2025-26 MLSN Technical Standards

[Anonymous]

MLSNext keeps expanding clubs and age groups. They can’t effectively fit the influx of paying players if they don’t turn 11v11 fields into multiple coned off fields. It’s a money grab masquerading as “development.”

[Anonymous]

Where are the new rules listed?

[Anonymous]

When you register on Kitman Labs, you have to read and agree to the Terms and Conditions to the many documents, including Rules and Regulations. It is in there along with Outside Competition (playing HS or other clubs).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

[Anonymous]

Since this is a MLSN thread, does anyone know when schedules are published?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since this is a MLSN thread, does anyone know when schedules are published?

Your club has a preliminary schedule already.

The schedules will be posted publicly 3-4 weeks after the season starts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

When you say AI, I assume you meant Taka.

“Taka is the group responsible for doing all of this. An Irish company who have consulted for Premier League clubs in performance models, they were the perfect match. They applied for MLS's request for proposal a year ago, and brought their technology to the league.

Taka, in short, is an in-depth data platform that "grades" actions of play on a soccer pitch. All of this is done by real humans, remotely. After every game, employees in Eastern Europe scour game film, and score every pass, every dribble, every shot, every tackle. Those "actions" are then evaluated - admittedly subjectively - as either positive or negative. The results are subsequently uploaded to a platform that players and coaches alike can access. The whole process takes about four hours.

Crucially, Taka employs soccer people, not mathematicians. Every summer, the company advertises the job, asking would-be applicants to, effectively, grade a soccer match. They then take the top 15 percent, and put them through their paces to test their game understanding. Those who are deemed to have the right amount of knowledge to break down thousands of individual instances - from first touches to 30-yard screamers - are then brought on.

"If you ask a mathematician to look at a soccer game, they won't understand," CEO Mark Shields said. "They are soccer people. And then the mathematicians are in the sort of modeling process."

And every year, there's widespread interest - yes, even if it means watching hours of occasionally low-quality youth soccer.

"We get loads of people applying because we're talking about a job, basically as a video scout for soccer," he said.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

Yes the AI bias is to "good" soccer not just the number of goals scored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

Italy does not keep scores and records until U15. They produce more quality professionals than us.

The fact that you keep looking at the rankings is the problem. Stop looking at them and aiming to manufacture superiority for a 12 year old. Let the kids learn how to play.

Soccer is a game that you can manipulate to win in the younger ages that is counterproductive to development which manifests itself in our kids starting at age 14/15.

The kids will internally keep score. Every game no matter what. That is all that is needed to “come back.” The rest is parental drama. Go watch White Lotus if this does not sink in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

When you say AI, I assume you meant Taka.

“Taka is the group responsible for doing all of this. An Irish company who have consulted for Premier League clubs in performance models, they were the perfect match. They applied for MLS's request for proposal a year ago, and brought their technology to the league.

Taka, in short, is an in-depth data platform that "grades" actions of play on a soccer pitch. All of this is done by real humans, remotely. After every game, employees in Eastern Europe scour game film, and score every pass, every dribble, every shot, every tackle. Those "actions" are then evaluated - admittedly subjectively - as either positive or negative. The results are subsequently uploaded to a platform that players and coaches alike can access. The whole process takes about four hours.

Crucially, Taka employs soccer people, not mathematicians. Every summer, the company advertises the job, asking would-be applicants to, effectively, grade a soccer match. They then take the top 15 percent, and put them through their paces to test their game understanding. Those who are deemed to have the right amount of knowledge to break down thousands of individual instances - from first touches to 30-yard screamers - are then brought on.

"If you ask a mathematician to look at a soccer game, they won't understand," CEO Mark Shields said. "They are soccer people. And then the mathematicians are in the sort of modeling process."

And every year, there's widespread interest - yes, even if it means watching hours of occasionally low-quality youth soccer.

"We get loads of people applying because we're talking about a job, basically as a video scout for soccer," he said.”

Thanks for clarifying what Taka is.

[Anonymous]

Clearly i am not going to be able to convince you that letting AI, yes Taka, decide games is a horrible idea. Also, let’s be clear, this is an AI system deciding games. I am sure the software is fine, but come’on people. This is getting further away from why American soccer is far behind the rest of the world. I dont care, have a daughter who plays. However, as a traditionalist, this idea is bad. I give it a year or two to phase out. Other countries are embracing delaying 11v11 longer as their method to innovate and here we are trying to use software to tell us if our kid played well or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

When you say AI, I assume you meant Taka.

“Taka is the group responsible for doing all of this. An Irish company who have consulted for Premier League clubs in performance models, they were the perfect match. They applied for MLS's request for proposal a year ago, and brought their technology to the league.

Taka, in short, is an in-depth data platform that "grades" actions of play on a soccer pitch. All of this is done by real humans, remotely. After every game, employees in Eastern Europe scour game film, and score every pass, every dribble, every shot, every tackle. Those "actions" are then evaluated - admittedly subjectively - as either positive or negative. The results are subsequently uploaded to a platform that players and coaches alike can access. The whole process takes about four hours.

Crucially, Taka employs soccer people, not mathematicians. Every summer, the company advertises the job, asking would-be applicants to, effectively, grade a soccer match. They then take the top 15 percent, and put them through their paces to test their game understanding. Those who are deemed to have the right amount of knowledge to break down thousands of individual instances - from first touches to 30-yard screamers - are then brought on.

"If you ask a mathematician to look at a soccer game, they won't understand," CEO Mark Shields said. "They are soccer people. And then the mathematicians are in the sort of modeling process."

And every year, there's widespread interest - yes, even if it means watching hours of occasionally low-quality youth soccer.

"We get loads of people applying because we're talking about a job, basically as a video scout for soccer," he said.”

Thanks for clarifying what Taka is.

In short, Taka is foreign work from home boxing/gymnastic judges picking a winner. Sounds like a real big improvement over goals scored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that mslN is also using AI to determine games for younger ages. No more scores. Sounds like a disaster.

It seems to be a success from the coaches - both club and neutral - that I’ve talked to in person. The only naysayers or skeptics are parents whose players aren’t being highlighted and can’t coast on just being part of teams that win.

I was talking to basketball parent about it and they thought it made so much sense and was wishing they had it for youth basketball too.

Sounds like participation awards

You should be embarrassed. It’s much harder to play well than to win, especially at younger ages.

Think about it. Nearly 50% of teams win. But how many play good soccer? That’s why “quality” is a better goal to shoot for if you’re serious about development. Sadly, too many parents prefer the win at 12 years old.

Nope, not saying that. AI determining winners and losers is absurd. Someone programmed it so there is an inherent bias already on what it good and bad. Teams will figure out how to game the AI and defeat the entire purpose. Learning how to come back after losing is one of the most important life skills anyone can have. Also, tournaments aren’t using this horrible idea so you would be the “best team based on AI” and not win a single tournament? Seems like a very confusing message for kids. Also, if MLSN is so premier, why do we need to change from what has worked for 100s of years?

When you say AI, I assume you meant Taka.

“Taka is the group responsible for doing all of this. An Irish company who have consulted for Premier League clubs in performance models, they were the perfect match. They applied for MLS's request for proposal a year ago, and brought their technology to the league.

Taka, in short, is an in-depth data platform that "grades" actions of play on a soccer pitch. All of this is done by real humans, remotely. After every game, employees in Eastern Europe scour game film, and score every pass, every dribble, every shot, every tackle. Those "actions" are then evaluated - admittedly subjectively - as either positive or negative. The results are subsequently uploaded to a platform that players and coaches alike can access. The whole process takes about four hours.

Crucially, Taka employs soccer people, not mathematicians. Every summer, the company advertises the job, asking would-be applicants to, effectively, grade a soccer match. They then take the top 15 percent, and put them through their paces to test their game understanding. Those who are deemed to have the right amount of knowledge to break down thousands of individual instances - from first touches to 30-yard screamers - are then brought on.

"If you ask a mathematician to look at a soccer game, they won't understand," CEO Mark Shields said. "They are soccer people. And then the mathematicians are in the sort of modeling process."

And every year, there's widespread interest - yes, even if it means watching hours of occasionally low-quality youth soccer.

"We get loads of people applying because we're talking about a job, basically as a video scout for soccer," he said.”

Thanks for clarifying what Taka is.

In short, Taka is foreign work from home boxing/gymnastic judges picking a winner. Sounds like a real big improvement over goals scored.

Taka is here to stay whether you like it or not. 🤷‍♂️

Even worse for those who hate it, it probably already has the data to create ratings for the players which scouts are using. That data will be used to track players and see if high ranking correlates to further success in the later years.

Starting last year, U13-U14s are pretty much guinea pigs.