ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The clubs who start putting these teams together sooner rather than later will have a big advantage on other clubs. "

genuine question, but like what clubs are you talking about. Tryouts are in 2 weeks and no club around here is doing what you are saying. There aren't just endless good clubs in a town? There are 2 good clubs where we live. If you are on the 2nd Team, you can't just switch clubs and make the 1st team at the other good club. And both good clubs are staying BY. So I think you are saying switch to a 3rd rouge club that is moving to SY early for 2025? the 2 good clubs would still crush this rouge club with their younger BY team. I'm just confused as to what mass change you think is possible in 2 weeks?

I don’t know about the person you are quoting but I don’t think they meant smart clubs would be out there in the open planning SY rosters. But there is no way any half decent club is not looking at the birthdate breakdowns of their current teams and the birthdates of any new tryout attendees and making some cold calculations now while tryouts are going on.

They certainly won’t be doing much SY stuff out in the open though, that will start in the spring.

I get the logic here. But it only works on the “happy path.”

Realistic Path:

Said club moves first, but can’t really load up any one team with sept-dec because not everyone moves, and talent sticks together.

So said club has a crappy 26/26 season, and becomes less attractive to talent elsewhere, and less fun for kids (and parents), resulting in loss of some of the talent it tried to stock up on. Vicious cycle for said club. Meanwhile the winner clubs keep on winning and attracting talent REGARDLESS of the age cutoff / timeline / roster mix.

Yes- when you look at how you would actually implement this early at an established ECNL club, it falls apart because it has to work across every age group. A major call out would be the 2014 PreECNL NL Team who will be starting actual ECNL NL in 2026. According to the "start now in 2025" plan, you would have a team of 2013’s Sept-Dec combine with the 2014’s. The 2014s would have to play up in the 2013 RL League since they have 2013’s on their roster. They would be worse off. The Sept-Dec 2013’s who are currently on the NL team would play in a lesser league --2013 RL in 2025 instead of the 2013 NL (worse for them).

Where we live, the u-12 Pre-ENCL NL Team (which will be the 2014’s in 2025) plays in a badass 11 v 11 league the year before actual ECNL starts. They play against all the top ECNL clubs in the the state, there’s a north and south division. It’s 12 of the states best preECNL teams. The competition is really good and gets you ready for ECNL. They couldn’t play in this league with 2013s on their roster, they would have to play in the 2013 RL league and be LESS Prepared to move to ECNL in 2026. They would be worse off long term because of it. So both the 2013 Sept-Dec players + the 2014 Jan-Aug players on the Top team would suffer.

It would only work at the club level if you did it across every team NL + RL. If the top team is still going to play BY, you can’t successfully create the second team as a SY team and have it be competitive, the older portion of that team will always be worse off bc they would be combining with the younger second team. It would be good for the younger RL players, but the older RL players on the team would not be as strong as just staying on the current BY RL team.

Again - Maybe works for a club that is not an established ECNL NL club where there is a strong First Team at every level. These clubs will have to move everyone at once and it will only hurt them to move to BY early.

Sure the RL players may consider switching to club that is moving to SY next season but they will be switching to a worse club, won’t be seen in the current clubs age group pool for 2026 and then when the change happens be in a worse spot. Tryouts here are 2 weeks away and the ECNL clubs are forming teams on BY. This is where the strongest players play. Leaving the club to go to a non ECNL club moving to SY, not only would the younger BY ECNL team beat this SY club, it would hurt your chances of coming back in 2026 and making the NL team, which will continue to dominate.

Again - there is no advantage to moving to SY early for an ECNL club and logistically impossible unless done at every age level. And we would all know that was happening by now in 2025, and it’s not. There is not a mass change of clubs happening at ECNL tryouts this year.

I don't think I was arguing that any established ECNL club would go full SY (that would be a major problem as you note) now. Just that it could (and probably should) impact some decisions they make now behind the scenes and in certain roster decisions. Do you keep a bubble player at the bottom of the team (who is a spring Bday) on the first team or move them down now and replace with a 2nd team fall bday player, etc.?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The clubs who start putting these teams together sooner rather than later will have a big advantage on other clubs. "

genuine question, but like what clubs are you talking about. Tryouts are in 2 weeks and no club around here is doing what you are saying. There aren't just endless good clubs in a town? There are 2 good clubs where we live. If you are on the 2nd Team, you can't just switch clubs and make the 1st team at the other good club. And both good clubs are staying BY. So I think you are saying switch to a 3rd rouge club that is moving to SY early for 2025? the 2 good clubs would still crush this rouge club with their younger BY team. I'm just confused as to what mass change you think is possible in 2 weeks?

I don’t know about the person you are quoting but I don’t think they meant smart clubs would be out there in the open planning SY rosters. But there is no way any half decent club is not looking at the birthdate breakdowns of their current teams and the birthdates of any new tryout attendees and making some cold calculations now while tryouts are going on.

They certainly won’t be doing much SY stuff out in the open though, that will start in the spring.

I get the logic here. But it only works on the “happy path.”

Realistic Path:

Said club moves first, but can’t really load up any one team with sept-dec because not everyone moves, and talent sticks together.

So said club has a crappy 26/26 season, and becomes less attractive to talent elsewhere, and less fun for kids (and parents), resulting in loss of some of the talent it tried to stock up on. Vicious cycle for said club. Meanwhile the winner clubs keep on winning and attracting talent REGARDLESS of the age cutoff / timeline / roster mix.

Yes- when you look at how you would actually implement this early at an established ECNL club, it falls apart because it has to work across every age group. A major call out would be the 2014 PreECNL NL Team who will be starting actual ECNL NL in 2026. According to the "start now in 2025" plan, you would have a team of 2013’s Sept-Dec combine with the 2014’s. The 2014s would have to play up in the 2013 RL League since they have 2013’s on their roster. They would be worse off. The Sept-Dec 2013’s who are currently on the NL team would play in a lesser league --2013 RL in 2025 instead of the 2013 NL (worse for them).

Where we live, the u-12 Pre-ENCL NL Team (which will be the 2014’s in 2025) plays in a badass 11 v 11 league the year before actual ECNL starts. They play against all the top ECNL clubs in the the state, there’s a north and south division. It’s 12 of the states best preECNL teams. The competition is really good and gets you ready for ECNL. They couldn’t play in this league with 2013s on their roster, they would have to play in the 2013 RL league and be LESS Prepared to move to ECNL in 2026. They would be worse off long term because of it. So both the 2013 Sept-Dec players + the 2014 Jan-Aug players on the Top team would suffer.

It would only work at the club level if you did it across every team NL + RL. If the top team is still going to play BY, you can’t successfully create the second team as a SY team and have it be competitive, the older portion of that team will always be worse off bc they would be combining with the younger second team. It would be good for the younger RL players, but the older RL players on the team would not be as strong as just staying on the current BY RL team.

Again - Maybe works for a club that is not an established ECNL NL club where there is a strong First Team at every level. These clubs will have to move everyone at once and it will only hurt them to move to BY early.

Sure the RL players may consider switching to club that is moving to SY next season but they will be switching to a worse club, won’t be seen in the current clubs age group pool for 2026 and then when the change happens be in a worse spot. Tryouts here are 2 weeks away and the ECNL clubs are forming teams on BY. This is where the strongest players play. Leaving the club to go to a non ECNL club moving to SY, not only would the younger BY ECNL team beat this SY club, it would hurt your chances of coming back in 2026 and making the NL team, which will continue to dominate.

Again - there is no advantage to moving to SY early for an ECNL club and logistically impossible unless done at every age level. And we would all know that was happening by now in 2025, and it’s not. There is not a mass change of clubs happening at ECNL tryouts this year.

I don't think I was arguing that any established ECNL club would go full SY (that would be a major problem as you note) now. Just that it could (and probably should) impact some decisions they make now behind the scenes and in certain roster decisions. Do you keep a bubble player at the bottom of the team (who is a spring Bday) on the first team or move them down now and replace with a 2nd team fall bday player, etc.?

If I was the Coach and thinking about the future of just my team, and not what's best for the club, I would perhaps keep the Spring Bubble player and try to develop them bc if I pick up the fall bday player, I would lose them next year when they move down.

[Anonymous]

At tryouts this cycle, what about the NL bubble players who are Sept-Dec birthdays, if they are basically equal to RL players with a few Jan-Aug bdays. Wouldn't it better to pick-up the RL players who would have potential to continue with the team in 2026? Especially if we have 5 Q4s rostered, why not swap the lower 2 of those for RLs that will be eligible to play with us in 2026.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At tryouts this cycle, what about the NL bubble players who are Sept-Dec birthdays, if they are basically equal to RL players with a few Jan-Aug bdays. Wouldn't it better to pick-up the RL players who would have potential to continue with the team in 2026? Especially if we have 5 Q4s rostered, why not swap the lower 2 of those for RLs that will be eligible to play with us in 2026.

This fixation also is silly, because birth month at these older age groups means a whole lot less than it does who are still playing 7v7 or 9v9. There will be opportunities for SepQ4 players BUT at the end of the day, you have many, many high quality players in the current pool/new pool where it'll be more about the soccer vs. the birth certificate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The clubs who start putting these teams together sooner rather than later will have a big advantage on other clubs. "

genuine question, but like what clubs are you talking about. Tryouts are in 2 weeks and no club around here is doing what you are saying. There aren't just endless good clubs in a town? There are 2 good clubs where we live. If you are on the 2nd Team, you can't just switch clubs and make the 1st team at the other good club. And both good clubs are staying BY. So I think you are saying switch to a 3rd rouge club that is moving to SY early for 2025? the 2 good clubs would still crush this rouge club with their younger BY team. I'm just confused as to what mass change you think is possible in 2 weeks?

I don’t know about the person you are quoting but I don’t think they meant smart clubs would be out there in the open planning SY rosters. But there is no way any half decent club is not looking at the birthdate breakdowns of their current teams and the birthdates of any new tryout attendees and making some cold calculations now while tryouts are going on.

They certainly won’t be doing much SY stuff out in the open though, that will start in the spring.

I get the logic here. But it only works on the “happy path.”

Realistic Path:

Said club moves first, but can’t really load up any one team with sept-dec because not everyone moves, and talent sticks together.

So said club has a crappy 26/26 season, and becomes less attractive to talent elsewhere, and less fun for kids (and parents), resulting in loss of some of the talent it tried to stock up on. Vicious cycle for said club. Meanwhile the winner clubs keep on winning and attracting talent REGARDLESS of the age cutoff / timeline / roster mix.

Yes- when you look at how you would actually implement this early at an established ECNL club, it falls apart because it has to work across every age group. A major call out would be the 2014 PreECNL NL Team who will be starting actual ECNL NL in 2026. According to the "start now in 2025" plan, you would have a team of 2013’s Sept-Dec combine with the 2014’s. The 2014s would have to play up in the 2013 RL League since they have 2013’s on their roster. They would be worse off. The Sept-Dec 2013’s who are currently on the NL team would play in a lesser league --2013 RL in 2025 instead of the 2013 NL (worse for them).

Where we live, the u-12 Pre-ENCL NL Team (which will be the 2014’s in 2025) plays in a badass 11 v 11 league the year before actual ECNL starts. They play against all the top ECNL clubs in the the state, there’s a north and south division. It’s 12 of the states best preECNL teams. The competition is really good and gets you ready for ECNL. They couldn’t play in this league with 2013s on their roster, they would have to play in the 2013 RL league and be LESS Prepared to move to ECNL in 2026. They would be worse off long term because of it. So both the 2013 Sept-Dec players + the 2014 Jan-Aug players on the Top team would suffer.

It would only work at the club level if you did it across every team NL + RL. If the top team is still going to play BY, you can’t successfully create the second team as a SY team and have it be competitive, the older portion of that team will always be worse off bc they would be combining with the younger second team. It would be good for the younger RL players, but the older RL players on the team would not be as strong as just staying on the current BY RL team.

Again - Maybe works for a club that is not an established ECNL NL club where there is a strong First Team at every level. These clubs will have to move everyone at once and it will only hurt them to move to BY early.

Sure the RL players may consider switching to club that is moving to SY next season but they will be switching to a worse club, won’t be seen in the current clubs age group pool for 2026 and then when the change happens be in a worse spot. Tryouts here are 2 weeks away and the ECNL clubs are forming teams on BY. This is where the strongest players play. Leaving the club to go to a non ECNL club moving to SY, not only would the younger BY ECNL team beat this SY club, it would hurt your chances of coming back in 2026 and making the NL team, which will continue to dominate.

Again - there is no advantage to moving to SY early for an ECNL club and logistically impossible unless done at every age level. And we would all know that was happening by now in 2025, and it’s not. There is not a mass change of clubs happening at ECNL tryouts this year.

I don't think I was arguing that any established ECNL club would go full SY (that would be a major problem as you note) now. Just that it could (and probably should) impact some decisions they make now behind the scenes and in certain roster decisions. Do you keep a bubble player at the bottom of the team (who is a spring Bday) on the first team or move them down now and replace with a 2nd team fall bday player, etc.?

Keep both. It will be big roster of 22 to 25 players. If you don’t do it, other ECNL clubs will do and you lose if there is a transition plan and next year

[Anonymous]

ECNL clubs are putting together winning teams for 25/26. They are taking the best players to win. If there are two equal players being considered for the top team and one is Q4 and one is Q2, they will keep and develop the Q4 and send the Q2 to regional. 26/27 tryouts will be a complete mess with players changing clubs and q4 regional players being looked at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ECNL clubs are putting together winning teams for 25/26. They are taking the best players to win. If there are two equal players being considered for the top team and one is Q4 and one is Q2, they will keep and develop the Q4 and send the Q2 to regional. 26/27 tryouts will be a complete mess with players changing clubs and q4 regional players being looked at.

They will bring all potential Q4 players to the ECNL team, so it will be a big roster. No coach is stupid to put a good Q4 to RL who can be grabbed by another ECNL club. Whoever cannot be rostered in the NL game will move down to play the RL game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ECNL clubs are putting together winning teams for 25/26. They are taking the best players to win. If there are two equal players being considered for the top team and one is Q4 and one is Q2, they will keep and develop the Q4 and send the Q2 to regional. 26/27 tryouts will be a complete mess with players changing clubs and q4 regional players being looked at.

If the Q2 helps the team win in 25/26, the Q2 will play in 25/26. The question is whether the Q4s suddenly becomes "top dogs" because some/all are permitted to play down in 25/26. We can all speculate about league rules for next year, but none of us know.

[Anonymous]

Cal south the largest USYS governed league. Has an online webinar tonight at 7pm. Will have a discussion about age change and a Q/A.

They are starting to form SY teams for spring 26.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cal south the largest USYS governed league. Has an online webinar tonight at 7pm. Will have a discussion about age change and a Q/A.

They are starting to form SY teams for spring 26.

Strangely Cal North says it's keeping BY until Fall 2026. https://www.calnorth.org/news/important-update-cal-north-shifts-to-seasonal-year-age-groups-in-2026-2027

It's a divided state.

[Anonymous]

For National Platforms, including MLS Next Tier 2, Cal North Member Organizations will defer to the National Platform’s governing body to adhere to their required age grouping method.

[Anonymous]

Beginning with the 2026-2027 soccer season, Cal North will be transitioning to a School Year age grouping method for all programs—with the exception of our Olympic Development Program (ODP) and National Platforms (e.g., MLS Next Tier 2).

[Anonymous]

MLSN/2 staying BY.

[Anonymous]

Mark your calendars! This change will go into effect August 1, 2026, for the 2026-2027 season. Clubs should prepare for this transition early to ensure a smooth registration process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MLSN/2 staying BY.[/

It only says they will defer but there has been no announcement what mlsn2 will do yet

For National Platforms, including MLS Next Tier 2, Cal North Member Organizations will defer to the National Platform’s governing body to adhere to their required age grouping method.