ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

I agree on an SY+30 or similar idea. And also agree that the soccer club leadership, at least in the clubs I see in one of the biggest soccer markets in the US, are full of idiots. However, arguing that school districts will move their age cutoffs earlier because of soccer, that's just not in the realm of reality.

No school districts changing to earlier and earlier start dates has nothing to do with soccer. Its private schools getting a jump on other schools. Its also districts that are trying to distribute the days teachers take off in different ways. (Shorter summer break but longer winter break as an example) Also districts with a large farming community start earlier in the summer so kids can work on the farms during harvest. These are just some of the reasons. There are others.

Your conflating when school starts and at which age a child is when they start kindergarten.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

10% is wildly inaccurate as was posted a few pages ago. AT WORST it will be the August birthdates in the states that have a 9/1 cutoff, correct?

So if the number of players is completely evenly distributed, it is 1/12 of around 70% or 5.8%. And then overlay that the kids in AYSO, rec league, etc dont care because they can play with their grade regardless and are not checking birth certificates to see if they are 13 months younger than the oldest kid. They dont care.

So lets be generous and say there are 8 years of competitive soccer, take the top 1000 competitive teams of approximately 18 kids per roster for boys and girls and you get 360,000 kids.

Now we are are down to 20,916 kids that have August birthdates in 9-1 states. Now everyone quotes Gadwell/RAE so it is probably not evenly distributed at the elite level so lets use the fact that ECNL uses and says 70% of elite birthdates are in Q1/Q2 so that will skew the number down dramatically. So it is probably something like 15,000 kids across 8 years of both boys and girls in the top 1000 teams in the US.

So that gives us a choice:

A). Keep it simple and just choose 8-1 cutoff and allow those 15K kids to play up with their grade or down with kids potentially more aligned with their maturity or
B). Institute a SY+30 system that will require some type of work (debatable how much) for ALL 3,000,000 kids to now deal with. Letters from school administrators? Take my word for it? Upload a report card (seems like PIA issues which require more stringent controls in all systems)?

It appears that the people that run all these organizations have chosen A) as their answer, and I have to assume they at least checked in with their customers (DOCs) as to what they wanted.

Now, to offer some grace, if ECNL or GA or National League wants to establish some slightly different structure for their small groups, more power to them. But dont try to solve a problem that impacts .005 of the population by requiring 100% of kids to jump through hoops with some random grade verification system retrofit.

And, just for clarity, using same math, there are approximately 700,000 kids that were "trapped" in the birth year structure and that number drops to virtually zero with a basic 8-1 cutoff. So a basic 8-1 cutoff solves the issue almost completely.

100% of players dont need to have a 2nd factor of authentication. Only Aug birthdays need birthcert and proof of grade.

Using your numbers 3,000,000 total players / 12 (because you only need Aug birthdays) = 250,000 that need birth cert and proof of grade. Everyone else only needs a birthcert.

Even the proof of grade authentication has different levels of enablement. It could be just a form that parents sign stating grade in school. If you get caught cheating (by another club) that player will need to play with the correct grade or get booted from the league. Or it could be a copy of some form of proof of grade that gets archived on a share. Lots of different ways to implement you get the idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

I agree on an SY+30 or similar idea. And also agree that the soccer club leadership, at least in the clubs I see in one of the biggest soccer markets in the US, are full of idiots. However, arguing that school districts will move their age cutoffs earlier because of soccer, that's just not in the realm of reality.

No school districts changing to earlier and earlier start dates has nothing to do with soccer. Its private schools getting a jump on other schools. Its also districts that are trying to distribute the days teachers take off in different ways. (Shorter summer break but longer winter break as an example) Also districts with a large farming community start earlier in the summer so kids can work on the farms during harvest. These are just some of the reasons. There are others.

Your conflating when school starts and at which age a child is when they start kindergarten.

It can be the same thing depending on the district. Especially with the farming comminuties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Recent USWNT Aug-born players:

Sophia Smith
Kelly O'Hara
Casey Krueger

For fun, here are some notable July-born players:

Alex Morgan
Megan Rapinoe
Crystal Dunn

All these played youth under the previous SY system

I am not sure what this suggests. That talent gets found regardless of birthdate? If so, I agree with it. If it is trying to suggest that these women would not have been "found" based on their July/August birthdate I wholeheartedly disagree because all of these women were most likely the best player on their teams regardless of structure and most likely were playing up a year or two in the first place.

It shows for the highest levels the BY/SY debate does not matter.

[Anonymous]

The real problem is soccer people only care about what happens in their own personal bubble. Which is typically suburban + $$$. They also lack ability or the knowledge needed to create programs that work for all different groups potentially involved. National leagues need to think of issues more holistically. This is the disconnect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Recent USWNT Aug-born players:

Sophia Smith
Kelly O'Hara
Casey Krueger

For fun, here are some notable July-born players:

Alex Morgan
Megan Rapinoe
Crystal Dunn

All these played youth under the previous SY system

I am not sure what this suggests. That talent gets found regardless of birthdate? If so, I agree with it. If it is trying to suggest that these women would not have been "found" based on their July/August birthdate I wholeheartedly disagree because all of these women were most likely the best player on their teams regardless of structure and most likely were playing up a year or two in the first place.

It shows for the highest levels the BY/SY debate does not matter.

Actually, it shows nothing - you're talking about ~35-50 people out of everyone playing soccer. Anyone at that level is playing up multiple years/with boys/men etc. Now for the rest of the 99.9999% the debate does matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

No, of course entities go with a solution that solves 90 percent of the problem all of the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

No, of course entities go with a solution that solves 90 percent of the problem all of the time.

Why not address 100% of the issues day 1 after switching from BY to SY?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

10% is wildly inaccurate as was posted a few pages ago. AT WORST it will be the August birthdates in the states that have a 9/1 cutoff, correct?

So if the number of players is completely evenly distributed, it is 1/12 of around 70% or 5.8%. And then overlay that the kids in AYSO, rec league, etc dont care because they can play with their grade regardless and are not checking birth certificates to see if they are 13 months younger than the oldest kid. They dont care.

So lets be generous and say there are 8 years of competitive soccer, take the top 1000 competitive teams of approximately 18 kids per roster for boys and girls and you get 360,000 kids.

Now we are are down to 20,916 kids that have August birthdates in 9-1 states. Now everyone quotes Gadwell/RAE so it is probably not evenly distributed at the elite level so lets use the fact that ECNL uses and says 70% of elite birthdates are in Q1/Q2 so that will skew the number down dramatically. So it is probably something like 15,000 kids across 8 years of both boys and girls in the top 1000 teams in the US.

So that gives us a choice:

A). Keep it simple and just choose 8-1 cutoff and allow those 15K kids to play up with their grade or down with kids potentially more aligned with their maturity or
B). Institute a SY+30 system that will require some type of work (debatable how much) for ALL 3,000,000 kids to now deal with. Letters from school administrators? Take my word for it? Upload a report card (seems like PIA issues which require more stringent controls in all systems)?

It appears that the people that run all these organizations have chosen A) as their answer, and I have to assume they at least checked in with their customers (DOCs) as to what they wanted.

Now, to offer some grace, if ECNL or GA or National League wants to establish some slightly different structure for their small groups, more power to them. But dont try to solve a problem that impacts .005 of the population by requiring 100% of kids to jump through hoops with some random grade verification system retrofit.

And, just for clarity, using same math, there are approximately 700,000 kids that were "trapped" in the birth year structure and that number drops to virtually zero with a basic 8-1 cutoff. So a basic 8-1 cutoff solves the issue almost completely.

100% of players dont need to have a 2nd factor of authentication. Only Aug birthdays need birthcert and proof of grade.

Using your numbers 3,000,000 total players / 12 (because you only need Aug birthdays) = 250,000 that need birth cert and proof of grade. Everyone else only needs a birthcert.

Even the proof of grade authentication has different levels of enablement. It could be just a form that parents sign stating grade in school. If you get caught cheating (by another club) that player will need to play with the correct grade or get booted from the league. Or it could be a copy of some form of proof of grade that gets archived on a share. Lots of different ways to implement you get the idea.

Even 250K would require almost every club to retrofit a system. Yes it takes pressure off parents of the other 11 months but the clubs would need the same system regardless of 3M or 250K. And I would also assume there would have to be somewhat of a standard in place that is agreed upon at some level. It just seems like a hassle and more meetings and more paper for something that doesnt seem like that big of a problem.

I might be missing some of the issue but 8-1+30 vs 8-1 SY would simply "force" the correct grade right? Where just 8-1 without the + those kids can choose what is best for them, to play with their correct grade or choose to be the oldest on the team with a slight grade disparity.

I dont have a dog in the fight but I generally default to easy/simple in terms of implementation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

No, of course entities go with a solution that solves 90 percent of the problem all of the time.

Why not address 100% of the issues day 1 after switching from BY to SY?

That has been outlined for you multiple times.

I am genuinely curious as to your end game with this? is it just entertainment for you? Do you actually think posting here 300 times will actually impact change? Do you have a kid that is impacted by this and it is somehow cathartic to think you are doing something/anything to help him/her? Do you think you will actually change anyones mind to your side at this point (maybe you did 3 months ago but hasn't everyone been exposed to all sides by now)?

It seems like a tremendous amount of time and effort that could be used in more productive ways. The fact that you respond very quickly to antagonists would suggest you are on here multiple times a day for extended periods of time.

Maybe use the time kicking a ball with your child instead of arguing with strangers on the internet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Recent USWNT Aug-born players:

Sophia Smith
Kelly O'Hara
Casey Krueger

For fun, here are some notable July-born players:

Alex Morgan
Megan Rapinoe
Crystal Dunn

All these played youth under the previous SY system

I am not sure what this suggests. That talent gets found regardless of birthdate? If so, I agree with it. If it is trying to suggest that these women would not have been "found" based on their July/August birthdate I wholeheartedly disagree because all of these women were most likely the best player on their teams regardless of structure and most likely were playing up a year or two in the first place.

It shows for the highest levels the BY/SY debate does not matter.

Actually, it shows nothing - you're talking about ~35-50 people out of everyone playing soccer. Anyone at that level is playing up multiple years/with boys/men etc. Now for the rest of the 99.9999% the debate does matter.

Pretty sure it's a tad more than 35-50 people.

[Anonymous]

This poster is exactly why I don’t talk to parents of players 99% of the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

No, of course entities go with a solution that solves 90 percent of the problem all of the time.

Why not address 100% of the issues day 1 after switching from BY to SY?

That has been outlined for you multiple times.

I am genuinely curious as to your end game with this? is it just entertainment for you? Do you actually think posting here 300 times will actually impact change? Do you have a kid that is impacted by this and it is somehow cathartic to think you are doing something/anything to help him/her? Do you think you will actually change anyones mind to your side at this point (maybe you did 3 months ago but hasn't everyone been exposed to all sides by now)?

It seems like a tremendous amount of time and effort that could be used in more productive ways. The fact that you respond very quickly to antagonists would suggest you are on here multiple times a day for extended periods of time.

Maybe use the time kicking a ball with your child instead of arguing with strangers on the internet?

What value do you add? You never answer the question posed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Recent USWNT Aug-born players:

Sophia Smith
Kelly O'Hara
Casey Krueger

For fun, here are some notable July-born players:

Alex Morgan
Megan Rapinoe
Crystal Dunn

All these played youth under the previous SY system

I am not sure what this suggests. That talent gets found regardless of birthdate? If so, I agree with it. If it is trying to suggest that these women would not have been "found" based on their July/August birthdate I wholeheartedly disagree because all of these women were most likely the best player on their teams regardless of structure and most likely were playing up a year or two in the first place.

It shows for the highest levels the BY/SY debate does not matter.

Actually, it shows nothing - you're talking about ~35-50 people out of everyone playing soccer. Anyone at that level is playing up multiple years/with boys/men etc. Now for the rest of the 99.9999% the debate does matter.

Pretty sure it's a tad more than 35-50 people.

*referring to USWNT/USMNT caliber players - ok maybe 100? it's a rounding error in the general soccer playing population

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You dont create solutions that address 90% of the issue. Ignoring the other 10%. Same thing with Aug birthdays you cant just let them choose if they want to play with their grade or play down a grade. This is the issue.

What will happen over time is more school districs will start earlier. Which will expand the 10% youre ignoring to 15% or even higher. Also because Aug is the oldest player possible for an age group there will be more of them over time. If theres more Aug birthdays there will be more Aug birthdays choosing to play down a grade.

By choosing to ignore these issues youve created a ticking time bomb that will only get worse over time. The squeaky wheels will get louder and louder. Once it hits a certain threshold soccer will address the issue in the dumbest way possible. Most likely with a league approved individual waiver program. Which club docs and coaches will exploit selling to the highest bidder. (This happened with DA and HS soccer waivers)

People that have been around youth soccer for a while know exactly what will happen next. People that understand math and trajectories over time also know exactly what will happen next.

Address the issues now with something like SY+30 or even SY+60 and all future issues go away.

No, of course entities go with a solution that solves 90 percent of the problem all of the time.

Why not address 100% of the issues day 1 after switching from BY to SY?

That has been outlined for you multiple times.

I am genuinely curious as to your end game with this? is it just entertainment for you? Do you actually think posting here 300 times will actually impact change? Do you have a kid that is impacted by this and it is somehow cathartic to think you are doing something/anything to help him/her? Do you think you will actually change anyones mind to your side at this point (maybe you did 3 months ago but hasn't everyone been exposed to all sides by now)?

It seems like a tremendous amount of time and effort that could be used in more productive ways. The fact that you respond very quickly to antagonists would suggest you are on here multiple times a day for extended periods of time.

Maybe use the time kicking a ball with your child instead of arguing with strangers on the internet?

It will be fun watching you choke on your own bile when MLS+GA announce something different than the foregone conclusion youve defined in your head.