ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

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

Your Q1 or Q2 kid probably isn’t that good and that was the reason for this post…I’m sorry your kid can’t keep playing against underclassmen….Q1&2 parents are about to be in for a very rude awakening…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Your Q1 or Q2 kid probably isn’t that good and that was the reason for this post…I’m sorry your kid can’t keep playing against underclassmen….Q1&2 parents are about to be in for a very rude awakening…

Or, get even better from the new older kids they get to play against!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Your Q1 or Q2 kid probably isn’t that good and that was the reason for this post…I’m sorry your kid can’t keep playing against underclassmen….Q1&2 parents are about to be in for a very rude awakening…

Or, get even better from the new older kids they get to play against!

Historical statistics are not in your favor. There are usually 1 or 2 SepQ4 in the current NL team of 22 players. After the switch, most Q2 July-August players will gradually be eliminated from the top team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.”

Not all ECNL clubs have teams in the RL league. Now they all get their own special participation trophy 2nd team league. Which makes a big difference.

[Anonymous]

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

That is the fun of all this! Are they or aren’t they? That is the question!?? And we will all find out by spring of 27.

It’s like waiting for a new avengers movie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Your Q1 or Q2 kid probably isn’t that good and that was the reason for this post…I’m sorry your kid can’t keep playing against underclassmen….Q1&2 parents are about to be in for a very rude awakening…

Or, get even better from the new older kids they get to play against!

Historical statistics are not in your favor. There are usually 1 or 2 SepQ4 in the current NL team of 22 players. After the switch, most Q2 July-August players will gradually be eliminated from the top team.

Q1s on Average should be okay. But the Q2 are in trouble unless they are superior athletes. On average and objectively speaking of course.

[Anonymous]

People should not underestimate RL/GA Q3/4 players who can start. Because 2010 RL/GA is equal to or better than 2011.

This page definitely getting to a 1000! But can we get to 2000?

[Anonymous]

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

I know so many Q1-Q2 that ain’t so good and make the 1sr team just because they are Q1-Q2 …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

That is the fun of all this! Are they or aren’t they? That is the question!?? And we will all find out by spring of 27.

It’s like waiting for a new avengers movie.

I think we will start finding out in spring/winter of 26 when they start letting Q4 practice/integrate with the team below. Eyes will be opened then one way or the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://theecnl.com/news/2025/5/1/real-colorado-academy-colorado-rapids-youth-join-ecnl-texas-conference.aspx

Please discuss.....

Bottom line:

1. ECNL and MLS Next are at war with each other.

2. Colorado was a proxy battle and ECNL won this one (but does Colorado even matter except for Real Colorado on the girls' side?).

3. MLS Next added a bunch of smaller or less-successful clubs to their platform in Colorado, but very likely won't be enough for it to matter without Real Colorado and Colorado Rapids Youth not involved.

4. Colorado Rapids *Academy* and Colorado Rapids *Youth* are distinct organizations. Academy is part of the actual MLS Rapids organization and Rapids Youth just shares branding (maybe they will change their branding or be forced to?) but does not have any official connection to the MLS organization.

5. This decision by ECNL, Real Colorado, and Colorado Rapids Youth is a consolidation and likely will negatively affect all of the other clubs and the state association. These were probably the two big players in the state and they just built a moat around themselves. They may be 'rivals' on the pitch, but they seem to have viewed the smaller clubs and state associations as the greater foe here.

6. Colorado is likely a lag indicator and not a lead indicator. Places like Colorado and DC don't set the tone for youth soccer, only California and Texas really can, do, and will

7. Again, this was just a proxy war that doesn't really matter anyways. ECNL won this one, but loyalties are fickle.

[Anonymous]

One more thing: ECNL really only has leverage against MLS Next with clubs only if their girls' program is stronger than their boys' program.

That's probably true of both of these clubs that moved to ECNL.

How long that leverage will be maintained? Who knows?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://theecnl.com/news/2025/5/1/real-colorado-academy-colorado-rapids-youth-join-ecnl-texas-conference.aspx

Please discuss.....

Bottom line:

1. ECNL and MLS Next are at war with each other.

2. Colorado was a proxy battle and ECNL won this one (but does Colorado even matter except for Real Colorado on the girls' side?).

3. MLS Next added a bunch of smaller or less-successful clubs to their platform in Colorado, but very likely won't be enough for it to matter without Real Colorado and Colorado Rapids Youth not involved.

4. Colorado Rapids *Academy* and Colorado Rapids *Youth* are distinct organizations. Academy is part of the actual MLS Rapids organization and Rapids Youth just shares branding (maybe they will change their branding or be forced to?) but does not have any official connection to the MLS organization.

5. This decision by ECNL, Real Colorado, and Colorado Rapids Youth is a consolidation and likely will negatively affect all of the other clubs and the state association. These were probably the two big players in the state and they just built a moat around themselves. They may be 'rivals' on the pitch, but they seem to have viewed the smaller clubs and state associations as the greater foe here.

6. Colorado is likely a lag indicator and not a lead indicator. Places like Colorado and DC don't set the tone for youth soccer, only California and Texas really can, do, and will

7. Again, this was just a proxy war that doesn't really matter anyways. ECNL won this one, but loyalties are fickle.

Fascinating analysis ... What's your take on the BY/SY switch in all of this, especially since MLSN/GA are still holding their cards close to the vest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://theecnl.com/news/2025/5/1/real-colorado-academy-colorado-rapids-youth-join-ecnl-texas-conference.aspx

Please discuss.....

Bottom line:

1. ECNL and MLS Next are at war with each other.

2. Colorado was a proxy battle and ECNL won this one (but does Colorado even matter except for Real Colorado on the girls' side?).

3. MLS Next added a bunch of smaller or less-successful clubs to their platform in Colorado, but very likely won't be enough for it to matter without Real Colorado and Colorado Rapids Youth not involved.

4. Colorado Rapids *Academy* and Colorado Rapids *Youth* are distinct organizations. Academy is part of the actual MLS Rapids organization and Rapids Youth just shares branding (maybe they will change their branding or be forced to?) but does not have any official connection to the MLS organization.

5. This decision by ECNL, Real Colorado, and Colorado Rapids Youth is a consolidation and likely will negatively affect all of the other clubs and the state association. These were probably the two big players in the state and they just built a moat around themselves. They may be 'rivals' on the pitch, but they seem to have viewed the smaller clubs and state associations as the greater foe here.

6. Colorado is likely a lag indicator and not a lead indicator. Places like Colorado and DC don't set the tone for youth soccer, only California and Texas really can, do, and will

7. Again, this was just a proxy war that doesn't really matter anyways. ECNL won this one, but loyalties are fickle.

Fascinating analysis ... What's your take on the BY/SY switch in all of this, especially since MLSN/GA are still holding their cards close to the vest?

Here's my take on the BY (Birth Year) vs. SY (School Year) situation in light of the recent ECNL vs. MLSN drama:

Let’s keep it real...most of us here are:

1. Parents of kids playing in ECNL, MLSN, GA, etc.
2. Or hoping our kids land in one of those platforms.

So naturally, we’re watching these battles (like the ECNL win in Colorado) closely. But when it comes to the BY vs. SY debate, I don’t think ECNL or MLSN are steering the ship anymore (ever?).

Yes, ECNL sparked the conversation via a podcast and some offhand comments, but they didn’t fully commit to driving a national change. They got what they wanted: flexibility. Do what works for your club, your region, your ecosystem. That’s it.

Here’s the deeper reality:
The rec soccer world still drives the base of the sport in this country. And it should. That’s where the majority of kids play, where most families get their first experience with the game, and where participation numbers still dominate.

And guess what? Rec programs overwhelmingly prefer School Year (SY). It's easier. Cleaner for schools, communities, and local leagues.

So even if MLS Next and GA hold the line on Birth Year (BY), and never budge, the overall tide isn’t in their favor long term. They’re not big enough by numbers or by influence at the grassroots level to dictate the national structure on their own.

In short:
Whether or not the “elite” platforms align won’t decide the future. The base will. And right now, that base is leaning SY. So unless you think MLSN or GA are going to start building soccer fields for 8-year-olds across the country, this shift is probably already happening, just not where we’re looking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Good coaches look at birthdays. A lot of them do not.

[Anonymous]

Here’s the truth: This whole shift started in 2016 because Jurgen Klinsmann pushed for it, thinking it would help the USMNT pipeline. So US Soccer made a top-down switch to BY not because it helped youth soccer, but because it supposedly helped elite development.

Result?

Our national team didn’t get any better. Youth soccer enrollment dropped. Rec programs took a hit.

So now, years later, returning to SY is a pragmatic correction. It’s not about ideology or development theory...it’s about participation. Getting more kids into the game. Clubs, especially on the rec side, realized that SY calendars just work better for families, schools, and communities.

Elite programs like ECNL and MLSN are loud about it, but they’re not driving the change. They’re just the ones posting about it. Meanwhile, rec soccer has the volume and the numbers and the reach and, frankly, the profit potential that makes the whole system sustainable.

Bottom line:
This is a numbers game, and rec programs have the numbers. If they’re leaning SY (which they are), that’s where the tide is going. Whether MLSN or GA stick with BY might matter for their own branding or structure, but it won’t steer the ship for US youth soccer as a whole (nor should it).