ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are in a potentially awkward situation where my daughter is a Q4 and one of the top 3 players on a Top 25 team in the nation. Our club is saying strict adherence to age groups to avoid all the noise.

The team below her is not good (~150 ranked) but there are no other clubs that work for our specific situation, so there are girls that are going to get short end of the stick out there.

Your daughter sounds like a phenom! Top 3 player on a top 25 team nationally!? You have solid options. If she's one of the best players on her team I doubt the club wouldn't want her to play up, even with some girls added for consideration due to the age change.

The other possibility is that the not so good team a year down becomes vastly better with new players.

The reality is no matter what the age range formation, kids will still be placed with other comparably skilled players.

[Anonymous]

It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

Leagues can still choose to do this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

Leagues can still choose to do this.

Which leagues can do this? I understand the sentiment, but there is no way this gets phased in. Rip the band aid and get it over with. It will suck for a year, and then things will even out. Changing teams, adding players, getting a new coach, etc. aren't bad things. It happens all the time anyway. Getting the age cutoff aligned as closely as possible with school year is the best option. It should have never changed to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

Leagues can still choose to do this.

Which leagues can do this? I understand the sentiment, but there is no way this gets phased in. Rip the band aid and get it over with. It will suck for a year, and then things will even out. Changing teams, adding players, getting a new coach, etc. aren't bad things. It happens all the time anyway. Getting the age cutoff aligned as closely as possible with school year is the best option. It should have never changed to begin with.

Any league associated with USYS AYSO or US Club.

They just have to say yes we're implementing SY with an 8/1 cutoff in 26/27 but its only for u13 and below.

I dont understand why everyone thinks theres crazy rules and theyre all written in stone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

Leagues can still choose to do this.

Which leagues can do this? I understand the sentiment, but there is no way this gets phased in. Rip the band aid and get it over with. It will suck for a year, and then things will even out. Changing teams, adding players, getting a new coach, etc. aren't bad things. It happens all the time anyway. Getting the age cutoff aligned as closely as possible with school year is the best option. It should have never changed to begin with.

Any league associated with USYS AYSO or US Club.

They just have to say yes we're implementing SY with an 8/1 cutoff in 26/27 but its only for u13 and below.

I dont understand why everyone thinks theres crazy rules and theyre all written in stone.

Suuurrrrreeee. That'll happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in a potentially awkward situation where my daughter is a Q4 and one of the top 3 players on a Top 25 team in the nation. Our club is saying strict adherence to age groups to avoid all the noise.

The team below her is not good (~150 ranked) but there are no other clubs that work for our specific situation, so there are girls that are going to get short end of the stick out there.

Your daughter sounds like a phenom! Top 3 player on a top 25 team nationally!? You have solid options. If she's one of the best players on her team I doubt the club wouldn't want her to play up, even with some girls added for consideration due to the age change.

The other possibility is that the not so good team a year down becomes vastly better with new players.

The reality is no matter what the age range formation, kids will still be placed with other comparably skilled players.

As they say, colleges recruit individuals not teams. If pp’s kid really is a star player, they will be seen.

The only exceptions clubs should make are August kids who will be playing with their actual grade based on their specific school’s cut off date. Otherwise it’s a huge headache of people like PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

Leagues can still choose to do this.

Which leagues can do this? I understand the sentiment, but there is no way this gets phased in. Rip the band aid and get it over with. It will suck for a year, and then things will even out. Changing teams, adding players, getting a new coach, etc. aren't bad things. It happens all the time anyway. Getting the age cutoff aligned as closely as possible with school year is the best option. It should have never changed to begin with.

Any league associated with USYS AYSO or US Club.

They just have to say yes we're implementing SY with an 8/1 cutoff in 26/27 but its only for u13 and below.

I dont understand why everyone thinks theres crazy rules and theyre all written in stone.

Suuurrrrreeee. That'll happen.

Did you not just see how they changed the cutoff date from 9/1 to 8/1 earlier this week?

[Anonymous]

I don’t doubt you’re trying.

Sad as F….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in a potentially awkward situation where my daughter is a Q4 and one of the top 3 players on a Top 25 team in the nation. Our club is saying strict adherence to age groups to avoid all the noise.

The team below her is not good (~150 ranked) but there are no other clubs that work for our specific situation, so there are girls that are going to get short end of the stick out there.

If soccer is that much of an opportunity for her and if it's possible, maybe move to a community with a club that would work for you? Also, if your kid is that good, threaten to leave the club if she doesn't stay on the team. And if you have to leave, maybe find a few fellow players to go with that would help make the new team strong. Be proactive. Do what's best for your kid and family.

While she is a very good player she would have to be the 2nd coming of Cat Macario, which she isnt, for us to move communities 🤣

I love watching her but not enough to move to a different city or drive 90min to and from a practice 3X a week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in a potentially awkward situation where my daughter is a Q4 and one of the top 3 players on a Top 25 team in the nation. Our club is saying strict adherence to age groups to avoid all the noise.

The team below her is not good (~150 ranked) but there are no other clubs that work for our specific situation, so there are girls that are going to get short end of the stick out there.

If soccer is that much of an opportunity for her and if it's possible, maybe move to a community with a club that would work for you? Also, if your kid is that good, threaten to leave the club if she doesn't stay on the team. And if you have to leave, maybe find a few fellow players to go with that would help make the new team strong. Be proactive. Do what's best for your kid and family.

While she is a very good player she would have to be the 2nd coming of Cat Macario, which she isnt, for us to move communities 🤣

I love watching her but not enough to move to a different city or drive 90min to and from a practice 3X a week.

When they changed the rules in 2016 a lot of kids were affected negatively then - and in the years following. It's a shame your kid can't stay on her team because they club won't let her play up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in a potentially awkward situation where my daughter is a Q4 and one of the top 3 players on a Top 25 team in the nation. Our club is saying strict adherence to age groups to avoid all the noise.

The team below her is not good (~150 ranked) but there are no other clubs that work for our specific situation, so there are girls that are going to get short end of the stick out there.

If soccer is that much of an opportunity for her and if it's possible, maybe move to a community with a club that would work for you? Also, if your kid is that good, threaten to leave the club if she doesn't stay on the team. And if you have to leave, maybe find a few fellow players to go with that would help make the new team strong. Be proactive. Do what's best for your kid and family.

While she is a very good player she would have to be the 2nd coming of Cat Macario, which she isnt, for us to move communities 🤣

I love watching her but not enough to move to a different city or drive 90min to and from a practice 3X a week.

When they changed the rules in 2016 a lot of kids were affected negatively then - and in the years following. It's a shame your kid can't stay on her team because they club won't let her play up.

No shame, the coach is not stupid. If she is not good enough to stay in the new team, she will be cut. No coach will demote a starter, and many talented players now play up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

Leagues can still choose to do this.

Which leagues can do this? I understand the sentiment, but there is no way this gets phased in. Rip the band aid and get it over with. It will suck for a year, and then things will even out. Changing teams, adding players, getting a new coach, etc. aren't bad things. It happens all the time anyway. Getting the age cutoff aligned as closely as possible with school year is the best option. It should have never changed to begin with.

Any league associated with USYS AYSO or US Club.

They just have to say yes we're implementing SY with an 8/1 cutoff in 26/27 but its only for u13 and below.

I dont understand why everyone thinks theres crazy rules and theyre all written in stone.

Nice try but wouldn't work because then U14 would have only 7 months available to make teams from and would totally shaft that age group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

Leagues can still choose to do this.

Which leagues can do this? I understand the sentiment, but there is no way this gets phased in. Rip the band aid and get it over with. It will suck for a year, and then things will even out. Changing teams, adding players, getting a new coach, etc. aren't bad things. It happens all the time anyway. Getting the age cutoff aligned as closely as possible with school year is the best option. It should have never changed to begin with.

Any league associated with USYS AYSO or US Club.

They just have to say yes we're implementing SY with an 8/1 cutoff in 26/27 but its only for u13 and below.

I dont understand why everyone thinks theres crazy rules and theyre all written in stone.

Nice try but wouldn't work because then U14 would have only 7 months available to make teams from and would totally shaft that age group.

So what? U14 is the trapped year anyway.

The idea is to not disrupt older players because its harder for them to move around. At u13 everyone is still switching teams all the time. Let the older players just age out without any big changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also why some argued for a gradual phase-in, so that existing teams could perhaps continue as they would have otherwise, especially at the oldest levels.

Leagues can still choose to do this.

Which leagues can do this? I understand the sentiment, but there is no way this gets phased in. Rip the band aid and get it over with. It will suck for a year, and then things will even out. Changing teams, adding players, getting a new coach, etc. aren't bad things. It happens all the time anyway. Getting the age cutoff aligned as closely as possible with school year is the best option. It should have never changed to begin with.

Any league associated with USYS AYSO or US Club.

They just have to say yes we're implementing SY with an 8/1 cutoff in 26/27 but its only for u13 and below.

I dont understand why everyone thinks theres crazy rules and theyre all written in stone.

Nice try but wouldn't work because then U14 would have only 7 months available to make teams from and would totally shaft that age group.

So what? U14 is the trapped year anyway.

The idea is to not disrupt older players because its harder for them to move around. At u13 everyone is still switching teams all the time. Let the older players just age out without any big changes.

They should just mandate every player play at age for one year regardless of skill.

We need to flesh out some issues in youth soccer swamp and this would help.