ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

lol like what do people think will happen. Like please explain how the NL teams will change drastically? Sept+q4(clearly what that person meant) that Play RL now and just got picked to play RL again yesterday. Will likely get picked to play RL again next year unless they put in extra work. The younger NL players are better today than the year older RL players 99% of the time. Don’t have to have been around for the last change. I was there last weekend when we beat the older RL team 5-1. We’l pick up 3 girls from our NL team and our 2 q4 players will be ballers on the younger the team. This is major wishful thinking that there is some new advantage to be on an older RL team vs an NL team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where I am from (flyover country), the elite clubs, both GA and ECNL, are stating that they are trying to keep current teams together to the best of their ability and making the major changes with U-little. Of course kids/parents can opt out if they have a younger but clubs seem to be valuing continuity over strict adherence to rules.

Not sure if you missed my post but that’s exactly what clubs are going to say and behind the scenes add Q3/4 and let the season play out to find out who’s the better players.

Very ignorant thinking to assume your club or any others are not going to add new players that tryout… especially if they are going to help the team win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:U11 Tryouts are over and my daughters Pre-ECNL team made 1 pick up and it was not a q4 player.

The year older team 1 moves to 11v11 next year (u12 tryouts) picked up 2 players - both were girls that would stay with the team and not move down an age group next year (so not q4s).

At the established age groups this will be normal next year too. Coaches picking the best players not looking at birthdates. First team players development over the next year will outpace second teams (not always but in most cases) so expect very few changes for next year beyond the normal tryout shifts.

There will be a movement on NL teams pushing their q4s down to the team below and keeping the q4 impact players up.

2017 and 2018 and next years 2019 teams will see a shift in how teams are picked. Benefitting q4s.

All other ages …it will be 95% just a shuffle down to the same level the age group below.

Can’t wait for the “NOT trues” in my one instance. BC of course. This is generally how it will go. Standout players will always rise to the top. But for most RL players who don’t put in extra work, the younger NL team will likely still be stronger ….in most cases. We beat our year older RL team 5-1 last week.

Her team is a top 5 team in the state. We have a strong NL team in every age group and not as strong RL.

There aren’t any crazy transitions happening. Clubs are just looking to pick the best players who show up and crush tryouts. Not looking at your birthday.

My own experience from last time, as a coach, was that the impact curve of the change was a bell curve.

So nothing at u8 (they were brand new), quickly rising with a peak in impacts at u12/13 and then a steady and steep decline in impacts.

Also if you don’t think coaches look at birthdays, then I’m not sure what to tell you. Of course they do. It is a data point. They will use it just like any other piece of data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:lol like what do people think will happen. Like please explain how the NL teams will change drastically? Sept+q4(clearly what that person meant) that Play RL now and just got picked to play RL again yesterday. Will likely get picked to play RL again next year unless they put in extra work. The younger NL players are better today than the year older RL players 99% of the time. Don’t have to have been around for the last change. I was there last weekend when we beat the older RL team 5-1. We’l pick up 3 girls from our NL team and our 2 q4 players will be ballers on the younger the team. This is major wishful thinking that there is some new advantage to be on an older RL team vs an NL team.

You’re just guessing just like anyone saying the q3/4 players are better. I think there is going to be some trial and error which is why ECNL made sure to make a true RL league that will help clubs move kids around.

But in my experience most teams that are nationally ranked 2012 that play up get beat or tie or barely win over 2011s with drastically lower rankings.

Example Mustang 2012 ECNL ranked CA 4th and nationally 10th lost 3-1 to Ajax NPL 2011 ranked CA 23rd and Nationally 121.

Obviously this is just one data point but there is a big difference when you play up a year. The game is faster and more physical.

[Anonymous]

Hey guys let’s do something really fun. Let’s take these RL players who are worse than our current players and put them on the first team and cut our ballers who are younger by 5 months bc looking at their birthdays (as us coaches do) they are older and this matters.

Lol nope.

[Anonymous]

Omg are we really back to denying RAE

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol like what do people think will happen. Like please explain how the NL teams will change drastically? Sept+q4(clearly what that person meant) that Play RL now and just got picked to play RL again yesterday. Will likely get picked to play RL again next year unless they put in extra work. The younger NL players are better today than the year older RL players 99% of the time. Don’t have to have been around for the last change. I was there last weekend when we beat the older RL team 5-1. We’l pick up 3 girls from our NL team and our 2 q4 players will be ballers on the younger the team. This is major wishful thinking that there is some new advantage to be on an older RL team vs an NL team.

You’re just guessing just like anyone saying the q3/4 players are better. I think there is going to be some trial and error which is why ECNL made sure to make a true RL league that will help clubs move kids around.

But in my experience most teams that are nationally ranked 2012 that play up get beat or tie or barely win over 2011s with drastically lower rankings.

Example Mustang 2012 ECNL ranked CA 4th and nationally 10th lost 3-1 to Ajax NPL 2011 ranked CA 23rd and Nationally 121.

Obviously this is just one data point but there is a big difference when you play up a year. The game is faster and more physical.

Yes a top 10 nationally ranked 2012 team playing up would fall somewhere between 50-150 nationally in 2011. This is why people assume q3-4 girls going down from 11s to 12s are better. Because if they are playing GA, ECNL, or on a decent RL team their competition is better than GA, ECNL, RL 2012.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey guys let’s do something really fun. Let’s take these RL players who are worse than our current players and put them on the first team and cut our ballers who are younger by 5 months bc looking at their birthdays (as us coaches do) they are older and this matters.

Lol nope.

I think you’re missing what people are saying. 2012 ballers are not getting cut in-fact most kids will not get cut. We will see large pools of players being formed with coaches deciding week to week who plays NL and RL. I’m sure RL 11s won’t make an NL 12/11 team.

But the competition for making any ECNL team just jumped up to another level for kids on an ECNL team currently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey guys let’s do something really fun. Let’s take these RL players who are worse than our current players and put them on the first team and cut our ballers who are younger by 5 months bc looking at their birthdays (as us coaches do) they are older and this matters.

Lol nope.

Are they ballers? Or are they age group only ballers? That’s what we are going to find out when the age groups change.

[Anonymous]

Chances are most top squads have between 0-3 Sept-Dec. kids on their roster at u13 and above. My daughter is a Q4, I don't expect a lot of movement in her club - or in rival area clubs - even when the SY shift goes into effect. The most realistic scenario is those kids get pushed down to the NL team the year below, which pushes the bubble kids off the roster. Yes there will be exceptions and anecdotes that suggest otherwise, but I doubt you see many q3&Q4 RL kids take NL kids slot in the age group below.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hey guys let’s do something really fun. Let’s take these RL players who are worse than our current players and put them on the first team and cut our ballers who are younger by 5 months bc looking at their birthdays (as us coaches do) they are older and this matters.

Lol nope.

Dude no one wants to hear it. We get it - you have a bubble kid and are hanging on. Good luck. But stop with the self righteous posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Omg are we really back to denying RAE

There's no denying RAE. The big question is how it'll impact the older teams. Some now seems to say big changes because last time -- which I find interesting because RAE helped drive those changes because the older kids in the old SY -- and often the core of the team -- had no real option to play down. This time, the older kids are the core of the team. That factor, I think, will lead to fewer changes, especially when compared to the last time. That's not to say some clubs and players won't have opportunities to improve through this change. That certainly will happen BUT not to the degree some people think or hope for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chances are most top squads have between 0-3 Sept-Dec. kids on their roster at u13 and above. My daughter is a Q4, I don't expect a lot of movement in her club - or in rival area clubs - even when the SY shift goes into effect. The most realistic scenario is those kids get pushed down to the NL team the year below, which pushes the bubble kids off the roster. Yes there will be exceptions and anecdotes that suggest otherwise, but I doubt you see many q3&Q4 RL kids take NL kids slot in the age group below.

Really depends on the area and the club. To your point some teams might not have many Q3/4 players. My daughter’s team only has 2. But another local club that is a top 10 nationally ranked club and team has 6. That will surely disrupt their lower age team when all those girls go down. Especially if more skilled GA/ECNL Q3-4 players move to that newly formed team as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For Q3:4 players next year is a free year and you get a mulligan season in 26/27.

Example 25/26 2011 play U15 26/27 Q3/4 2011 play U15. Use this season to make sure your kids play a bunch and are ready for the Wild West tryouts next spring.

It’s going to be a SH#T SHOW!

Wait until ECNL kids get promised they are still going to be part of the ECNL pool of players only to play in the new RL league. ECNL has already said this new league is so clubs can optimize player potential and move players up or down week to week.

What this means is clubs will say everyone has a chance to be ECNL to get everyone’s money then let the sad losers complain after the check clears and it’s too late.

Don’t be a sucker! If clubs/coaches want your kid they will make sure you know it. Don’t fall for the definitely maybe game.

This has always been the case. ECNL is a pooled player league. Meaning clubs with both an ECNL and RL roster out of the total pool.

Not all clubs utilize this, and make rosters fixed. Typically due to parents and teens not being able to handle the “demotion” and “promotion.”

[Anonymous]

If your Q4 kid needs a BY to SY change to make the team he or she ain't that good