ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many idiots in this thread promoting the plus as something that is actually being considered

Seems like one idiot pushing a garbage system not under consideration because it is essentially GY with hold backs, and cheaters and a 14 month window and while it may have been considered last year when they were debating (highly unlikely), it was not chosen when the rules were set. Done deal.

The troll said they had a girl which makes sense because a 14 month window for boys around puberty is a much bigger issue for boys than girls and much fewer girls play than boys.

SY+60 is the same as GY WITHOUT cheaters playing down.

Which as multiple people have said it what everyone wants.

SY plus is for cheaters.

Yes, wouldn't SY+60, e.g., let July birthdays play down with grade in a district with a 9/1 cutoff? One could argue that this two months isn't a big deal, but it's still a redshirted kid playing down, which is what most people are defining as "cheaters." So it would be "GY with cheaters, just not egregious cheaters."

A cheater is someone who breaks the rules. If the rule is you don't have to start school when a state picks an arbitrary date, and the rule is you have a 60 days window to play with your grade, then you're not a cheater. People who call them cheaters are just crybabies who think the world is out to get them.

If you were arguing that an exception should be made for kids in a state with a 7/31, 8/1, or 8/15 cutoff who attended school on time, I could see your point. Don’t think it will happen except with showcases, but a logical argument.

You are arguing that an exception should be made for kids who were blatantly red shirted because they were close to the cutoff so were held back and didn’t attend school on time. It’s bizarre that you can’t see the other side of this.

All a moot point because none of this is happening.

With SY+60 you address all the trapped players nationwide.

There might be parents in a 9/1 cutoff date state that hold back or regrade their 8/15 kid which would technically make them a redshirt. But this would be a rarity and it would only be possible for kids born 60 days before 9/1. Which isn't that bad.

The real regrade / holdback cheaters are the 16 year old freshman. This is the situation you dont want to allow.

If eliminating trapped was a goal, they would have gone GY. It wasn't, they didn't.

Mr. 60+ is a Dinner for Schmucks guest playing with dead mice in soccer jerseys.

[Anonymous]

Imagine thinking only one person thinks SY + something is a good idea. TBH I don't care my Q4 will benefit with the strict SY change. But honestly having some accomodations in a structured limiting way is much much better than straight grad year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another way to think of SY+60 is that its just a 7/1 cutoff date but with 2 months of grade validation.

So only heldback kids get to play down but parents who sent their kids to school on time will not? Yeah, that would fly! So stupid.

[Anonymous]

I'd be good with SY + 5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd be good with SY + 5.

Why didn't anyone suggest BY-minus-60 during the past 10 years? Guess that wasn't a concern of BY+60 guy, or it would have happened.

[Anonymous]

It would have been tidier I think to just do 8/1 which was the old cutoff. Not perfect but better than 9/1 and keeps the 12 month age gap max.

This is going round and round thanks to the tireless efforts of SY+60. You aren't getting traction here, if you have a voice at the table great, otherwise can we move back to being angry about MLSN1 vs 2 vs ECNL and RL?

[Anonymous]

+60 guy is the OP and probably moderator as well… only possible explanation for this insanity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many idiots in this thread promoting the plus as something that is actually being considered

Seems like one idiot pushing a garbage system not under consideration because it is essentially GY with hold backs, and cheaters and a 14 month window and while it may have been considered last year when they were debating (highly unlikely), it was not chosen when the rules were set. Done deal.

The troll said they had a girl which makes sense because a 14 month window for boys around puberty is a much bigger issue for boys than girls and much fewer girls play than boys.

SY+60 is the same as GY WITHOUT cheaters playing down.

Which as multiple people have said it what everyone wants.

SY plus is for cheaters.

Yes, wouldn't SY+60, e.g., let July birthdays play down with grade in a district with a 9/1 cutoff? One could argue that this two months isn't a big deal, but it's still a redshirted kid playing down, which is what most people are defining as "cheaters." So it would be "GY with cheaters, just not egregious cheaters."

A cheater is someone who breaks the rules. If the rule is you don't have to start school when a state picks an arbitrary date, and the rule is you have a 60 days window to play with your grade, then you're not a cheater. People who call them cheaters are just crybabies who think the world is out to get them.

If you were arguing that an exception should be made for kids in a state with a 7/31, 8/1, or 8/15 cutoff who attended school on time, I could see your point. Don’t think it will happen except with showcases, but a logical argument.

You are arguing that an exception should be made for kids who were blatantly red shirted because they were close to the cutoff so were held back and didn’t attend school on time. It’s bizarre that you can’t see the other side of this.

All a moot point because none of this is happening.

This. In a hypothetical world where this is on the table, exceptions must be case-by-case to prevent redshirts, not a blanket +60.

It's not a blanket exemption. You need to be born 60 days and have proof of grade.

So you are good with redshirts? Why 60 days? Why not include June and May birthdays who were held back, maybe they had a good reason. Why not include kids born premature who were placed in the appropriate grade for their due date. You decided 60 days because it worked for your kid.

You will never solve all trapped players and that’s not what the system is designed to do. It’s designed to place the majority of the kids correctly. Just because we can’t place them all correctly doesn’t mean the change isn’t worth making. It’s not all or nothing. There also isn’t infrastructure in place to handle evaluating exceptions on a wide scale basis.

Agree with everything posted. + guy should seek counciling.

SY+ is a lunatic, a crazy soccer parent who lives totally through his/her mediocre kid, unfortunately.

These responses are extreme. The idea isn't crazy. Other sports do it already. Perhaps what's crazy is the ongoing quixotic effort at trying to convince people who attack/name call in return.

Seriously, you will be better off with counseling pointing out to you that other people have perspectives that differ from you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be good with SY + 5.

Why didn't anyone suggest BY-minus-60 during the past 10 years? Guess that wasn't a concern of BY+60 guy, or it would have happened.

BY + 4.5 months woulda worked out great for us!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many idiots in this thread promoting the plus as something that is actually being considered

Seems like one idiot pushing a garbage system not under consideration because it is essentially GY with hold backs, and cheaters and a 14 month window and while it may have been considered last year when they were debating (highly unlikely), it was not chosen when the rules were set. Done deal.

The troll said they had a girl which makes sense because a 14 month window for boys around puberty is a much bigger issue for boys than girls and much fewer girls play than boys.

SY+60 is the same as GY WITHOUT cheaters playing down.

Which as multiple people have said it what everyone wants.

SY plus is for cheaters.

Yes, wouldn't SY+60, e.g., let July birthdays play down with grade in a district with a 9/1 cutoff? One could argue that this two months isn't a big deal, but it's still a redshirted kid playing down, which is what most people are defining as "cheaters." So it would be "GY with cheaters, just not egregious cheaters."

A cheater is someone who breaks the rules. If the rule is you don't have to start school when a state picks an arbitrary date, and the rule is you have a 60 days window to play with your grade, then you're not a cheater. People who call them cheaters are just crybabies who think the world is out to get them.

If you were arguing that an exception should be made for kids in a state with a 7/31, 8/1, or 8/15 cutoff who attended school on time, I could see your point. Don’t think it will happen except with showcases, but a logical argument.

You are arguing that an exception should be made for kids who were blatantly red shirted because they were close to the cutoff so were held back and didn’t attend school on time. It’s bizarre that you can’t see the other side of this.

All a moot point because none of this is happening.

This. In a hypothetical world where this is on the table, exceptions must be case-by-case to prevent redshirts, not a blanket +60.

It's not a blanket exemption. You need to be born 60 days and have proof of grade.

So you are good with redshirts? Why 60 days? Why not include June and May birthdays who were held back, maybe they had a good reason. Why not include kids born premature who were placed in the appropriate grade for their due date. You decided 60 days because it worked for your kid.

You will never solve all trapped players and that’s not what the system is designed to do. It’s designed to place the majority of the kids correctly. Just because we can’t place them all correctly doesn’t mean the change isn’t worth making. It’s not all or nothing. There also isn’t infrastructure in place to handle evaluating exceptions on a wide scale basis.

Agree with everything posted. + guy should seek counciling.

SY+ is a lunatic, a crazy soccer parent who lives totally through his/her mediocre kid, unfortunately.

These responses are extreme. The idea isn't crazy. Other sports do it already. Perhaps what's crazy is the ongoing quixotic effort at trying to convince people who attack/name call in return.

Theres one idiot that just wants to win an arguement.

Yea, other sports (LAX) already use a variation of what's being described with SY+60.

I like the +60 part of SY+60 because without it parents will play their kids down for wins. This is the most frustrating part about Lacrosse and Private Schools. Yes they win a lot but most of their teams are a year older / regrades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be good with SY + 5.

Why didn't anyone suggest BY-minus-60 during the past 10 years? Guess that wasn't a concern of BY+60 guy, or it would have happened.

BY + 4.5 months woulda worked out great for us!

We only need BY + 1. But seriously, just play against a younger professional club academy team, and my kid should be one of the best on that team. Thanks to playing up literally in the top team from the beginning, he is going to his own grade and dominating the younger group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be good with SY + 5.

Why didn't anyone suggest BY-minus-60 during the past 10 years? Guess that wasn't a concern of BY+60 guy, or it would have happened.

BY + 4.5 months woulda worked out great for us!

We only need BY + 1. But seriously, just play against a younger professional club academy team, and my kid should be one of the best on that team. Thanks to playing up literally in the top team from the beginning, he is going to his own grade and dominating the younger group.

Or bored. Or finding it's harder than you think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many idiots in this thread promoting the plus as something that is actually being considered

Seems like one idiot pushing a garbage system not under consideration because it is essentially GY with hold backs, and cheaters and a 14 month window and while it may have been considered last year when they were debating (highly unlikely), it was not chosen when the rules were set. Done deal.

The troll said they had a girl which makes sense because a 14 month window for boys around puberty is a much bigger issue for boys than girls and much fewer girls play than boys.

SY+60 is the same as GY WITHOUT cheaters playing down.

Which as multiple people have said it what everyone wants.

SY plus is for cheaters.

Yes, wouldn't SY+60, e.g., let July birthdays play down with grade in a district with a 9/1 cutoff? One could argue that this two months isn't a big deal, but it's still a redshirted kid playing down, which is what most people are defining as "cheaters." So it would be "GY with cheaters, just not egregious cheaters."

A cheater is someone who breaks the rules. If the rule is you don't have to start school when a state picks an arbitrary date, and the rule is you have a 60 days window to play with your grade, then you're not a cheater. People who call them cheaters are just crybabies who think the world is out to get them.

If you were arguing that an exception should be made for kids in a state with a 7/31, 8/1, or 8/15 cutoff who attended school on time, I could see your point. Don’t think it will happen except with showcases, but a logical argument.

You are arguing that an exception should be made for kids who were blatantly red shirted because they were close to the cutoff so were held back and didn’t attend school on time. It’s bizarre that you can’t see the other side of this.

All a moot point because none of this is happening.

This. In a hypothetical world where this is on the table, exceptions must be case-by-case to prevent redshirts, not a blanket +60.

It's not a blanket exemption. You need to be born 60 days and have proof of grade.

So you are good with redshirts? Why 60 days? Why not include June and May birthdays who were held back, maybe they had a good reason. Why not include kids born premature who were placed in the appropriate grade for their due date. You decided 60 days because it worked for your kid.

You will never solve all trapped players and that’s not what the system is designed to do. It’s designed to place the majority of the kids correctly. Just because we can’t place them all correctly doesn’t mean the change isn’t worth making. It’s not all or nothing. There also isn’t infrastructure in place to handle evaluating exceptions on a wide scale basis.

Agree with everything posted. + guy should seek counciling.

SY+ is a lunatic, a crazy soccer parent who lives totally through his/her mediocre kid, unfortunately.

These responses are extreme. The idea isn't crazy. Other sports do it already. Perhaps what's crazy is the ongoing quixotic effort at trying to convince people who attack/name call in return.

Theres one idiot that just wants to win an arguement.

Yea, other sports (LAX) already use a variation of what's being described with SY+60.

I like the +60 part of SY+60 because without it parents will play their kids down for wins. This is the most frustrating part about Lacrosse and Private Schools. Yes they win a lot but most of their teams are a year older / regrades.

There is no argument to win. Everybody wants something different. There is no system that everyone will agree with. Nobody on a random forum has any influence with decision makers. Trying to get buy-in in a Rube Goldberg of a plan is nuts. But 2,000 here we come!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many idiots in this thread promoting the plus as something that is actually being considered

Seems like one idiot pushing a garbage system not under consideration because it is essentially GY with hold backs, and cheaters and a 14 month window and while it may have been considered last year when they were debating (highly unlikely), it was not chosen when the rules were set. Done deal.

The troll said they had a girl which makes sense because a 14 month window for boys around puberty is a much bigger issue for boys than girls and much fewer girls play than boys.

SY+60 is the same as GY WITHOUT cheaters playing down.

Which as multiple people have said it what everyone wants.

SY plus is for cheaters.

Yes, wouldn't SY+60, e.g., let July birthdays play down with grade in a district with a 9/1 cutoff? One could argue that this two months isn't a big deal, but it's still a redshirted kid playing down, which is what most people are defining as "cheaters." So it would be "GY with cheaters, just not egregious cheaters."

A cheater is someone who breaks the rules. If the rule is you don't have to start school when a state picks an arbitrary date, and the rule is you have a 60 days window to play with your grade, then you're not a cheater. People who call them cheaters are just crybabies who think the world is out to get them.

If you were arguing that an exception should be made for kids in a state with a 7/31, 8/1, or 8/15 cutoff who attended school on time, I could see your point. Don’t think it will happen except with showcases, but a logical argument.

You are arguing that an exception should be made for kids who were blatantly red shirted because they were close to the cutoff so were held back and didn’t attend school on time. It’s bizarre that you can’t see the other side of this.

All a moot point because none of this is happening.

This. In a hypothetical world where this is on the table, exceptions must be case-by-case to prevent redshirts, not a blanket +60.

It's not a blanket exemption. You need to be born 60 days and have proof of grade.

So you are good with redshirts? Why 60 days? Why not include June and May birthdays who were held back, maybe they had a good reason. Why not include kids born premature who were placed in the appropriate grade for their due date. You decided 60 days because it worked for your kid.

You will never solve all trapped players and that’s not what the system is designed to do. It’s designed to place the majority of the kids correctly. Just because we can’t place them all correctly doesn’t mean the change isn’t worth making. It’s not all or nothing. There also isn’t infrastructure in place to handle evaluating exceptions on a wide scale basis.

Agree with everything posted. + guy should seek counciling.

SY+ is a lunatic, a crazy soccer parent who lives totally through his/her mediocre kid, unfortunately.

These responses are extreme. The idea isn't crazy. Other sports do it already. Perhaps what's crazy is the ongoing quixotic effort at trying to convince people who attack/name call in return.

Theres one idiot that just wants to win an arguement.

Yea, other sports (LAX) already use a variation of what's being described with SY+60.

I like the +60 part of SY+60 because without it parents will play their kids down for wins. This is the most frustrating part about Lacrosse and Private Schools. Yes they win a lot but most of their teams are a year older / regrades.

There is no argument to win. Everybody wants something different. There is no system that everyone will agree with. Nobody on a random forum has any influence with decision makers. Trying to get buy-in in a Rube Goldberg of a plan is nuts. But 2,000 here we come!

Exactly. Let the people argue over whatever they want to argue. It's not going to matter and neither side is going to convice the other. The only thing we all need to be laser focused on is getting this thing to 2,000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be good with SY + 5.

Why didn't anyone suggest BY-minus-60 during the past 10 years? Guess that wasn't a concern of BY+60 guy, or it would have happened.

BY + 4.5 months woulda worked out great for us!

We only need BY + 1. But seriously, just play against a younger professional club academy team, and my kid should be one of the best on that team. Thanks to playing up literally in the top team from the beginning, he is going to his own grade and dominating the younger group.

Or bored. Or finding it's harder than you think.

Scrimmage with the younger group all the time, always beat them 5:0 or more. Half of the team will be gone next year for sure.