ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The top tier of MLS is not changing to SY.

It hasn't been made clear about the second tier MLSN 2. Both sides have good reasons for one or the other. For BY- it keeps the two MLS programs aligned. The SY case is more nuanced- The majority of clubs field teams that are not MLSN- all their teams under the age of 12/13 will be SY. Additionally, most large clubs have 5 teams per age bracket. In which case, 3 of those teams will be SY.

Will MLSN care what clubs do with the 2nd tier? How much say will clubs have? Which scenario is easier on the clubs to manage.

I don’t think it’s at all clear that MLSN won’t just go SY. It’s clear they don’t want to, but they might end up folding to club pressure, since their customers are really clubs and DOCs. Any club managing two different registration systems is insane. No one wants that. Letting rec do whatever while your competitive program is different is not the same as managing two different registrations across your first and second reme. The former is easy and the latter is insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That scenario sounds difficult for clubs to manage. There’s not a huge amount of upside to BY especially if all the other major leagues are going SY so I’m not sure why that approach makes sense.

You dont understand because all you know is youth soccer and likely under u12. Your kid is in elementary or maybe middle school. Because of this grouping by grade seems to make sense. Also in Americal college soccer a scholorship is a potential outcome. This doesnt exist in other countries.

Internationally clubs and national teams are more aligned to BY. This is because Acadamies are geared to identify top talent for playing on professional teams and national teams. Nothing else matters and college soccer doesnt exist.

MLSN is a league but its basically a funnel for MLS Acadamies. MLS Acadamies are a funnel for MLS and other pro teams. In this environment its not that college isn't considered if players have talent. Its just that theres so much money involved in playing professionally that by just playing a season or two all college costs are covered. So scholorships dont matter.

The girls parents that love to comment on MLSN have no clue how things work on the boys side. If they did they wouldn't comment that ECNL is "just as good" as MLS Acadamies. It's not, and never will be because the leagues target outcomes are different (pro vs college scholorships).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top tier of MLS is not changing to SY.

It hasn't been made clear about the second tier MLSN 2. Both sides have good reasons for one or the other. For BY- it keeps the two MLS programs aligned. The SY case is more nuanced- The majority of clubs field teams that are not MLSN- all their teams under the age of 12/13 will be SY. Additionally, most large clubs have 5 teams per age bracket. In which case, 3 of those teams will be SY.

Will MLSN care what clubs do with the 2nd tier? How much say will clubs have? Which scenario is easier on the clubs to manage.

I don’t think it’s at all clear that MLSN won’t just go SY. It’s clear they don’t want to, but they might end up folding to club pressure, since their customers are really clubs and DOCs. Any club managing two different registration systems is insane. No one wants that. Letting rec do whatever while your competitive program is different is not the same as managing two different registrations across your first and second reme. The former is easy and the latter is insane.

Stop with the propaganda.

Clubs grouping players with a 1/1 cutoff is exactly the same amount of effort as 9/1 (or 8/1, 7/1 cutoff)

And again because of boibanding MLSN can make BY teams look like SY teams. All this can be done now without any changes or updates to the rules

[Anonymous]

One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

You lost all credibly when you said "playing down".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

You lost all credibly when you said "playing down".

No, that's the correct terminology.

You lost all credibility when you got excited for the potential for your kid to play down.

If they were they real deal they'd be playing up and getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

You lost all credibly when you said "playing down".

No, that's the correct terminology.

You lost all credibility when you got excited for the potential for your kid to play down.

If they were they real deal they'd be playing up and getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Your Q1 with all the advantages today playing down also isn't getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

You lost all credibly when you said "playing down".

No, that's the correct terminology.

You lost all credibility when you got excited for the potential for your kid to play down.

If they were they real deal they'd be playing up and getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Your Q1 with all the advantages today playing down also isn't getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Keep moving the goalposts around.

Doesn't change the fact that you're excited to have your kid play down for wins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

You lost all credibly when you said "playing down".

No, that's the correct terminology.

You lost all credibility when you got excited for the potential for your kid to play down.

If they were they real deal they'd be playing up and getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Your Q1 with all the advantages today playing down also isn't getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Keep moving the goalposts around.

Doesn't change the fact that you're excited to have your kid play down for wins.

No goal posts have been moved facts are facts.
But sure I'm excited for my kid to play with kids in the same grade as them. Not sure how that relates to playing down but you do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

You lost all credibly when you said "playing down".

No, that's the correct terminology.

You lost all credibility when you got excited for the potential for your kid to play down.

If they were they real deal they'd be playing up and getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Your Q1 with all the advantages today playing down also isn't getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Keep moving the goalposts around.

Doesn't change the fact that you're excited to have your kid play down for wins.

This change doesn't effect my kid, but why wouldn't parents of Q4 parents want their kids playing with other kids who they will be fighting scholarships for? How does that not make sense? Of course it makes sense for Q4 kids to be seen playing with other kids of the same graduation class because a scout isn't going to care they are a Q4 but different year.

[Anonymous]

Can one have credibility on an anonymous forum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

You lost all credibly when you said "playing down".

No, that's the correct terminology.

You lost all credibility when you got excited for the potential for your kid to play down.

If they were they real deal they'd be playing up and getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Your Q1 with all the advantages today playing down also isn't getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Keep moving the goalposts around.

Doesn't change the fact that you're excited to have your kid play down for wins.

This change doesn't effect my kid, but why wouldn't parents of Q4 parents want their kids playing with other kids who they will be fighting scholarships for? How does that not make sense? Of course it makes sense for Q4 kids to be seen playing with other kids of the same graduation class because a scout isn't going to care they are a Q4 but different year.

What youre describing is why many people are pushing for GY starting with U17 and u18. If the end goal is getting recruited to play in college put all the players graduating a certain year into its own group.

What's annoying about all the SY people is with a single cutoff date of 9/1 there will still be trapped players. It might work around here because of when schools start but it wont work for everyone nationally. What end up happening is 80% of the current trapped players are addressed by switching to SY with a 9/1 cutoff but 20% are still trapped depending on when the district stated.

What's also annoying is the people pushing for SY that really just want their kid to play down for wins. Achievement in a sport isn't supposed to be about dominating against younger players. Talent is a younger player that is able to play up and dominate.

[Anonymous]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QFB7cyX5OVo

Fast forward and start watching about 45 sec in. Talks about BY/SY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the things that I've noticed reading through the comments is that ECNL parents seem genuinely excited to play down with a younger age group. It seems like this this is so players can stand out for college recruiters.

MLSN Acadamies and Acadamies in general are looking for players that can dominate while playing up. These are the type of players that will get picked to play at the next level and eventually pro.

Fundamentally different end products.

You lost all credibly when you said "playing down".

No, that's the correct terminology.

You lost all credibility when you got excited for the potential for your kid to play down.

If they were they real deal they'd be playing up and getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Your Q1 with all the advantages today playing down also isn't getting noticed by USYNT scouts.

Keep moving the goalposts around.

Doesn't change the fact that you're excited to have your kid play down for wins.

This change doesn't effect my kid, but why wouldn't parents of Q4 parents want their kids playing with other kids who they will be fighting scholarships for? How does that not make sense? Of course it makes sense for Q4 kids to be seen playing with other kids of the same graduation class because a scout isn't going to care they are a Q4 but different year.

What youre describing is why many people are pushing for GY starting with U17 and u18. If the end goal is getting recruited to play in college put all the players graduating a certain year into its own group.

What's annoying about all the SY people is with a single cutoff date of 9/1 there will still be trapped players. It might work around here because of when schools start but it wont work for everyone nationally. What end up happening is 80% of the current trapped players are addressed by switching to SY with a 9/1 cutoff but 20% are still trapped depending on when the district stated.

What's also annoying is the people pushing for SY that really just want their kid to play down for wins. Achievement in a sport isn't supposed to be about dominating against younger players. Talent is a younger player that is able to play up and dominate.

What's also annoying is the people pushing for BY that really just want their kid to play down for wins. Achievement in a sport isn't supposed to be about dominating against younger players. Talent is a younger player that is able to play up and dominate.

Closer to 1% trapped than 20 %.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That scenario sounds difficult for clubs to manage. There’s not a huge amount of upside to BY especially if all the other major leagues are going SY so I’m not sure why that approach makes sense.

You dont understand because all you know is youth soccer and likely under u12. Your kid is in elementary or maybe middle school. Because of this grouping by grade seems to make sense. Also in Americal college soccer a scholorship is a potential outcome. This doesnt exist in other countries.

Internationally clubs and national teams are more aligned to BY. This is because Acadamies are geared to identify top talent for playing on professional teams and national teams. Nothing else matters and college soccer doesnt exist.

MLSN is a league but its basically a funnel for MLS Acadamies. MLS Acadamies are a funnel for MLS and other pro teams. In this environment its not that college isn't considered if players have talent. Its just that theres so much money involved in playing professionally that by just playing a season or two all college costs are covered. So scholorships dont matter.

The girls parents that love to comment on MLSN have no clue how things work on the boys side. If they did they wouldn't comment that ECNL is "just as good" as MLS Acadamies. It's not, and never will be because the leagues target outcomes are different (pro vs college scholorships).

MLSN is a money pit that they are trying to turn into a cash cow. They see the cash at the lower ages and secondary leagues and are trying to increase their currently small market share of the youth soccer dollars. What they purport to be is just marketing fluff as they actually operate like a Nigerian scam. They are having to adjust their business model that didn't work for DA either.