ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the mom of a former trapped player (Nov 04) who had to skip u12 when the BY change happened, had no 8th grade spring season, was one of 4 trapped players to invade the 05 team and take their play time and captain bands and be the cause of 1/4 of the team to get dropped to regional during the senior season, the talk of changing to SY is encouraging to me so my 2012 trapped player (Oct 2012) doesn’t have to go through similar experiences. The discomfort of breaking up a team senior year and taking the spots of players who had been together for years is massive. My 2004 got a great scholarship at a d1 school. The problem is less about RAE and more about a systemic dysfunction for Q4 kids.

Now that the discussion to revert the BY age change has emerged and knowing that ECNL and US Club are considering to right the past wrongs, I really hope it happens since they’ve kicked the hornets nest.

This argument applies to switching or not. But there is no “systemic dysfunction” either way outside of the chaos 1-3 years after a switch is made.

No switch: Continuous disruption for 33% trapped players.

Switch: Short-term disruption, then long-term team stability and chemistry. Minimal trapped players (You can always play up if capable or play down to stay in your grade within the 8/1 to 7/31 cutoff, no redshirt)

Switch, but phase it in.

To say that a switch now is a short term disruption is forgetting that teams will be reconfigured only to benefit a relatively small number of players.

Pick a age group and switch from there on below. But it would be best to target phasing in age groups not currently in the recruitment process. and then those older age groups simple age out of the process on teams that they have been on already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sense of entitlement is funny

All these people fighting to change everything except the work, sacrifice and discipline required by the kid to make it.

Funny to see an adult commenting without putting in the work to understand the issues

I understand that if my October kid wakes up tomorrow and is in the Q1 versus Q4 age group because ECNL changed to School Year, their game is still the same and college scouts still see what kinda player they are.

The issue is that your kid is ineligible for recruiting at the showcases the year the majority of the team is eligible and the following year, when they are eligible, the coaches don't show because most the kids are committed. I have no stake in the college recruiting bit but it is important to a lot of parents.

Here's a quote from way earlier in the thread

Anonymous wrote:
Here are the four bad deals for a trapped player. 1. In her 8th grade, her team is off during high school season, so there is no team practice or game for her for the next 3 or 4 months. 2. In her 12th grade, her team is gone, so have to find a new team. 3. When her team is in the recruiting process and goes to showcase, she is not eligible to be recruited. When she is in her recruiting window, her team is done recruiting. 4. She can never play in the same team as her classmates.

Players are recruited. Not teams.

How do players get recruited when the majority of their team isn’t interested in showcases anymore?

The college coach has limited games he can watch during the showcase. They will not spend their valuable game time watching a game between most seniors. Trapped players have to be superstars on the junior team (when they are sophomores) so the college coach can remember them one year later when they are juniors and eligible to be recruited.

😂 what is this? A Disney movie? Some coach rolls up with his clipboard to see some specific players, and the some kid not on their radar makes an amazing play, then another and another and then a few minutes later every coach at the event has come over to the field to watch this pitch-maestro that nobody knew about before?

If the coach is interest in your kid, the coach will make time to catch part of the game. The problem kids on the seniors team isn’t that they “got trapped” it’s that they aren’t on anyone’s radar.

Look at how the kids that had their offers rescinded due to roster limits have scrambled! Those that are in demand got snatched up quickly, those in the middle worked hard to find new schools by promoting themselves and being proactive, and the rest probably won’t play their first year (maybe not collegiately ever). Why for the latter group? Because they aren’t good enough and they aren’t willing to do the work necessary to find a new spot. It isn’t birth month that separates them into these 3 buckets. It’s the same way with recruiting!

You can't convince people that don't understand how recruiting works.

Recruiters don't walk around events randomly watching games. They have a list of players that they are in contact with. The players on the list have provided their game times and locations.

The recruiter/coach drafts a rough schedule of the games they want to watch the day before or day of the event.

Understand? If anything trapped players can be more desirable because they're playing "up" a year and understand the game at a higher level.

A trapped player doesn't stop DOCs from reaching out to college connections and representing that player.

A trapped player doesn't stop players from attending college camps and making connections with coaches.

A trapped player doesn't stop players from getting really good grades.

Think about it. If coaches/recruiters walked around events randomly watching teams they'd all go after the same players. As much as players want to attend a good school. Coaches want the best players that show interest in attending their school. (So they're not wasting time going after players that won't join their team)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL said they don’t want to go alone (they can’t) because it would create a real mess. But ECNL wants everyone else to create chaos and align with them so that it’s less messy for ECNL. This whole thing is so dumb.

Then you get the fake “give me good reason not to change” thing, and then when they get a pretty darn good reason, they just dismiss it as “not good enough.”

From the Podcast:
“And it doesn't have to be everybody, but it's got to be the greater majority of organizations. I've challenged people and I said, come back with one positive reason for birth year in terms of player experience or player development. I'm still waiting for the one positive reason to support birth year beyond the proverbial other people in the world do it. So we keep falling back on that argument.”

This is just an entire movement, that is going to end in another mistake by US Soccer, because it’s all about a few loud parents who thing their kids are better than they are, and the birth month is holding them back at 17/18 years old…. Who could foresee consequences of getting out of alignment with the rest of the u15+ world? The rest of the world must be doing it all wrong…and emotionally reactive trap parents have it all figured out with their middling but poorly planned birth month kids….

The world is a big place and no not everyone goes off of birth year. That is only for national teams. Many countries in Europe for their non academy teams play school year. Also many have bio banding which is for everyone but often it’s the later born kids who are the smaller players.

If the change to grad year we can still put together a team and bring them to an International competition.

Also not many teams outside of mls next go play internationally again the system can’t just favor the 1% of team and players or even 25% if it’s that high which it isn’t when you think about every single team in the US Rec to Academy level.

So…what are you actually arguing? This is a thread about ECNL making a change, but you’re saying this is better for the non-elite kids. Ok…so…why are you arguing about it for ECNL?

If we’re talking about the 98% of youth soccer that isn’t MLSN, ECNL, GA and saying they do not need FIFA / International alignment at those levels, what does that say about our elite levels? Probably that they do need that alignment to be at the most competitive levels.

I do appreciate the casualness though of the “we can just throw together some birth year kids to compete internationally if we have to.” <Chef’s Kiss>

Holy moly the logic leap in that second paragraph is epic.

The logical leap was based off the bolded quote. Where that poster suggested that “you can’t just favor the 1%.” 😒 it’s that poster’s own logic.

But the argument ECNL (US Club) is making is that this isn’t good for anyone outside the 1% of national team players or kids who go on vacation to play in Europe. Guess what if they change back you will still teams get formed and people will take their European vacations. Don’t worry your instagrams will be fine.

That is not the argument ECNL is making. They’re blowing off a valid argument by using that retort, meanwhile ECNL is the 0.3% pool from which on the girls side a large majority of YNT, College and Pro’s come from. And on the boys side, a not small proportion….

It’s a lazy smoke and mirrors response to the valide argument by playing games with tiers / definitions and pools.

The problem is both sides see each others reasoning as the same but if you look at it objectively, the entry level should be school year for kids wanting to be with friends, for kids wanting to be recruited to college should be grad year , the platform for kids wanting to go pro and national teams should probably be birth year.

But if we want to just only have one system for all those different things that’s where everyone can say why they think this or that is better. We will find out in a month or so what the majority of US soccer leagues think. Regardless people will be upset when you have a one party system and people don’t feel like their problem are heard.

Maybe there should be another thread, not from the ECNL perspective: "Take back youth soccer from the extreme minority - move back to SY." I can't help but read these posts and think, wow, the millions of kids who don't want to play in college (or higher) are really getting slapped in the face by the small number who do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL said they don’t want to go alone (they can’t) because it would create a real mess. But ECNL wants everyone else to create chaos and align with them so that it’s less messy for ECNL. This whole thing is so dumb.

Then you get the fake “give me good reason not to change” thing, and then when they get a pretty darn good reason, they just dismiss it as “not good enough.”

From the Podcast:
“And it doesn't have to be everybody, but it's got to be the greater majority of organizations. I've challenged people and I said, come back with one positive reason for birth year in terms of player experience or player development. I'm still waiting for the one positive reason to support birth year beyond the proverbial other people in the world do it. So we keep falling back on that argument.”

This is just an entire movement, that is going to end in another mistake by US Soccer, because it’s all about a few loud parents who thing their kids are better than they are, and the birth month is holding them back at 17/18 years old…. Who could foresee consequences of getting out of alignment with the rest of the u15+ world? The rest of the world must be doing it all wrong…and emotionally reactive trap parents have it all figured out with their middling but poorly planned birth month kids….

The world is a big place and no not everyone goes off of birth year. That is only for national teams. Many countries in Europe for their non academy teams play school year. Also many have bio banding which is for everyone but often it’s the later born kids who are the smaller players.

If the change to grad year we can still put together a team and bring them to an International competition.

Also not many teams outside of mls next go play internationally again the system can’t just favor the 1% of team and players or even 25% if it’s that high which it isn’t when you think about every single team in the US Rec to Academy level.

So…what are you actually arguing? This is a thread about ECNL making a change, but you’re saying this is better for the non-elite kids. Ok…so…why are you arguing about it for ECNL?

If we’re talking about the 98% of youth soccer that isn’t MLSN, ECNL, GA and saying they do not need FIFA / International alignment at those levels, what does that say about our elite levels? Probably that they do need that alignment to be at the most competitive levels.

I do appreciate the casualness though of the “we can just throw together some birth year kids to compete internationally if we have to.” <Chef’s Kiss>

Holy moly the logic leap in that second paragraph is epic.

The logical leap was based off the bolded quote. Where that poster suggested that “you can’t just favor the 1%.” 😒 it’s that poster’s own logic.

But the argument ECNL (US Club) is making is that this isn’t good for anyone outside the 1% of national team players or kids who go on vacation to play in Europe. Guess what if they change back you will still teams get formed and people will take their European vacations. Don’t worry your instagrams will be fine.

That is not the argument ECNL is making. They’re blowing off a valid argument by using that retort, meanwhile ECNL is the 0.3% pool from which on the girls side a large majority of YNT, College and Pro’s come from. And on the boys side, a not small proportion….

It’s a lazy smoke and mirrors response to the valide argument by playing games with tiers / definitions and pools.

The problem is both sides see each others reasoning as the same but if you look at it objectively, the entry level should be school year for kids wanting to be with friends, for kids wanting to be recruited to college should be grad year , the platform for kids wanting to go pro and national teams should probably be birth year.

But if we want to just only have one system for all those different things that’s where everyone can say why they think this or that is better. We will find out in a month or so what the majority of US soccer leagues think. Regardless people will be upset when you have a one party system and people don’t feel like their problem are heard.

Maybe there should be another thread, not from the ECNL perspective: "Take back youth soccer from the extreme minority - move back to SY." I can't help but read these posts and think, wow, the millions of kids who don't want to play in college (or higher) are really getting slapped in the face by the small number who do.

Totally fair take!

What is the argument for SY for those that don’t want to play college soccer where there is no “trap” per se?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL said they don’t want to go alone (they can’t) because it would create a real mess. But ECNL wants everyone else to create chaos and align with them so that it’s less messy for ECNL. This whole thing is so dumb.

Then you get the fake “give me good reason not to change” thing, and then when they get a pretty darn good reason, they just dismiss it as “not good enough.”

From the Podcast:
“And it doesn't have to be everybody, but it's got to be the greater majority of organizations. I've challenged people and I said, come back with one positive reason for birth year in terms of player experience or player development. I'm still waiting for the one positive reason to support birth year beyond the proverbial other people in the world do it. So we keep falling back on that argument.”

This is just an entire movement, that is going to end in another mistake by US Soccer, because it’s all about a few loud parents who thing their kids are better than they are, and the birth month is holding them back at 17/18 years old…. Who could foresee consequences of getting out of alignment with the rest of the u15+ world? The rest of the world must be doing it all wrong…and emotionally reactive trap parents have it all figured out with their middling but poorly planned birth month kids….

The world is a big place and no not everyone goes off of birth year. That is only for national teams. Many countries in Europe for their non academy teams play school year. Also many have bio banding which is for everyone but often it’s the later born kids who are the smaller players.

If the change to grad year we can still put together a team and bring them to an International competition.

Also not many teams outside of mls next go play internationally again the system can’t just favor the 1% of team and players or even 25% if it’s that high which it isn’t when you think about every single team in the US Rec to Academy level.

So…what are you actually arguing? This is a thread about ECNL making a change, but you’re saying this is better for the non-elite kids. Ok…so…why are you arguing about it for ECNL?

If we’re talking about the 98% of youth soccer that isn’t MLSN, ECNL, GA and saying they do not need FIFA / International alignment at those levels, what does that say about our elite levels? Probably that they do need that alignment to be at the most competitive levels.

I do appreciate the casualness though of the “we can just throw together some birth year kids to compete internationally if we have to.” <Chef’s Kiss>

Holy moly the logic leap in that second paragraph is epic.

The logical leap was based off the bolded quote. Where that poster suggested that “you can’t just favor the 1%.” 😒 it’s that poster’s own logic.

But the argument ECNL (US Club) is making is that this isn’t good for anyone outside the 1% of national team players or kids who go on vacation to play in Europe. Guess what if they change back you will still teams get formed and people will take their European vacations. Don’t worry your instagrams will be fine.

That is not the argument ECNL is making. They’re blowing off a valid argument by using that retort, meanwhile ECNL is the 0.3% pool from which on the girls side a large majority of YNT, College and Pro’s come from. And on the boys side, a not small proportion….

It’s a lazy smoke and mirrors response to the valide argument by playing games with tiers / definitions and pools.

The problem is both sides see each others reasoning as the same but if you look at it objectively, the entry level should be school year for kids wanting to be with friends, for kids wanting to be recruited to college should be grad year , the platform for kids wanting to go pro and national teams should probably be birth year.

But if we want to just only have one system for all those different things that’s where everyone can say why they think this or that is better. We will find out in a month or so what the majority of US soccer leagues think. Regardless people will be upset when you have a one party system and people don’t feel like their problem are heard.

Maybe there should be another thread, not from the ECNL perspective: "Take back youth soccer from the extreme minority - move back to SY." I can't help but read these posts and think, wow, the millions of kids who don't want to play in college (or higher) are really getting slapped in the face by the small number who do.

Totally fair take!

What is the argument for SY for those that don’t want to play college soccer where there is no “trap” per se?

The recruiting one drops out, but the others are still there. Maximizing the chance to play with friends becomes way more important. Trapped 8th grade year might be even worse, as there is no shifted season in many leagues to accommodate HS, it just doesn't exist. You have to find another team for a single season, or just train with younger kids at your club with no games. Senior year, you're pretty much done, as you're trying out for a new team and you aren't a superstar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL said they don’t want to go alone (they can’t) because it would create a real mess. But ECNL wants everyone else to create chaos and align with them so that it’s less messy for ECNL. This whole thing is so dumb.

Then you get the fake “give me good reason not to change” thing, and then when they get a pretty darn good reason, they just dismiss it as “not good enough.”

From the Podcast:
“And it doesn't have to be everybody, but it's got to be the greater majority of organizations. I've challenged people and I said, come back with one positive reason for birth year in terms of player experience or player development. I'm still waiting for the one positive reason to support birth year beyond the proverbial other people in the world do it. So we keep falling back on that argument.”

This is just an entire movement, that is going to end in another mistake by US Soccer, because it’s all about a few loud parents who thing their kids are better than they are, and the birth month is holding them back at 17/18 years old…. Who could foresee consequences of getting out of alignment with the rest of the u15+ world? The rest of the world must be doing it all wrong…and emotionally reactive trap parents have it all figured out with their middling but poorly planned birth month kids….

The world is a big place and no not everyone goes off of birth year. That is only for national teams. Many countries in Europe for their non academy teams play school year. Also many have bio banding which is for everyone but often it’s the later born kids who are the smaller players.

If the change to grad year we can still put together a team and bring them to an International competition.

Also not many teams outside of mls next go play internationally again the system can’t just favor the 1% of team and players or even 25% if it’s that high which it isn’t when you think about every single team in the US Rec to Academy level.

So…what are you actually arguing? This is a thread about ECNL making a change, but you’re saying this is better for the non-elite kids. Ok…so…why are you arguing about it for ECNL?

If we’re talking about the 98% of youth soccer that isn’t MLSN, ECNL, GA and saying they do not need FIFA / International alignment at those levels, what does that say about our elite levels? Probably that they do need that alignment to be at the most competitive levels.

I do appreciate the casualness though of the “we can just throw together some birth year kids to compete internationally if we have to.” <Chef’s Kiss>

Holy moly the logic leap in that second paragraph is epic.

The logical leap was based off the bolded quote. Where that poster suggested that “you can’t just favor the 1%.” 😒 it’s that poster’s own logic.

But the argument ECNL (US Club) is making is that this isn’t good for anyone outside the 1% of national team players or kids who go on vacation to play in Europe. Guess what if they change back you will still teams get formed and people will take their European vacations. Don’t worry your instagrams will be fine.

That is not the argument ECNL is making. They’re blowing off a valid argument by using that retort, meanwhile ECNL is the 0.3% pool from which on the girls side a large majority of YNT, College and Pro’s come from. And on the boys side, a not small proportion….

It’s a lazy smoke and mirrors response to the valide argument by playing games with tiers / definitions and pools.

The problem is both sides see each others reasoning as the same but if you look at it objectively, the entry level should be school year for kids wanting to be with friends, for kids wanting to be recruited to college should be grad year , the platform for kids wanting to go pro and national teams should probably be birth year.

But if we want to just only have one system for all those different things that’s where everyone can say why they think this or that is better. We will find out in a month or so what the majority of US soccer leagues think. Regardless people will be upset when you have a one party system and people don’t feel like their problem are heard.

Maybe there should be another thread, not from the ECNL perspective: "Take back youth soccer from the extreme minority - move back to SY." I can't help but read these posts and think, wow, the millions of kids who don't want to play in college (or higher) are really getting slapped in the face by the small number who do.

Totally fair take!

What is the argument for SY for those that don’t want to play college soccer where there is no “trap” per se?

The recruiting one drops out, but the others are still there. Maximizing the chance to play with friends becomes way more important. Trapped 8th grade year might be even worse, as there is no shifted season in many leagues to accommodate HS, it just doesn't exist. You have to find another team for a single season, or just train with younger kids at your club with no games. Senior year, you're pretty much done, as you're trying out for a new team and you aren't a superstar.

I don’t understand why there would not be fall and spring seasons for classic or NPL? Yea, if your 9th grade soccer friends play HS, you can’t play with them, but that doesn’t mean you’re teamless.

[Anonymous]

Arguing the pros and cons of SY vs. BY is pointless. SY will bring more revenue to ECNL and better align with their business interests, so they will do it. They already hinted in the podcast that they can if they want to, but they want to play nice to give other leagues a chance to change together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the mom of a former trapped player (Nov 04) who had to skip u12 when the BY change happened, had no 8th grade spring season, was one of 4 trapped players to invade the 05 team and take their play time and captain bands and be the cause of 1/4 of the team to get dropped to regional during the senior season, the talk of changing to SY is encouraging to me so my 2012 trapped player (Oct 2012) doesn’t have to go through similar experiences. The discomfort of breaking up a team senior year and taking the spots of players who had been together for years is massive. My 2004 got a great scholarship at a d1 school. The problem is less about RAE and more about a systemic dysfunction for Q4 kids.

Now that the discussion to revert the BY age change has emerged and knowing that ECNL and US Club are considering to right the past wrongs, I really hope it happens since they’ve kicked the hornets nest.

This argument applies to switching or not. But there is no “systemic dysfunction” either way outside of the chaos 1-3 years after a switch is made.

No switch: Continuous disruption for 33% trapped players.

Switch: Short-term disruption, then long-term team stability and chemistry. Minimal trapped players (You can always play up if capable or play down to stay in your grade within the 8/1 to 7/31 cutoff, no redshirt)

Switch, but phase it in.

To say that a switch now is a short term disruption is forgetting that teams will be reconfigured only to benefit a relatively small number of players.

Pick an age group and switch from there on below. But it would be best to target phasing in age groups not currently in the recruitment process. and then those older age groups simple age out of the process on teams that they have been on already.

You can’t say well the system only screws over half the kids so it’s not a real problem. How is half the kids a small number of players?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL said they don’t want to go alone (they can’t) because it would create a real mess. But ECNL wants everyone else to create chaos and align with them so that it’s less messy for ECNL. This whole thing is so dumb.

Then you get the fake “give me good reason not to change” thing, and then when they get a pretty darn good reason, they just dismiss it as “not good enough.”

From the Podcast:
“And it doesn't have to be everybody, but it's got to be the greater majority of organizations. I've challenged people and I said, come back with one positive reason for birth year in terms of player experience or player development. I'm still waiting for the one positive reason to support birth year beyond the proverbial other people in the world do it. So we keep falling back on that argument.”

This is just an entire movement, that is going to end in another mistake by US Soccer, because it’s all about a few loud parents who thing their kids are better than they are, and the birth month is holding them back at 17/18 years old…. Who could foresee consequences of getting out of alignment with the rest of the u15+ world? The rest of the world must be doing it all wrong…and emotionally reactive trap parents have it all figured out with their middling but poorly planned birth month kids….

The world is a big place and no not everyone goes off of birth year. That is only for national teams. Many countries in Europe for their non academy teams play school year. Also many have bio banding which is for everyone but often it’s the later born kids who are the smaller players.

If the change to grad year we can still put together a team and bring them to an International competition.

Also not many teams outside of mls next go play internationally again the system can’t just favor the 1% of team and players or even 25% if it’s that high which it isn’t when you think about every single team in the US Rec to Academy level.

So…what are you actually arguing? This is a thread about ECNL making a change, but you’re saying this is better for the non-elite kids. Ok…so…why are you arguing about it for ECNL?

If we’re talking about the 98% of youth soccer that isn’t MLSN, ECNL, GA and saying they do not need FIFA / International alignment at those levels, what does that say about our elite levels? Probably that they do need that alignment to be at the most competitive levels.

I do appreciate the casualness though of the “we can just throw together some birth year kids to compete internationally if we have to.” <Chef’s Kiss>

If we are only arguing about ECNL and the rest of the soccer landscape is irrelevant for this argument. Grad Year still makes way more sense than birth year. ECNL is not a platform to produce National team players it’s a platform for getting kids recruited for college. If you’re nervous of redshirt kids more than likely your kid will not play college. Not sure if they told you but the ncaa doesn’t use birth year to determine teams.

Redshirting has nothing to do with this.

And you’re right, NCAA has 5 years of kids in the pool, not birth year, and also not school year, but eligibility year - and the talent is what determines the teams. So im not sure how “the NCAA doesn’t use birth year to determine teams” does anything to support school year either. Recruiting has been humming along just fine regardless of age cutoffs.

If the rule was only kids born in March are eligible to be recruited. recruiting would still humm along. That doesn’t mean the system in use is best for the majority of ECNL kids trying to get recruited.

My point was the ncaa doesn’t use birth year kids are all tossed in together in college so no need to fear a few redshirt kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ECNL said they don’t want to go alone (they can’t) because it would create a real mess. But ECNL wants everyone else to create chaos and align with them so that it’s less messy for ECNL. This whole thing is so dumb.

Then you get the fake “give me good reason not to change” thing, and then when they get a pretty darn good reason, they just dismiss it as “not good enough.”

From the Podcast:
“And it doesn't have to be everybody, but it's got to be the greater majority of organizations. I've challenged people and I said, come back with one positive reason for birth year in terms of player experience or player development. I'm still waiting for the one positive reason to support birth year beyond the proverbial other people in the world do it. So we keep falling back on that argument.”

This is just an entire movement, that is going to end in another mistake by US Soccer, because it’s all about a few loud parents who thing their kids are better than they are, and the birth month is holding them back at 17/18 years old…. Who could foresee consequences of getting out of alignment with the rest of the u15+ world? The rest of the world must be doing it all wrong…and emotionally reactive trap parents have it all figured out with their middling but poorly planned birth month kids….

The world is a big place and no not everyone goes off of birth year. That is only for national teams. Many countries in Europe for their non academy teams play school year. Also many have bio banding which is for everyone but often it’s the later born kids who are the smaller players.

If the change to grad year we can still put together a team and bring them to an International competition.

Also not many teams outside of mls next go play internationally again the system can’t just favor the 1% of team and players or even 25% if it’s that high which it isn’t when you think about every single team in the US Rec to Academy level.

So…what are you actually arguing? This is a thread about ECNL making a change, but you’re saying this is better for the non-elite kids. Ok…so…why are you arguing about it for ECNL?

If we’re talking about the 98% of youth soccer that isn’t MLSN, ECNL, GA and saying they do not need FIFA / International alignment at those levels, what does that say about our elite levels? Probably that they do need that alignment to be at the most competitive levels.

I do appreciate the casualness though of the “we can just throw together some birth year kids to compete internationally if we have to.” <Chef’s Kiss>

Holy moly the logic leap in that second paragraph is epic.

The logical leap was based off the bolded quote. Where that poster suggested that “you can’t just favor the 1%.” 😒 it’s that poster’s own logic.

But the argument ECNL (US Club) is making is that this isn’t good for anyone outside the 1% of national team players or kids who go on vacation to play in Europe. Guess what if they change back you will still teams get formed and people will take their European vacations. Don’t worry your instagrams will be fine.

That is not the argument ECNL is making. They’re blowing off a valid argument by using that retort, meanwhile ECNL is the 0.3% pool from which on the girls side a large majority of YNT, College and Pro’s come from. And on the boys side, a not small proportion….

It’s a lazy smoke and mirrors response to the valide argument by playing games with tiers / definitions and pools.

The problem is both sides see each others reasoning as the same but if you look at it objectively, the entry level should be school year for kids wanting to be with friends, for kids wanting to be recruited to college should be grad year , the platform for kids wanting to go pro and national teams should probably be birth year.

But if we want to just only have one system for all those different things that’s where everyone can say why they think this or that is better. We will find out in a month or so what the majority of US soccer leagues think. Regardless people will be upset when you have a one party system and people don’t feel like their problem are heard.

Maybe there should be another thread, not from the ECNL perspective: "Take back youth soccer from the extreme minority - move back to SY." I can't help but read these posts and think, wow, the millions of kids who don't want to play in college (or higher) are really getting slapped in the face by the small number who do.

Totally fair take!

What is the argument for SY for those that don’t want to play college soccer where there is no “trap” per se?

The recruiting one drops out, but the others are still there. Maximizing the chance to play with friends becomes way more important. Trapped 8th grade year might be even worse, as there is no shifted season in many leagues to accommodate HS, it just doesn't exist. You have to find another team for a single season, or just train with younger kids at your club with no games. Senior year, you're pretty much done, as you're trying out for a new team and you aren't a superstar.

I don’t understand why there would not be fall and spring seasons for classic or NPL? Yea, if your 9th grade soccer friends play HS, you can’t play with them, but that doesn’t mean you’re teamless.

What if your high school season is November to March like in California that’s a lot of kids without teams for 4 months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Arguing the pros and cons of SY vs. BY is pointless. SY will bring more revenue to ECNL and better align with their business interests, so they will do it. They already hinted in the podcast that they can if they want to, but they want to play nice to give other leagues a chance to change together.

They want to play nice? lol if they go alone that will be the end

[Anonymous]

I feel like it should be pretty easy for all clubs two manage two systems if clubs did not want to join ECNL. ECNL is 6 teams is it really that hard to manage?

Obvious more people are on board with this decision. Otherwise why not just let ECNL do it on their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arguing the pros and cons of SY vs. BY is pointless. SY will bring more revenue to ECNL and better align with their business interests, so they will do it. They already hinted in the podcast that they can if they want to, but they want to play nice to give other leagues a chance to change together.

They want to play nice? lol if they go alone that will be the end

If they go it alone, ECNL will dilute its brand via RL and expansion. And when that happens more coaches will attend GA events. And when that happens, GA will gain share of ex placement. And when that happens talent, and clubs will begin to move. Either it opens the door for a new league, or GA reaps some benefits.

Regardless, ECNL cannot “technically” change it on their own. In the current structure it would have to be approved by Club, and it seems ECNL is confident club would let them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like it should be pretty easy for all clubs two manage two systems if clubs did not want to join ECNL. ECNL is 6 teams is it really that hard to manage?

Obvious more people are on board with this decision. Otherwise why not just let ECNL do it on their own.

ECNL is currently 6 x 3 = 18 teams on the girls side. They are ECNL, ECNL-RL and ECNL-RL-Socal in my area.

Plus they have 2 x 2 = 4 teams on the younger side.

So SD Surf is pretty much all are ECNL related teams from 5th grade.

ECNL is definitely looking forward to be able to offer RL3, RL4 and RLN leagues when it is an option to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arguing the pros and cons of SY vs. BY is pointless. SY will bring more revenue to ECNL and better align with their business interests, so they will do it. They already hinted in the podcast that they can if they want to, but they want to play nice to give other leagues a chance to change together.

They want to play nice? lol if they go alone that will be the end

If they go it alone, ECNL will dilute its brand via RL and expansion. And when that happens more coaches will attend GA events. And when that happens, GA will gain share of ex placement. And when that happens talent, and clubs will begin to move. Either it opens the door for a new league, or GA reaps some benefits.

Regardless, ECNL cannot “technically” change it on their own. In the current structure it would have to be approved by Club, and it seems ECNL is confident club would let them.

ECNL showcase is exclusively ECNL only. RL has its own event on a different date.

ECNL will not dilute itself. Instead, it will have multiple leagues of tiers. Socal already has three tiers. ECNL only league will be tightly controlled to prevent any dilution.