ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From US soccer website

Alignment of Post-Season Play & Standalone Competitions |

It is generally seen that for regular seasons serving as qualifiers for post-season competitions, those seasons should be on the same registration choice as the end-state competition (e.g., national championships); for standalone competitions not part of league play (e.g., showcases), organization members will be responsible for working with the competition organizers on clearly communicating the approved registration choice.

ECNL will be allowed to make showcases based off whatever age groups they want separate from the 8/1 format. I’ve heard ECNL is wanting grad year for showcases Junior/seniors.

All Aug-Dec players who started school early and are young for their grade will be eligible to play 8/1-7/31 league play and nationals however ECNL will not allow them to play in the younger school grade for showcases.
Will be based on grade in school or GY.

So they can be recruited with their graduating class because either they are good enough or they or not.

My friend is a consultant/lawyer that is helping US soccer and he told me what ECNL plans on doing. Based on the plans submitted. This will all be public knowledge at some point late this year or early next year.

What you've written doesn't make sense.

Wildcards include showcase results. This means playoff eligibility depends on showcase results. Since this is the case you can"t have players playing down during showcases. Unless you want to make playing down during any part of the season a thing. Many people seem to think that showcase results are completely separate from league when they're not.

Maybe ECNL should hire someone that understands math instead of a lawyer.

I think you have it backwards. They were saying that league can play down but showcases you have to play with your grade.

Well thats even more dumb.

So ECNL wants to make sure all players on the field during showcases are the same grade but league games, playoffs, and finels might be 2 grades?

Just make a rule that Aug birthdays can't play down and it will guarantee that all players on the field are the same grade in school at all events. Stop making this so hard and just do what SY+30 guy said from the beginning.

You’re assuming only Aug kids are in a misaligned grade. Force a Aug kid to play with older age group but not a Sept kid?
What makes sense is a 12 month calendar and showcases for older kids are just grad year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

[Anonymous]

I meant "Aug birthdays can't play down"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

You're missing a big world -- the one where families don't want to be forced to play with kids who are older, even if they are in the same grade, for a multitude of reasons having to do what's best for the kid. This entire argument is just like let's go to BY to cater to the YNT. Kids CAN play up and should do so if they are at the highest levels for recruiting purposes. Forcing everyone is just dumb.

I would agree until you are talking about the top leagues that are college recruitment leagues. Kids at 17/18 should be able to play with 1 year older kids especially if they are at a level to be recruited.

Also parents might want their kid to play against juniors as a senior even if they are the same age but I’m sure the kid wants to play with their same grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

Senior year will be Grad Year anyways. All high school seniors will be allowed to play. So adding a junior year GY showcase is not that big of a deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

Senior year will be Grad Year anyways. All high school seniors will be allowed to play. So adding a junior year GY showcase is not that big of a deal.

It is to Junior player parents who are paying for it all.

The GY guy is trying everything he can because he knows his opportunity to get GY in is done once SY is implemented. If a rule not allowing aug birthdays to play down is also implemented theyre double done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

GY is not a good a good idea for any age.

It's tolerated for HS Seniors because they dont have other options to be seen by recruiters. Other than playing semi pro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

GY is not a good a good idea for any age.

It's tolerated for HS Seniors because they dont have other options to be seen by recruiters. Other than playing semi pro.

Then why would US soccer allow leagues to do whatever they want for their showcases? What rules will be included if not some type of GY adjustments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

Senior year will be Grad Year anyways. All high school seniors will be allowed to play. So adding a junior year GY showcase is not that big of a deal.

It is to Junior player parents who are paying for it all.

The GY guy is trying everything he can because he knows his opportunity to get GY in is done once SY is implemented. If a rule not allowing aug birthdays to play down is also implemented theyre double done.

When has any league or club ever cared about paying parents that makes no sense? Especially if the kid is replaceable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

Senior year will be Grad Year anyways. All high school seniors will be allowed to play. So adding a junior year GY showcase is not that big of a deal.

It is to Junior player parents who are paying for it all.

The GY guy is trying everything he can because he knows his opportunity to get GY in is done once SY is implemented. If a rule not allowing aug birthdays to play down is also implemented theyre double done.

If an Aug birthday is within the 12-month window, it's NOT playing down. The kid may be playing against a lower grade BUT they don't have to and can seek out teams/opportunities with the same grade. It will work, people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

Senior year will be Grad Year anyways. All high school seniors will be allowed to play. So adding a junior year GY showcase is not that big of a deal.

It is to Junior player parents who are paying for it all.

The GY guy is trying everything he can because he knows his opportunity to get GY in is done once SY is implemented. If a rule not allowing aug birthdays to play down is also implemented theyre double done.

When has any league or club ever cared about paying parents that makes no sense? Especially if the kid is replaceable.

Every year when they send out the bill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we need SY +30 if we are trying to make it all kids in lay in their SY. Just make it SY period. No date. That way Aug and Sept kids that are above the cutoff still can lay “up” with their school year and are in the correct recruiting class. Plain old SY solves everything.

If you have to change from BY to SY I agree with you.

The problem with what you're suggesting is parents will hold back / regrade their kids so they're the biggest and oldest on the team. (16 year old freshman / 20 year old seniors in HS)

So you need a way to only allow players that are a certain grade AND a certain age on the team. This is what SY+30 does.

Except it's not needed ... All you need is to keep a hard 12-month window that allows kids to play up based on ability. There's no reason to prohibit an Aug. bday playing on a team that's a grade below. Now, if you want to play with your grade, that's possible -- but no guarantee as the level of play you might find. What's already out there is enough. Adding SY+30 only creates more problems by limiting people's flexibility.

You still dont understand how a calendar works.

8/1 with a rule saying Aug birthdays cant play down is the same thing as SY+30. The difference is enforcement is reactive instead of proactive. What this does is guarantee that all players on the field are a certain grade in school and not older playing down. You get the best of both worlds. No GY nonsense and all players are a certain grade in school during games.

All ECNL has to do is implement a no Aug birthdays playing down rule and their issues are solved.

The person pushing for a "hard 12 month eligibility" whatever will eventually have to capitulate because they're fighting against math. Unfortunately because school districts start at different dates theres just no way to make what they want work the way they want it to.

This whole process was geared towards eliminating trapped players as Job 1. Having significant misalignment was bad from multiple different stand points. Not fair to younger players, confusing to college coaches and most likely impacted participation to some degree.

8/1 solves that unequivocally so I am in total agreement with that.

Now the "ancillary" issues, while small, are not unimportant, and, if we are trying to solve all issues in one fail swoop, need to be addressed. The main minor issues in my viewpoint are deciding what to do with August birthdays in 9/1 or later states AND guarding against a slippery slope to grad year at the younger ages due to holdbacks, etc. I am fine with grad year for seniors.

The fixes must be balanced with ease of implementation, technology restraints, elimination of gamesmanship etc.

Having a fixed 8/1-7/31 365 days with no exceptions is really easy to implement for the 10,000 clubs. So that needs to be the defacto solution in my opinion. Now if ECNL or GA or whomever else wants to add stipulations for their specific organizations more power to them. A simple august birthdays in 9/1 states must play with grade is fine but you have just created a slight disadvantage for those kids making them play in a 13 month structure vs a strict 12 month.

I am still of the opinion that choice is better than no choice. If a kid is in the 12 month window they play with that cohort as the default. If they are good enough to play up and WANT to play up, more power to them.

Everything else is just noise.

And my bet is still that it will be a straight 365 day window at ECNL and GA, with a slight (less than 25%) that they implement a rule having August play up with grade.

I prefer BY but SY with a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down a grade is ok.

The supposed lawyer / GY guy that was working with ECNL is ridiculious. They're creating all kinds of dumb carve outs just so older players can play down for wins in showcases. Just implement a rule saying Aug birthdays can play down and ALL events will only be a single grade. Which is what college recruiters want. Stop listening to the GY cheaters who want to piss all the other parents off that arent cheating by playing down for extra recruiting minutes.

Learn to read they said working with US Soccer. But I agree and disagree.
Grad Year is NOT a good idea for younger ages.

But if the language written from US soccer regarding showcases is legit (have not looked it up)

There would be no reason for US soccer to include that unless they were allowing leagues like ECNL to run their private showcases however they want. Which would mean those leagues obviously want to do their own thing.

Which allowing just GY for Juniors/Seniors showcases makes a lot of sense.

Senior year will be Grad Year anyways. All high school seniors will be allowed to play. So adding a junior year GY showcase is not that big of a deal.

It is to Junior player parents who are paying for it all.

The GY guy is trying everything he can because he knows his opportunity to get GY in is done once SY is implemented. If a rule not allowing aug birthdays to play down is also implemented theyre double done.

When has any league or club ever cared about paying parents that makes no sense? Especially if the kid is replaceable.

Every year when they send out the bill.

If you paying them means they care there’s no help for you.

[Anonymous]

ECNL podcast already said they can not fix all trapped player issues, they will play based off a 1 year calendar. That will include some higher grades playing with some lower grades it will just drastically less. Also US soccer rules show they need to follow that same calendar year round and for nationals.

Showcases are the only gray area at this point.