ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's fine that people think they have a better solution to a year-long age range by adding +30 or +60. But let's be real, what is the likelihood of this actually happening? My guess is zero.

They already changed it to 8/1. People may think this means they can change it a 3rd time. I actually think the opposite - they already put a lot of time and data into correcting to 8/1, likely already considered options like GY and +30 before changing it again, and would give teams less prep time by changing it again. The whole point of announcing a year in advance was to give teams time to prepare, not to allow for soccer mommy and daddy disagreements to lead to more changes. They changed to 8/1 because they overlooked school district data.

Commenters act like the powers that be didn't already consider +30 or +60 already, like it's some genius new idea that can only be learned on a soccer mom message board. They already considered this idea and it gained zero traction.

It ain't gonna happen. This thread is made for discussions like this, but that's as far as it'll go.

👍👍👍

[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: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.

I never said it wouldn't just questioning the time and effort on a random message board that will have literally zero impact on the final decision. I dont think the powers that be are monitoring this board that closely. Not trying to be mean just suggesting there are better ways to spend your time. That's all.

So your time spent on DCUM is better spent then others?

Go away loser. Worry about yourself.

You must be a Russian bot because nobody else would be invested in such a ridiculous idea as trying to invent and rabidly defend the perfect miscellaneous carve out system which can't exist obviously in a zero sum game.

Math is not ridiculous.

The more people hear about SY+30 the more likely it becomes.

Please explain EXACTLY how SY+30 would work? And how it would affect July birthdays

SY+60 with a 9/1 cutoff would allow July birthdays in a specific grade to play down with their grade. If youre a July birthday but not in that grade you cant play down.

Aug and July verification would require a birth cert and proof of grade in school. All other months of the year only need a birth cert. Players caught cheating will be forced to play with their grade and the team will forfeit games.

Above is to address July birthdays

Most people only want to address Aug birthdays so in this case SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff works.

Okay, so do you not see the hypocrisy of your proposal? You are allowing players to cheat by playing below their biological age cutoff!!!

Nope, some school districts start in July. This means that being born in July shouldn't keep players from playing with their grade.

If very few choose to exploit the loophole. Its not an issue because 1 its only two months and 2 players on the field are all in the same grade. Which is what recruiters want to see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's fine that people think they have a better solution to a year-long age range by adding +30 or +60. But let's be real, what is the likelihood of this actually happening? My guess is zero.

They already changed it to 8/1. People may think this means they can change it a 3rd time. I actually think the opposite - they already put a lot of time and data into correcting to 8/1, likely already considered options like GY and +30 before changing it again, and would give teams less prep time by changing it again. The whole point of announcing a year in advance was to give teams time to prepare, not to allow for soccer mommy and daddy disagreements to lead to more changes. They changed to 8/1 because they overlooked school district data.

Commenters act like the powers that be didn't already consider +30 or +60 already, like it's some genius new idea that can only be learned on a soccer mom message board. They already considered this idea and it gained zero traction.

It ain't gonna happen. This thread is made for discussions like this, but that's as far as it'll go.

Agree it is just a waiver system which is already granted in rec . Playing down a biological age category though will not have a place in the non-rec space, outside the biobanding rouse that MLSN employs anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Because only grad year solves 100 percent but is open to the criticism of an age window over 12 months. 8/1 solves 98 percent of the problem, it worked well until a euro weenie for hire butchered things. We are just resetting things to a time when things worked better.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff gives the same end solution as GY. You end up with all players on the field graduating the same year. Which is exactly what recruiters want.

What SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff does not allow is regrades playing down. GY allows this and is where you end up with 16 year old freshman or 20 year old high school seniors.

If SY+30 gives you the same end solution as GY, you are making an argument for GY. Most surveyed prefered a straight 12 month window without waivers though.

No i dont agree with letting players play down. It creates situations where table stakes for playing a sport becomes being held back several years in school. This is the issue with GY.

Right, nobody will be allowed to play down. The ECNL leadership said on an earlier podcast that playing down was looked askew. 8/1 - 7/31 it is.

If ECNL leadership is saying that they're against players playing down. A single 8/1 cutoff date with an unwritten rule for Aug birthdays to not play down a grade is the same thing as SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff. The only difference is that SY+30 addresses the issue with a written rule while ECNL plans to address it with an unwritten rule.

Which solution do you think will make SY challenges a thing of the past?

Which solution do you think will make SY challenges pop up again and again?

[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: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.

I never said it wouldn't just questioning the time and effort on a random message board that will have literally zero impact on the final decision. I dont think the powers that be are monitoring this board that closely. Not trying to be mean just suggesting there are better ways to spend your time. That's all.

So your time spent on DCUM is better spent then others?

Go away loser. Worry about yourself.

You must be a Russian bot because nobody else would be invested in such a ridiculous idea as trying to invent and rabidly defend the perfect miscellaneous carve out system which can't exist obviously in a zero sum game.

Math is not ridiculous.

The more people hear about SY+30 the more likely it becomes.

Please explain EXACTLY how SY+30 would work? And how it would affect July birthdays

SY+60 with a 9/1 cutoff would allow July birthdays in a specific grade to play down with their grade. If youre a July birthday but not in that grade you cant play down.

Aug and July verification would require a birth cert and proof of grade in school. All other months of the year only need a birth cert. Players caught cheating will be forced to play with their grade and the team will forfeit games.

Above is to address July birthdays

Most people only want to address Aug birthdays so in this case SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff works.

Okay, so do you not see the hypocrisy of your proposal? You are allowing players to cheat by playing below their biological age cutoff!!!

Nope, some school districts start in July. This means that being born in July shouldn't keep players from playing with their grade.

If very few choose to exploit the loophole. Its not an issue because 1 its only two months and 2 players on the field are all in the same grade. Which is what recruiters want to see.

I see, it’s not an issue since they are only cheating by a couple months. You continue to think grade trumps the significance of biological age. I’m guessing you are a conspiracy theorist too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's fine that people think they have a better solution to a year-long age range by adding +30 or +60. But let's be real, what is the likelihood of this actually happening? My guess is zero.

They already changed it to 8/1. People may think this means they can change it a 3rd time. I actually think the opposite - they already put a lot of time and data into correcting to 8/1, likely already considered options like GY and +30 before changing it again, and would give teams less prep time by changing it again. The whole point of announcing a year in advance was to give teams time to prepare, not to allow for soccer mommy and daddy disagreements to lead to more changes. They changed to 8/1 because they overlooked school district data.

Commenters act like the powers that be didn't already consider +30 or +60 already, like it's some genius new idea that can only be learned on a soccer mom message board. They already considered this idea and it gained zero traction.

It ain't gonna happen. This thread is made for discussions like this, but that's as far as it'll go.

Agree it is just a waiver system which is already granted in rec . Playing down a biological age category though will not have a place in the non-rec space, outside the biobanding rouse that MLSN employs anyway.

I agree with you SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff is just a waiver system. But what makes it different is waiver eligibility is clearly defined in black and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's fine that people think they have a better solution to a year-long age range by adding +30 or +60. But let's be real, what is the likelihood of this actually happening? My guess is zero.

They already changed it to 8/1. People may think this means they can change it a 3rd time. I actually think the opposite - they already put a lot of time and data into correcting to 8/1, likely already considered options like GY and +30 before changing it again, and would give teams less prep time by changing it again. The whole point of announcing a year in advance was to give teams time to prepare, not to allow for soccer mommy and daddy disagreements to lead to more changes. They changed to 8/1 because they overlooked school district data.

Commenters act like the powers that be didn't already consider +30 or +60 already, like it's some genius new idea that can only be learned on a soccer mom message board. They already considered this idea and it gained zero traction.

It ain't gonna happen. This thread is made for discussions like this, but that's as far as it'll go.

Agree it is just a waiver system which is already granted in rec . Playing down a biological age category though will not have a place in the non-rec space, outside the biobanding rouse that MLSN employs anyway.

I agree with you SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff is just a waiver system. But what makes it different is waiver eligibility is clearly defined in black and white.

But both are a form of cheating by allowing kids to play down a biological age group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's fine that people think they have a better solution to a year-long age range by adding +30 or +60. But let's be real, what is the likelihood of this actually happening? My guess is zero.

They already changed it to 8/1. People may think this means they can change it a 3rd time. I actually think the opposite - they already put a lot of time and data into correcting to 8/1, likely already considered options like GY and +30 before changing it again, and would give teams less prep time by changing it again. The whole point of announcing a year in advance was to give teams time to prepare, not to allow for soccer mommy and daddy disagreements to lead to more changes. They changed to 8/1 because they overlooked school district data.

Commenters act like the powers that be didn't already consider +30 or +60 already, like it's some genius new idea that can only be learned on a soccer mom message board. They already considered this idea and it gained zero traction.

It ain't gonna happen. This thread is made for discussions like this, but that's as far as it'll go.

Agree it is just a waiver system which is already granted in rec . Playing down a biological age category though will not have a place in the non-rec space, outside the biobanding rouse that MLSN employs anyway.

I agree with you SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff is just a waiver system. But what makes it different is waiver eligibility is clearly defined in black and white.

But both are a form of cheating by allowing kids to play down a biological age group.

Your 12 month parameter of what makes a "biological grouping" correct is arbitrary.

The reason for switching from BY to SY was because leadership thinks that kids playing soccer against other kids in the grade will help grow the sport.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's fine that people think they have a better solution to a year-long age range by adding +30 or +60. But let's be real, what is the likelihood of this actually happening? My guess is zero.

They already changed it to 8/1. People may think this means they can change it a 3rd time. I actually think the opposite - they already put a lot of time and data into correcting to 8/1, likely already considered options like GY and +30 before changing it again, and would give teams less prep time by changing it again. The whole point of announcing a year in advance was to give teams time to prepare, not to allow for soccer mommy and daddy disagreements to lead to more changes. They changed to 8/1 because they overlooked school district data.

Commenters act like the powers that be didn't already consider +30 or +60 already, like it's some genius new idea that can only be learned on a soccer mom message board. They already considered this idea and it gained zero traction.

It ain't gonna happen. This thread is made for discussions like this, but that's as far as it'll go.

Agree it is just a waiver system which is already granted in rec . Playing down a biological age category though will not have a place in the non-rec space, outside the biobanding rouse that MLSN employs anyway.

I agree with you SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff is just a waiver system. But what makes it different is waiver eligibility is clearly defined in black and white.

But both are a form of cheating by allowing kids to play down a biological age group.

Your 12 month parameter of what makes a "biological grouping" correct is arbitrary.

The reason for switching from BY to SY was because leadership thinks that kids playing soccer against other kids in the grade will help grow the sport.

If older kids are systematically allowed to play down, it will cause more attrition among the younger kids than before, as it will be even harder for them to keep up. They and their parents will compare themselves to the oldest kids who are likely more successful (on average, despite true soccer skill). Allowing ANY exceptions to an absolute 12 month age cutoff, now that is arbitrary

[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: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.

I never said it wouldn't just questioning the time and effort on a random message board that will have literally zero impact on the final decision. I dont think the powers that be are monitoring this board that closely. Not trying to be mean just suggesting there are better ways to spend your time. That's all.

So your time spent on DCUM is better spent then others?

Go away loser. Worry about yourself.

You must be a Russian bot because nobody else would be invested in such a ridiculous idea as trying to invent and rabidly defend the perfect miscellaneous carve out system which can't exist obviously in a zero sum game.

Math is not ridiculous.

The more people hear about SY+30 the more likely it becomes.

Please explain EXACTLY how SY+30 would work? And how it would affect July birthdays

SY+60 with a 9/1 cutoff would allow July birthdays in a specific grade to play down with their grade. If youre a July birthday but not in that grade you cant play down.

Aug and July verification would require a birth cert and proof of grade in school. All other months of the year only need a birth cert. Players caught cheating will be forced to play with their grade and the team will forfeit games.

Above is to address July birthdays

Most people only want to address Aug birthdays so in this case SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff works.

Okay, so do you not see the hypocrisy of your proposal? You are allowing players to cheat by playing below their biological age cutoff!!!

Nope, some school districts start in July. This means that being born in July shouldn't keep players from playing with their grade.

If very few choose to exploit the loophole. Its not an issue because 1 its only two months and 2 players on the field are all in the same grade. Which is what recruiters want to see.

As the parent who pays the club fees, I don't care what recruiters want to see. My kid with an August birthday should be able to play with all the kids in her 1 year window - regardless if she went to school on time, was held back, or skipped a year ahead. Club soccer is outside of school and fairness is determined by biological age. There is no cheating by holding your kid back to get an advantage, and that's exactly what your +whatever scheme is advocating for.

[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: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.

I never said it wouldn't just questioning the time and effort on a random message board that will have literally zero impact on the final decision. I dont think the powers that be are monitoring this board that closely. Not trying to be mean just suggesting there are better ways to spend your time. That's all.

So your time spent on DCUM is better spent then others?

Go away loser. Worry about yourself.

You must be a Russian bot because nobody else would be invested in such a ridiculous idea as trying to invent and rabidly defend the perfect miscellaneous carve out system which can't exist obviously in a zero sum game.

Math is not ridiculous.

The more people hear about SY+30 the more likely it becomes.

Please explain EXACTLY how SY+30 would work? And how it would affect July birthdays

SY+60 with a 9/1 cutoff would allow July birthdays in a specific grade to play down with their grade. If youre a July birthday but not in that grade you cant play down.

Aug and July verification would require a birth cert and proof of grade in school. All other months of the year only need a birth cert. Players caught cheating will be forced to play with their grade and the team will forfeit games.

Above is to address July birthdays

Most people only want to address Aug birthdays so in this case SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff works.

Okay, so do you not see the hypocrisy of your proposal? You are allowing players to cheat by playing below their biological age cutoff!!!

Nope, some school districts start in July. This means that being born in July shouldn't keep players from playing with their grade.

If very few choose to exploit the loophole. Its not an issue because 1 its only two months and 2 players on the field are all in the same grade. Which is what recruiters want to see.

As the parent who pays the club fees, I don't care what recruiters want to see. My kid with an August birthday should be able to play with all the kids in her 1 year window - regardless if she went to school on time, was held back, or skipped a year ahead. Club soccer is outside of school and fairness is determined by biological age. There is no cheating by holding your kid back to get an advantage, and that's exactly what your +whatever scheme is advocating for.

Not true at all. SY+ is advocating for those August birthdays that started school on time. It also won't allow clubs to bring in the Aug birthday that is playing with their grade year to be brought into the lower age group when advantageous for wins. Only Aug birthdays in that school grade will be allowed a waiver.

[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: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.

I never said it wouldn't just questioning the time and effort on a random message board that will have literally zero impact on the final decision. I dont think the powers that be are monitoring this board that closely. Not trying to be mean just suggesting there are better ways to spend your time. That's all.

So your time spent on DCUM is better spent then others?

Go away loser. Worry about yourself.

You must be a Russian bot because nobody else would be invested in such a ridiculous idea as trying to invent and rabidly defend the perfect miscellaneous carve out system which can't exist obviously in a zero sum game.

Math is not ridiculous.

The more people hear about SY+30 the more likely it becomes.

Please explain EXACTLY how SY+30 would work? And how it would affect July birthdays

SY+60 with a 9/1 cutoff would allow July birthdays in a specific grade to play down with their grade. If youre a July birthday but not in that grade you cant play down.

Aug and July verification would require a birth cert and proof of grade in school. All other months of the year only need a birth cert. Players caught cheating will be forced to play with their grade and the team will forfeit games.

Above is to address July birthdays

Most people only want to address Aug birthdays so in this case SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff works.

Okay, so do you not see the hypocrisy of your proposal? You are allowing players to cheat by playing below their biological age cutoff!!!

Nope, some school districts start in July. This means that being born in July shouldn't keep players from playing with their grade.

If very few choose to exploit the loophole. Its not an issue because 1 its only two months and 2 players on the field are all in the same grade. Which is what recruiters want to see.

As the parent who pays the club fees, I don't care what recruiters want to see. My kid with an August birthday should be able to play with all the kids in her 1 year window - regardless if she went to school on time, was held back, or skipped a year ahead. Club soccer is outside of school and fairness is determined by biological age. There is no cheating by holding your kid back to get an advantage, and that's exactly what your +whatever scheme is advocating for.

You're basically arguing for grade year then, right? Which was already shot down. And if you have an August kid, doesn't she have options now with the 8/1 date? She can be the oldest or youngest if you really want her to play with her grade, and that's really up to her specific club, not the US Club Soccer org.

[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: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.

I never said it wouldn't just questioning the time and effort on a random message board that will have literally zero impact on the final decision. I dont think the powers that be are monitoring this board that closely. Not trying to be mean just suggesting there are better ways to spend your time. That's all.

So your time spent on DCUM is better spent then others?

Go away loser. Worry about yourself.

You must be a Russian bot because nobody else would be invested in such a ridiculous idea as trying to invent and rabidly defend the perfect miscellaneous carve out system which can't exist obviously in a zero sum game.

Math is not ridiculous.

The more people hear about SY+30 the more likely it becomes.

Please explain EXACTLY how SY+30 would work? And how it would affect July birthdays

SY+60 with a 9/1 cutoff would allow July birthdays in a specific grade to play down with their grade. If youre a July birthday but not in that grade you cant play down.

Aug and July verification would require a birth cert and proof of grade in school. All other months of the year only need a birth cert. Players caught cheating will be forced to play with their grade and the team will forfeit games.

Above is to address July birthdays

Most people only want to address Aug birthdays so in this case SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff works.

Okay, so do you not see the hypocrisy of your proposal? You are allowing players to cheat by playing below their biological age cutoff!!!

Nope, some school districts start in July. This means that being born in July shouldn't keep players from playing with their grade.

If very few choose to exploit the loophole. Its not an issue because 1 its only two months and 2 players on the field are all in the same grade. Which is what recruiters want to see.

As the parent who pays the club fees, I don't care what recruiters want to see. My kid with an August birthday should be able to play with all the kids in her 1 year window - regardless if she went to school on time, was held back, or skipped a year ahead. Club soccer is outside of school and fairness is determined by biological age. There is no cheating by holding your kid back to get an advantage, and that's exactly what your +whatever scheme is advocating for.

No, the + part of SY+30 just forces Aug birthdays to play with their grade in school. If you have an Aug birthday kid and want to play down just hold them back a year. No other birthday month is given this option. Meaning they would have to play up a grade because of their age.

[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: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.

I never said it wouldn't just questioning the time and effort on a random message board that will have literally zero impact on the final decision. I dont think the powers that be are monitoring this board that closely. Not trying to be mean just suggesting there are better ways to spend your time. That's all.

So your time spent on DCUM is better spent then others?

Go away loser. Worry about yourself.

You must be a Russian bot because nobody else would be invested in such a ridiculous idea as trying to invent and rabidly defend the perfect miscellaneous carve out system which can't exist obviously in a zero sum game.

Math is not ridiculous.

The more people hear about SY+30 the more likely it becomes.

Please explain EXACTLY how SY+30 would work? And how it would affect July birthdays

SY+60 with a 9/1 cutoff would allow July birthdays in a specific grade to play down with their grade. If youre a July birthday but not in that grade you cant play down.

Aug and July verification would require a birth cert and proof of grade in school. All other months of the year only need a birth cert. Players caught cheating will be forced to play with their grade and the team will forfeit games.

Above is to address July birthdays

Most people only want to address Aug birthdays so in this case SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff works.

Okay, so do you not see the hypocrisy of your proposal? You are allowing players to cheat by playing below their biological age cutoff!!!

Nope, some school districts start in July. This means that being born in July shouldn't keep players from playing with their grade.

If very few choose to exploit the loophole. Its not an issue because 1 its only two months and 2 players on the field are all in the same grade. Which is what recruiters want to see.

As the parent who pays the club fees, I don't care what recruiters want to see. My kid with an August birthday should be able to play with all the kids in her 1 year window - regardless if she went to school on time, was held back, or skipped a year ahead. Club soccer is outside of school and fairness is determined by biological age. There is no cheating by holding your kid back to get an advantage, and that's exactly what your +whatever scheme is advocating for.

No, the + part of SY+30 just forces Aug birthdays to play with their grade in school. If you have an Aug birthday kid and want to play down just hold them back a year. No other birthday month is given this option. Meaning they would have to play up a grade because of their age.

With 8/1 (or 9/1 or the old 1/1) every single birthday month is given the option to play within their 1 year biological age window. Grade has nothing to do with it, and it shouldn't. No one should be holding their kid back academically just for soccer. The SY+ system is trying to make loopholes for people to redshirt to "cheat" while forcing August kids who started school early/on time or skipped up to play with older kids.

[Anonymous]

WHY ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT THIS!?