ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

There's 2 things going on at the same tine.

1. GA can Sanction
2. GA is a league and can define its rules

GA can sanction its own league or GA can sanction other leagues. While yes GA can Sanction and is a league at the same time. It's important to keep the functionality separate. Obviously GA isn't going to unsanction itself for certain rules. But they need to be consistent especially if other leagues start using GA for sanctioning.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think we will hear anything about ecnl, ga, or mlsnext plans for 26/27 until the 24/25 season wraps up in early July. They won’t want to take the attention off of what’s going on now. Making policies public in the dead time between playoffs wrapping up and the 25/26 preseason starting will keep the attention on the league.

I think the more complicated the age policy and the more differences between the leagues the worse for the players. It becomes less about the development of the kids and more about the leagues themselves. I guess that’s what they want though.

I also can’t imagine how chaotic this next year is going to be. There are a surprisingly large number of parents with kids playing at a high level who have no idea that an age group change is happening or even being discussed. This is even with ecnl families where the change is all but done. US soccer has done the worst job managing this by allowing the leagues to have total control. An absolute disgrace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think we will hear anything about ecnl, ga, or mlsnext plans for 26/27 until the 24/25 season wraps up in early July. They won’t want to take the attention off of what’s going on now. Making policies public in the dead time between playoffs wrapping up and the 25/26 preseason starting will keep the attention on the league.

I think the more complicated the age policy and the more differences between the leagues the worse for the players. It becomes less about the development of the kids and more about the leagues themselves. I guess that’s what they want though.

I also can’t imagine how chaotic this next year is going to be. There are a surprisingly large number of parents with kids playing at a high level who have no idea that an age group change is happening or even being discussed. This is even with ecnl families where the change is all but done. US soccer has done the worst job managing this by allowing the leagues to have total control. An absolute disgrace.

If MLS Next sticks with birth year, there will be a place for kids who fit best in the BY system. And USYS and US Club teams will have a place for kids who fit best in the SY system. Seems to be a win win for everyone involved!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think we will hear anything about ecnl, ga, or mlsnext plans for 26/27 until the 24/25 season wraps up in early July. They won’t want to take the attention off of what’s going on now. Making policies public in the dead time between playoffs wrapping up and the 25/26 preseason starting will keep the attention on the league.

I think the more complicated the age policy and the more differences between the leagues the worse for the players. It becomes less about the development of the kids and more about the leagues themselves. I guess that’s what they want though.

I also can’t imagine how chaotic this next year is going to be. There are a surprisingly large number of parents with kids playing at a high level who have no idea that an age group change is happening or even being discussed. This is even with ecnl families where the change is all but done. US soccer has done the worst job managing this by allowing the leagues to have total control. An absolute disgrace.

If MLS Next sticks with birth year, there will be a place for kids who fit best in the BY system. And USYS and US Club teams will have a place for kids who fit best in the SY system. Seems to be a win win for everyone involved!

A win for everyone except DOCs who have to do rosters across age groups that also cross platforms and parents who might want different things

[Anonymous]

If MLS Next sticks with birth year, there will be a place for kids who fit best in the BY system. And USYS and US Club teams will have a place for kids who fit best in the SY system. Seems to be a win win for everyone involved!

All it would do is separate the talent pool. August/Q4 kids will play SY, most others BY.

[Anonymous]

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/

This last part is a huge, imo wrong, assumption: "... 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."

This assumes clubs, players, and their parents will make a decision which puts them at a competitive disadvantage in order to have a better social experience. Spend 30 minutes reading posts on this site and you'll see there are a shocking number of parents who claim they and their player don't give a crap about the social experience - they are laser-focused on competing at the highest level possible. Clubs want to win, at least on their A teams. If the goal of a potential change to July 1 or August 1 was to put more kids with their grade, that should be part of the registration rule. You cannot rely on a hope that clubs, players, and parents to make that decision.

[Anonymous]

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/

This last part is a huge, imo wrong, assumption: "... 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."

This assumes clubs, players, and their parents will make a decision which puts them at a competitive disadvantage in order to have a better social experience. Spend 30 minutes reading posts on this site and you'll see there are a shocking number of parents who claim they and their player don't give a crap about the social experience - they are laser-focused on competing at the highest level possible. Clubs want to win, at least on their A teams. If the goal of a potential change to July 1 or August 1 was to put more kids with their grade, that should be part of the registration rule. You cannot rely on a hope that clubs, players, and parents to make that decision.

well said! agree completely

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
All it would do is separate the talent pool. August/Q4 kids will play SY, most others BY.

Why is this a bad thing?

[Anonymous]

Just heard MLS academies are adopting the English model? What does that mean?

[Anonymous]

UK age groups are calculated on school years e.g. 1st September to 31st August, whereas in Europe they are done on calendar year e.g. 1st January to 31st December

[Anonymous]

Where did you hear about MLS Next adopting the English Model?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just heard MLS academies are adopting the English model? What does that mean?

It means $$$$$ won out because the worlds biggest buyers of thier product wants those september born studs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think we will hear anything about ecnl, ga, or mlsnext plans for 26/27 until the 24/25 season wraps up in early July. They won’t want to take the attention off of what’s going on now. Making policies public in the dead time between playoffs wrapping up and the 25/26 preseason starting will keep the attention on the league.

I think the more complicated the age policy and the more differences between the leagues the worse for the players. It becomes less about the development of the kids and more about the leagues themselves. I guess that’s what they want though.

I also can’t imagine how chaotic this next year is going to be. There are a surprisingly large number of parents with kids playing at a high level who have no idea that an age group change is happening or even being discussed. This is even with ecnl families where the change is all but done. US soccer has done the worst job managing this by allowing the leagues to have total control. An absolute disgrace.

If MLS Next sticks with birth year, there will be a place for kids who fit best in the BY system. And USYS and US Club teams will have a place for kids who fit best in the SY system. Seems to be a win win for everyone involved!

A win for everyone except DOCs who have to do rosters across age groups that also cross platforms and parents who might want different things

It’s about time DOC have to start using their brain and doing some work. Lazy no good for nothing people most of them. IMO they don’t know what a hard day of work is even like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just heard MLS academies are adopting the English model? What does that mean?

English model is the same as SY. I find it hard to believe you are the first to report this breaking news and yet you don’t know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just heard MLS academies are adopting the English model? What does that mean?

It means $$$$$ won out because the worlds biggest buyers of thier product wants those september born studs.

MLSN/GA has been building a relationship with English clubs. So this makes sense (sort of) but I believe English model is SY plus biobanding.