going to be considered to play up/down at RL/NL. Our club is making inventory of Q3/Q4 players to relocate them according to the new system SY.

[Anonymous]

Now we are between the bartering and acceptance phase, it is happening but won't be a big deal because RAE doesn't exist. Is there anything we can do to help you guys through this process?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny part of all these amateur RAE professors is that everyone keeps missing the part that the studies focus on actual elite athletes and top level team selections

Not pay-to-play subpar players and teams

The studies are mainly about very good late developers with potential who get left off rosters of elite teams for good early bloomers with better current physicality performance and maturation.

It's not about every kick and run Mary, Tom and Jane being 1st or 4th quarter BY

RAE is just a theory that helps explain the reality, tho -- all the stats showing top teams tend to skew toward the oldest kids. This very true dynamic -- regardless of cause -- will provide lots of opportunity not typically present during this switch.

Then it will shift the effect from Q1 to Q3 as Q3 will become the new Q1 for that specific league

However, SY Q1 will still be Q3 against BY/Calendar Q1s in the real world

[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.

Yes, I can confirm that. My daughter is September, she plays pre-ECNL U12.

We have been told she is going to be considered to play up/down at RL/NL. Our club is making inventory of Q3/Q4 players to relocate them according to the new system SY.

The distribution of Q2/Q3 kids will look like the current Q3/Q4 kids in the next 24 moths. There are alot of people who dont realize how profound the difference is end of the year kids. Best of luck all and the end of the day its justa game we paly for fun.

[Anonymous]

Our club has 2 NL Q4 and 6 RL…the team below is mediocre. The RL team would run the below NL team below. My guess is the 2 NL and at least 4 to 6 RL move down and will take over the new team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"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). "

I think we are agreeing on this point. There aren't that many Q4s on any of the NL teams. Which is why you can GENERALLY (not absolutely) say at the club level if you are a Q4 NL player you will LIKELY easily have a spot on the younger NL team in 2026. Lets say the older team has 4 players that are moving down, the team below has 3 that are moving down. It's not 1:1 but no one is getting cut because of it. There are roster size changes moving from 7V7, 9V9, 11V11. In 2026 we'll lose 3, gain 4, and because of the increase in roster size, we'll still have spots open. I can gurantee you there is not going to be this crazy mass replacement of NL teams with RL players. At the PRE-ECNL level, I have no doubt that there will be 1-3 Q4 RL players that move to the NL team the age group below, they are the same players that would would make their current age NL team as the roster size expands, and would need to be the Top players on their current RL team. 2nd team players who are talented and skilled always move up to the first team as the roster size increases and sometimes based on talent beating out the bottom level of current team. It's crazy to think that all of the sudden coaches of existing NL teams who are beating the older RL teams will be making any major changes.

Are people thinking the RL player that lacked the skill and IQ to be NL in '25 is all of a sudden going to be Pulisic or Wambach in '26 because of age cutoff shift?

Are people thinking that the Q1 or Q2 MLSN or ECNL player the lacked the skill and IQ but was bigger and faster because of age is all of a sudden going to be not as good relative to the new older kids because of the age cutoff shift? Um, yes. And somebody has to replace them.

Q4 players will have to worry about teams and coaches stuck in player lock though so switching teams could be massive next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"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). "

I think we are agreeing on this point. There aren't that many Q4s on any of the NL teams. Which is why you can GENERALLY (not absolutely) say at the club level if you are a Q4 NL player you will LIKELY easily have a spot on the younger NL team in 2026. Let's say the older team has 4 players that are moving down, the team below has 3 that are moving down. It's not 1:1 but no one is getting cut because of it. There are roster size changes moving from 7V7, 9V9, 11V11. In 2026 we'll lose 3, gain 4, and because of the increase in roster size, we'll still have spots open. I can gurantee you there is not going to be this crazy mass replacement of NL teams with RL players. At the PRE-ECNL level, I have no doubt that there will be 1-3 Q4 RL players that move to the NL team the age group below, they are the same players that would would make their current age NL team as the roster size expands, and would need to be the Top players on their current RL team. 2nd team players who are talented and skilled always move up to the first team as the roster size increases and sometimes based on talent beating out the bottom level of current team. It's crazy to think that all of the sudden coaches of existing NL teams who are beating the older RL teams will be making any major changes.

Yes this is exactly my view. I have kids at various ages, and I think alot of the parents arguing here just have one view of another, but from what I see this is spot on. At older ages its just a shuffle from NL to NL and RL to RL, however at the smaller sided teams, most of the top 2 9v9 teams are all on track for the top 11v11 NL team, and much of the second 9v9 team will be top of the roster on the top team the age group down. It's still essentially NL to NL but it'll *feel* like a big shuffle for the younger kids I think.