ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The you just want your kid to keep playing down line to BY advocates is classic.

True statement…sorry if it hits a nerve

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The you just want your kid to keep playing down line to BY advocates is classic.

True statement…sorry if it hits a nerve

Another real nerve is when you remind people that the SepQ4 kids in the BY system now get to play down a level -- while that could be good, it's also perhaps to their detriment -- especially the older they are.

[Anonymous]

My son is one of these kids.

Pros:
Less risk of injury
Less stress from tryouts
Better position options
More recognition for elite opportunities
Plays with classmates for first time in soccer career.
No trapped player issues, missed recruiting timelines.
Better team options

Cons:
Possible less development because of lower quality competition.

[Anonymous]

ECNL has not told its clubs anything privately, my good friend is an ECNL director (girls) he has reached out to ECNL admin with questions they don’t respond. Only thing he has been told is that ECNL acknowledged they are changing the groups but would not give out specifics at this time.

[Anonymous]

Any one year block will advantage some players and disadvantage others. BY advantages January to March birthdays and disadvantages September to December. SY advantages September to December birthdays and disadvantages June to August. Any choice will be arbitrary and will hurt some players and help others. Is this whole debate just driven by which system advantages their particular kids?

My DD is undersized and has an early January birthday, and I can certainly see that she'd have been at a disadvantage if she'd been born two weeks earlier and had to play a different BY. But any line will have arbitrary effects like that.

Shouldn't the question be what is best as an overall system, since any line will have these effects for some player? What is the disinterested case for a change? Not saying that there isn't one, and probably a switch to SY would not impact my DD too much. But the fact that BY is bad for September to December kids so we need to switch just moves the disadvantage to a different group of kids, which isn't that compelling to me. I certainly understand why those parents want a change but why is SY preferable to BY overall? Some kids will always be the youngest in the grouping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any one year block will advantage some players and disadvantage others. BY advantages January to March birthdays and disadvantages September to December. SY advantages September to December birthdays and disadvantages June to August. Any choice will be arbitrary and will hurt some players and help others. Is this whole debate just driven by which system advantages their particular kids?

My DD is undersized and has an early January birthday, and I can certainly see that she'd have been at a disadvantage if she'd been born two weeks earlier and had to play a different BY. But any line will have arbitrary effects like that.

Shouldn't the question be what is best as an overall system, since any line will have these effects for some player? What is the disinterested case for a change? Not saying that there isn't one, and probably a switch to SY would not impact my DD too much. But the fact that BY is bad for September to December kids so we need to switch just moves the disadvantage to a different group of kids, which isn't that compelling to me. I certainly understand why those parents want a change but why is SY preferable to BY overall? Some kids will always be the youngest in the grouping.

Recruiting. And we already group kids based on SY.

Can you tell me why BY is preferable to SY overall?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any one year block will advantage some players and disadvantage others. BY advantages January to March birthdays and disadvantages September to December. SY advantages September to December birthdays and disadvantages June to August. Any choice will be arbitrary and will hurt some players and help others. Is this whole debate just driven by which system advantages their particular kids?

My DD is undersized and has an early January birthday, and I can certainly see that she'd have been at a disadvantage if she'd been born two weeks earlier and had to play a different BY. But any line will have arbitrary effects like that.

Shouldn't the question be what is best as an overall system, since any line will have these effects for some player? What is the disinterested case for a change? Not saying that there isn't one, and probably a switch to SY would not impact my DD too much. But the fact that BY is bad for September to December kids so we need to switch just moves the disadvantage to a different group of kids, which isn't that compelling to me. I certainly understand why those parents want a change but why is SY preferable to BY overall? Some kids will always be the youngest in the grouping.

From a generic kid perspective, the best overall system is the system that aligns with their academic cohort. That's who they will start the sport with, their recruitment years will be aligned. The current SY proposal doesn't completely solve that and likely no system can solve it. But it does a much better job at putting more kids in their academic cohorts. Grad year makes even more sense because that's how recruiting works BUT too many crazy parents will redshirt/reclass and have their 18year old freshman playing. Look at basketball.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any one year block will advantage some players and disadvantage others. BY advantages January to March birthdays and disadvantages September to December. SY advantages September to December birthdays and disadvantages June to August. Any choice will be arbitrary and will hurt some players and help others. Is this whole debate just driven by which system advantages their particular kids?

My DD is undersized and has an early January birthday, and I can certainly see that she'd have been at a disadvantage if she'd been born two weeks earlier and had to play a different BY. But any line will have arbitrary effects like that.

Shouldn't the question be what is best as an overall system, since any line will have these effects for some player? What is the disinterested case for a change? Not saying that there isn't one, and probably a switch to SY would not impact my DD too much. But the fact that BY is bad for September to December kids so we need to switch just moves the disadvantage to a different group of kids, which isn't that compelling to me. I certainly understand why those parents want a change but why is SY preferable to BY overall? Some kids will always be the youngest in the grouping.

Dead cat argument. Leagues are not moving from Jan-Dec to Sep to Aug to avoid Sept and Q4 being the youngest. Not sure why you think this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any one year block will advantage some players and disadvantage others. BY advantages January to March birthdays and disadvantages September to December. SY advantages September to December birthdays and disadvantages June to August. Any choice will be arbitrary and will hurt some players and help others. Is this whole debate just driven by which system advantages their particular kids?

My DD is undersized and has an early January birthday, and I can certainly see that she'd have been at a disadvantage if she'd been born two weeks earlier and had to play a different BY. But any line will have arbitrary effects like that.

Shouldn't the question be what is best as an overall system, since any line will have these effects for some player? What is the disinterested case for a change? Not saying that there isn't one, and probably a switch to SY would not impact my DD too much. But the fact that BY is bad for September to December kids so we need to switch just moves the disadvantage to a different group of kids, which isn't that compelling to me. I certainly understand why those parents want a change but why is SY preferable to BY overall? Some kids will always be the youngest in the grouping.

From a generic kid perspective, the best overall system is the system that aligns with their academic cohort. That's who they will start the sport with, their recruitment years will be aligned. The current SY proposal doesn't completely solve that and likely no system can solve it. But it does a much better job at putting more kids in their academic cohorts. Grad year makes even more sense because that's how recruiting works BUT too many crazy parents will redshirt/reclass and have their 18year old freshman playing. Look at basketball.

“Academic cohort” and “trapped player” is just an excuse that sounded good and compassionate. Recruitment from grad year is understandable.

[Anonymous]

Just set the dates and go with it 9/1, add August players or and of that. Set a rule and live by it. Tired of all this and wish there was some real leadership at the top to enforce a rule or even come out with rules. All weakness imo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any one year block will advantage some players and disadvantage others. BY advantages January to March birthdays and disadvantages September to December. SY advantages September to December birthdays and disadvantages June to August. Any choice will be arbitrary and will hurt some players and help others. Is this whole debate just driven by which system advantages their particular kids?

My DD is undersized and has an early January birthday, and I can certainly see that she'd have been at a disadvantage if she'd been born two weeks earlier and had to play a different BY. But any line will have arbitrary effects like that.

Shouldn't the question be what is best as an overall system, since any line will have these effects for some player? What is the disinterested case for a change? Not saying that there isn't one, and probably a switch to SY would not impact my DD too much. But the fact that BY is bad for September to December kids so we need to switch just moves the disadvantage to a different group of kids, which isn't that compelling to me. I certainly understand why those parents want a change but why is SY preferable to BY overall? Some kids will always be the youngest in the grouping.

From a generic kid perspective, the best overall system is the system that aligns with their academic cohort. That's who they will start the sport with, their recruitment years will be aligned. The current SY proposal doesn't completely solve that and likely no system can solve it. But it does a much better job at putting more kids in their academic cohorts. Grad year makes even more sense because that's how recruiting works BUT too many crazy parents will redshirt/reclass and have their 18year old freshman playing. Look at basketball.

“Academic cohort” and “trapped player” is just an excuse that sounded good and compassionate. Recruitment from grad year is understandable.

Trapped is a real thing and a major pain. My oldest has lived through it. Three times as much work for college recruiting vs. the non-trapped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any one year block will advantage some players and disadvantage others. BY advantages January to March birthdays and disadvantages September to December. SY advantages September to December birthdays and disadvantages June to August. Any choice will be arbitrary and will hurt some players and help others. Is this whole debate just driven by which system advantages their particular kids?

My DD is undersized and has an early January birthday, and I can certainly see that she'd have been at a disadvantage if she'd been born two weeks earlier and had to play a different BY. But any line will have arbitrary effects like that.

Shouldn't the question be what is best as an overall system, since any line will have these effects for some player? What is the disinterested case for a change? Not saying that there isn't one, and probably a switch to SY would not impact my DD too much. But the fact that BY is bad for September to December kids so we need to switch just moves the disadvantage to a different group of kids, which isn't that compelling to me. I certainly understand why those parents want a change but why is SY preferable to BY overall? Some kids will always be the youngest in the grouping.

Dead cat argument. Leagues are not moving from Jan-Dec to Sep to Aug to avoid Sept and Q4 being the youngest. Not sure why you think this.

It’s the victim mentality the BY crazies have adopted…the world is against them and their amazing Q1/2 child…because their kid just works so hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any one year block will advantage some players and disadvantage others. BY advantages January to March birthdays and disadvantages September to December. SY advantages September to December birthdays and disadvantages June to August. Any choice will be arbitrary and will hurt some players and help others. Is this whole debate just driven by which system advantages their particular kids?

My DD is undersized and has an early January birthday, and I can certainly see that she'd have been at a disadvantage if she'd been born two weeks earlier and had to play a different BY. But any line will have arbitrary effects like that.

Shouldn't the question be what is best as an overall system, since any line will have these effects for some player? What is the disinterested case for a change? Not saying that there isn't one, and probably a switch to SY would not impact my DD too much. But the fact that BY is bad for September to December kids so we need to switch just moves the disadvantage to a different group of kids, which isn't that compelling to me. I certainly understand why those parents want a change but why is SY preferable to BY overall? Some kids will always be the youngest in the grouping.

Dead cat argument. Leagues are not moving from Jan-Dec to Sep to Aug to avoid Sept and Q4 being the youngest. Not sure why you think this.

It’s the victim mentality the BY crazies have adopted…the world is against them and their amazing Q1/2 child…because their kid just works so hard.

The only victim mentality are the SY crazies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MLSN was never a "landing spot". If a player coudnt make a NL team they definatly wont make MLS NEXT. The spot families and players should get comfortable with will be the RL teams.

There aren’t any hard and fast rules on these things. Different clubs look for different qualities and may even have different medium to long term out looks.

One example is that my boy (late December 2010) hasn’t received an offer from an NL team, but recently received offers to try out for several top professional academies in Seria A in Italy this summer. The Seria A academies focus on long-term potential and not “winning” now. The ECNL clubs may be more focused on now and therefore could prefer a player that is physically superior but technically or tactically mediocre over a technically and tactically superior but physically not as developed player.

It always depends. There are no rules on this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just set the dates and go with it 9/1, add August players or and of that. Set a rule and live by it. Tired of all this and wish there was some real leadership at the top to enforce a rule or even come out with rules. All weakness imo.

This. Just come out with the plan and let’s move on. So tired of this.