ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, did not read the previous 927 pages but this mean that the April-July kids will now be the least likely to make the team? After this change was announced I looked at our roster to realize that most kids were born January through May, and then we have two July/August kids and only one born in October after the new cutoff. Is this typical? My son is born in July and I am a bit concern what this shift will mean for him next year.

Feels like a troll, but yes this the current landscape and it will be changing drastically in fall 2026

Huh? Why would this be a troll post? This is what my son’s team look like and I was curious if that is the case more or less across the board. If so, then I think there is a good reason to believe that things will become an uphill battle for him next year having a July birthday and being still quite young.

It depends on how many Sept-Q4 kids are on the older team. Sounds like perhaps not many. The age cut offs have probably caused a lot of Q4 kids to drop soccer.

It seems that this might be the case to a large extent and only the youngest kids will be really affected, but there might be a few kids who could become a threat. Our October kid is one of the smallest but also one of the best technically. The age group currently below us definitely needs to worry about him, because with them he will no longer have the size disadvantage and will have benefited from years of playing with and against older and larger kids on a top team. It is going to be interesting to see how things shake up next year.

Yall know you can go on the ECNL site on the boys side and see grad year for all players right? There are plenty of q4s… not to mention all of the Q4s from the stronger RL teams. Plus, all of them will be club shopping next spring… you really don’t understand what is going to happen.

When the lower half of the roster kids have to suddenly compete a birth year up against bigger, older kids from within and from outside the club, they aren’t going to make the cut for first teams. This isn’t rocket science, plus it literally happened before!

Ding ding ding.

[Anonymous]

Starting in 25/26 the Girls Academy will be its own sanctioning body, similar to MLS/MLS Next. No longer under USSSA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw my first ECNL hat today! I laughed. Thanks to this message board

Consider this...

There used to be 10x more. Some have been shamed into taking them off + buying something with their kids club info.

The ones left haven't got the memo.

I did find it funny when my U12 fellow parent bought one at an event. Big time cringe.

Maybe some people aren't into sports and that's fine but come on.

You wouldn't go to a Commanders game and buy a hat that says NFL.

I don’t view my kid’s game at a travel showcase as being much like a pro football game, so it’s more of a souvenir for me.

Glad to accept $10 from anyone here who wants to judge, though.

Does your kid play for a club?

Or, does your kid play for a league?

A club of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, did not read the previous 927 pages but this mean that the April-July kids will now be the least likely to make the team? After this change was announced I looked at our roster to realize that most kids were born January through May, and then we have two July/August kids and only one born in October after the new cutoff. Is this typical? My son is born in July and I am a bit concern what this shift will mean for him next year.

Feels like a troll, but yes this the current landscape and it will be changing drastically in fall 2026

Huh? Why would this be a troll post? This is what my son’s team look like and I was curious if that is the case more or less across the board. If so, then I think there is a good reason to believe that things will become an uphill battle for him next year having a July birthday and being still quite young.

It depends on how many Sept-Q4 kids are on the older team. Sounds like perhaps not many. The age cut offs have probably caused a lot of Q4 kids to drop soccer.

It seems that this might be the case to a large extent and only the youngest kids will be really affected, but there might be a few kids who could become a threat. Our October kid is one of the smallest but also one of the best technically. The age group currently below us definitely needs to worry about him, because with them he will no longer have the size disadvantage and will have benefited from years of playing with and against older and larger kids on a top team. It is going to be interesting to see how things shake up next year.

Yall know you can go on the ECNL site on the boys side and see grad year for all players right? There are plenty of q4s… not to mention all of the Q4s from the stronger RL teams. Plus, all of them will be club shopping next spring… you really don’t understand what is going to happen.

When the lower half of the roster kids have to suddenly compete a birth year up against bigger, older kids from within and from outside the club, they aren’t going to make the cut for first teams. This isn’t rocket science, plus it literally happened before!

Ding ding ding.

It did not happen in the recent ECNL tryout; the 3 new players on our NL teams are all Q1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, did not read the previous 927 pages but this mean that the April-July kids will now be the least likely to make the team? After this change was announced I looked at our roster to realize that most kids were born January through May, and then we have two July/August kids and only one born in October after the new cutoff. Is this typical? My son is born in July and I am a bit concern what this shift will mean for him next year.

Feels like a troll, but yes this the current landscape and it will be changing drastically in fall 2026

Huh? Why would this be a troll post? This is what my son’s team look like and I was curious if that is the case more or less across the board. If so, then I think there is a good reason to believe that things will become an uphill battle for him next year having a July birthday and being still quite young.

It depends on how many Sept-Q4 kids are on the older team. Sounds like perhaps not many. The age cut offs have probably caused a lot of Q4 kids to drop soccer.

That proves the point doesnt it?
It seems that this might be the case to a large extent and only the youngest kids will be really affected, but there might be a few kids who could become a threat. Our October kid is one of the smallest but also one of the best technically. The age group currently below us definitely needs to worry about him, because with them he will no longer have the size disadvantage and will have benefited from years of playing with and against older and larger kids on a top team. It is going to be interesting to see how things shake up next year.

Yall know you can go on the ECNL site on the boys side and see grad year for all players right? There are plenty of q4s… not to mention all of the Q4s from the stronger RL teams. Plus, all of them will be club shopping next spring… you really don’t understand what is going to happen.

When the lower half of the roster kids have to suddenly compete a birth year up against bigger, older kids from within and from outside the club, they aren’t going to make the cut for first teams. This isn’t rocket science, plus it literally happened before!

Ding ding ding.

It did not happen in the recent ECNL tryout; the 3 new players on our NL teams are all Q1.

[Anonymous]

That proves the point doesnt it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a fair discussion of the switch to SY ... Also found this super insightful ...

It’s confusing because the cutoff works in opposite directions for school and soccer:
The school cutoff says “no younger than” while the soccer cutoff says “no older than".

In school you can choose to start late (be older for your class, i.e., “play down”), but in soccer if you’re too old (based on the soccer cutoff date) you are excluded from that group.

In you can choose to play up (be younger than teammates), but in school you’re too young you can’t start (e.g., can’t enroll in kindergarten until you turn 5.

The later the school district cutoff, the more kids eligible for that school year (Sept 1 cutoff allows Aug birthdays to start); the earlier the soccer cutoff, the more kids eligible to play soccer with that group (Aug 1 cutoff allows Aug birthdays to participate).

An earlier cutoff = more players eligible to participate with their classmates. We support a July 1 or August 1 soccer cutoff, with the assumption that clubs & leagues will allow players to play up and that most players will choose to play with their grade, even those eligible to play with the grade below.

https://www.soccerparenting.com/blog/upcoming-age-group-changes-youth-soccer-csc/

Makes so much sense. Does anyone from the governing bodies see this though? Surely they are getting lots of similar feedback.

To be clear - no one is going to choose to play up during the "important years" when it comes to recruiting. Each month you add, the more misaligned kids you have.You're talking the exception not the rule.

This approach is essentially grad year-lite, making it open enough to cover most scenarios that are +/- 90 days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, did not read the previous 927 pages but this mean that the April-July kids will now be the least likely to make the team? After this change was announced I looked at our roster to realize that most kids were born January through May, and then we have two July/August kids and only one born in October after the new cutoff. Is this typical? My son is born in July and I am a bit concern what this shift will mean for him next year.

Feels like a troll, but yes this the current landscape and it will be changing drastically in fall 2026

Huh? Why would this be a troll post? This is what my son’s team look like and I was curious if that is the case more or less across the board. If so, then I think there is a good reason to believe that things will become an uphill battle for him next year having a July birthday and being still quite young.

It depends on how many Sept-Q4 kids are on the older team. Sounds like perhaps not many. The age cut offs have probably caused a lot of Q4 kids to drop soccer.

It seems that this might be the case to a large extent and only the youngest kids will be really affected, but there might be a few kids who could become a threat. Our October kid is one of the smallest but also one of the best technically. The age group currently below us definitely needs to worry about him, because with them he will no longer have the size disadvantage and will have benefited from years of playing with and against older and larger kids on a top team. It is going to be interesting to see how things shake up next year.

Yall know you can go on the ECNL site on the boys side and see grad year for all players right? There are plenty of q4s… not to mention all of the Q4s from the stronger RL teams. Plus, all of them will be club shopping next spring… you really don’t understand what is going to happen.

When the lower half of the roster kids have to suddenly compete a birth year up against bigger, older kids from within and from outside the club, they aren’t going to make the cut for first teams. This isn’t rocket science, plus it literally happened before!

Ding ding ding.

Makes sense that there's plenty of Q4 -- ECNL is the 2nd-tier boys league.

[Anonymous]

The landscape of college soccer is going to change and there will no longer be restrictions on how long players can stay/play in college. What’s being talked about is colleges will have a year long season and most likely have multiple teams. A scholarship team and a P2P development team.

Which is bad and good how you look at it. Because of roster rules this will allow more “student athletes” but obviously college soccer as we know it is dying.

Will be even more difficult to get a scholarship if players choose to stay in college long term. Will probably see more players take the Nico route and then try and transfer or just join the 2nd team and graduate and be on their way in life or transfer out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Starting in 25/26 the Girls Academy will be its own sanctioning body, similar to MLS/MLS Next. No longer under USSSA.

This means what exactly? They could have done this last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting in 25/26 the Girls Academy will be its own sanctioning body, similar to MLS/MLS Next. No longer under USSSA.

This means what exactly? They could have done this last year.

They can technically do whatever they want in regard to league rules and age grouping policy and start next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting in 25/26 the Girls Academy will be its own sanctioning body, similar to MLS/MLS Next. No longer under USSSA.

This means what exactly? They could have done this last year.

They can technically do whatever they want in regard to league rules and age grouping policy and start next year.

It's more than that. GA can also sanction GAA, DPL, etc etc etc. They could even sanction ECNL.

Basically GA is at the same level at US Club (for the ECNL people).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting in 25/26 the Girls Academy will be its own sanctioning body, similar to MLS/MLS Next. No longer under USSSA.

This means what exactly? They could have done this last year.

They can technically do whatever they want in regard to league rules and age grouping policy and start next year.

It's more than that. GA can also sanction GAA, DPL, etc etc etc. They could even sanction ECNL.

Basically GA is at the same level at US Club (for the ECNL people).

That’s probably why there is a rumor going around that their answer to SY will have more flexibility. But who knows. Hopefully we will find out for sure in the next couple of weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting in 25/26 the Girls Academy will be its own sanctioning body, similar to MLS/MLS Next. No longer under USSSA.

This means what exactly? They could have done this last year.

They can technically do whatever they want in regard to league rules and age grouping policy and start next year.

It's more than that. GA can also sanction GAA, DPL, etc etc etc. They could even sanction ECNL.

Basically GA is at the same level at US Club (for the ECNL people).

That’s probably why there is a rumor going around that their answer to SY will have more flexibility. But who knows. Hopefully we will find out for sure in the next couple of weeks.

Sanctioning doesn't define league rules. However they can choose to not sanctuon certain leagues because of their rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting in 25/26 the Girls Academy will be its own sanctioning body, similar to MLS/MLS Next. No longer under USSSA.

This means what exactly? They could have done this last year.

They can technically do whatever they want in regard to league rules and age grouping policy and start next year.

It's more than that. GA can also sanction GAA, DPL, etc etc etc. They could even sanction ECNL.

Basically GA is at the same level at US Club (for the ECNL people).

That’s probably why there is a rumor going around that their answer to SY will have more flexibility. But who knows. Hopefully we will find out for sure in the next couple of weeks.

Sanctioning doesn't define league rules. However they can choose to not sanctuon certain leagues because of their rules.

I’m not sure what you mean? If they decide their own rules and regulations isn’t that them sanctioning themselves?
Similar to MLS/MLSN which allows biobanding?