Important Update: US Soccer Birth Year Change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
So US Soccer is going to align to school year instead of birth year for the purposes of college recruiting...

As college sports is imploding and undergoing a massive re-shift under NIL, roster limits, athletes eventually becoming employees.

As college teams rely more on international players and taking older players from the portal.

And to move the system further away from alignment with the international system as the USA struggles with development compared to other nations.

Smh. What idiots...

England seems to do pretty well with development and they aren't on a birth year system............

If you want facts, international players still make up a very small percentage of D1 roster spots, college sports for everything but football and hoops is basically staying the same. You act like Michigan is going to start paying their players pro salaries.

We all get it, you have a Q1/Q2 average kid and they may get dropped from the top team. It sucks for him/her but what a great time to teach him/her that life is not always fair vs teaching him/her to call everyone that disagrees with your biased opinion idiots.

Just a thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So US Soccer is going to align to school year instead of birth year for the purposes of college recruiting...

As college sports is imploding and undergoing a massive re-shift under NIL, roster limits, athletes eventually becoming employees.

As college teams rely more on international players and taking older players from the portal.

And to move the system further away from alignment with the international system as the USA struggles with development compared to other nations.

Smh. What idiots...

Follow the money...

This is a money grab by ECNL around tournaments. ECNL is also trying to be very clear that they train players fir playing in college not playing professionally.

The leagues that focus on younger players just want an easier way to group teams.

Don't disagree but then why does ECNL subbing rules differ from college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So US Soccer is going to align to school year instead of birth year for the purposes of college recruiting...

As college sports is imploding and undergoing a massive re-shift under NIL, roster limits, athletes eventually becoming employees.

As college teams rely more on international players and taking older players from the portal.

And to move the system further away from alignment with the international system as the USA struggles with development compared to other nations.

Smh. What idiots...

Follow the money...

This is a money grab by ECNL around tournaments. ECNL is also trying to be very clear that they train players fir playing in college not playing professionally.

The leagues that focus on younger players just want an easier way to group teams.

Not saying you are saying it here but assuming this change is ECNL lead may be wrong or at least an overstatement. All we know is that ECNL was the first to publicly make known the issue and their position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So US Soccer is going to align to school year instead of birth year for the purposes of college recruiting...

As college sports is imploding and undergoing a massive re-shift under NIL, roster limits, athletes eventually becoming employees.

As college teams rely more on international players and taking older players from the portal.

And to move the system further away from alignment with the international system as the USA struggles with development compared to other nations.

Smh. What idiots...

Follow the money...

This is a money grab by ECNL around tournaments. ECNL is also trying to be very clear that they train players fir playing in college not playing professionally.

The leagues that focus on younger players just want an easier way to group teams.

Don't disagree but then why does ECNL subbing rules differ from college?

Parents would go crazy if youth clubs completely negated possession. Clubs need something they can teach players so they can win without the biggest and best players.

You can kind of see what unlimited subs would be like at tournaments. Notice superteams put together with the biggest fastest players. This is what youth soccer would be like during league.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who started the term 'trapped' and why? Once again trapped by WHAT? Lack of talent? Size? Maturity? I don't get how a birthday traps anyone

Trapped because they don't get a full club season in 8th grade while their BY peers are playing HS soccer. And trapped because junior year all the BY peers have already been recruited and stopped going to events. The major recruitment happens sophomore year when the trapped kids can't be recruited as they are freshman. College coaches are on record saying they don't bother with junior and senior teams in a showcase when the 10th graders are the next wave and need to be picked. That's why they are "trapped" not because of their size, maturity or skills.

Im trying to understand how this would play out for aug and sept players who would play down a grade. I dont know much about college recruiting at all. What would happen to a 10th grader playing on a team with 9th graders? Or 11th with 10th, etc? Would they also lose out? Or is it not the same if playing with the grade younger somehow?

Good question. I would think playing with a grade below would not be good because by the time scouts are recruiting your team, you’re already a year older. So if sophomore year is a bi lg recruiting year, you’d be on a 9th grade team where no scouts will come to watch. When your team is all sophomores, that’s when the scouts come so you’d essentially lose out on a year of recruiting it would seem.

I agree with this. Lets say someone on a 2012 team has an 8/15 birthday (a 7th grader in many states) so would have be able to either play "up" with their grade or down with 6th graders. I think I would prioritize 7th grade ECNL>7th grade ECRL>6th grade ECNL for the main reason of recruiting. I think you could really get lost being a 7th grader on a mostly 6th grade team. The only caveat might be if the 6th grade team is markedly better than the 7th grade teams

I agree with the priority assuming there are spots on those teams and kids that get bumped down from the 2011s (using your example) don't take them. I think you could potentially get lost being a 7th grader on a 6th grade team, but you could also stand out more if you're that much bigger, more developed player, etc. But being in a different grade altogether mitigates those advantages in my opinion. How many parents of kids in those small windows (Aug birthdays with Sept 1 cutoff for school who started early) will look to "reclassify" their kids to be aligned with their grade? Won't debate pros and cons of "reclassifying/redshirting" because each kid and situation is different and I see both sides (academically, socially, sports/physically, etc.), but that is the other option for consideration assuming this passes (which it clearly is now, IMO)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So US Soccer is going to align to school year instead of birth year for the purposes of college recruiting...

As college sports is imploding and undergoing a massive re-shift under NIL, roster limits, athletes eventually becoming employees.

As college teams rely more on international players and taking older players from the portal.

And to move the system further away from alignment with the international system as the USA struggles with development compared to other nations.

Smh. What idiots...

Follow the money...

This is a money grab by ECNL around tournaments. ECNL is also trying to be very clear that they train players fir playing in college not playing professionally.

The leagues that focus on younger players just want an easier way to group teams.

Don't disagree but then why does ECNL subbing rules differ from college?

Parents would go crazy if youth clubs completely negated possession. Clubs need something they can teach players so they can win without the biggest and best players.

You can kind of see what unlimited subs would be like at tournaments. Notice superteams put together with the biggest fastest players. This is what youth soccer would be like during league.

Womens College soccer perhaps could evolve and eliminate unlimited subs. Follow the men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So US Soccer is going to align to school year instead of birth year for the purposes of college recruiting...

As college sports is imploding and undergoing a massive re-shift under NIL, roster limits, athletes eventually becoming employees.

As college teams rely more on international players and taking older players from the portal.

And to move the system further away from alignment with the international system as the USA struggles with development compared to other nations.

Smh. What idiots...

Follow the money...

This is a money grab by ECNL around tournaments. ECNL is also trying to be very clear that they train players fir playing in college not playing professionally.

The leagues that focus on younger players just want an easier way to group teams.

Don't disagree but then why does ECNL subbing rules differ from college?

Parents would go crazy if youth clubs completely negated possession. Clubs need something they can teach players so they can win without the biggest and best players.

You can kind of see what unlimited subs would be like at tournaments. Notice superteams put together with the biggest fastest players. This is what youth soccer would be like during league.

Womens College soccer perhaps could evolve and eliminate unlimited subs. Follow the men.

They're going to be limited to 28 roster spots soon so this gets rid of the 40+ rosters. Which in turn limits the amount of players that can be subbed.

Now that college sports is a form of pro sports there's a good chance that several schools defund their women's programs. Which might put pressure on upping attendance. Unlimited sub soccer is awful to watch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who started the term 'trapped' and why? Once again trapped by WHAT? Lack of talent? Size? Maturity? I don't get how a birthday traps anyone

Trapped because they don't get a full club season in 8th grade while their BY peers are playing HS soccer. And trapped because junior year all the BY peers have already been recruited and stopped going to events. The major recruitment happens sophomore year when the trapped kids can't be recruited as they are freshman. College coaches are on record saying they don't bother with junior and senior teams in a showcase when the 10th graders are the next wave and need to be picked. That's why they are "trapped" not because of their size, maturity or skills.

Im trying to understand how this would play out for aug and sept players who would play down a grade. I dont know much about college recruiting at all. What would happen to a 10th grader playing on a team with 9th graders? Or 11th with 10th, etc? Would they also lose out? Or is it not the same if playing with the grade younger somehow?

Good question. I would think playing with a grade below would not be good because by the time scouts are recruiting your team, you’re already a year older. So if sophomore year is a bi lg recruiting year, you’d be on a 9th grade team where no scouts will come to watch. When your team is all sophomores, that’s when the scouts come so you’d essentially lose out on a year of recruiting it would seem.

I agree with this. Lets say someone on a 2012 team has an 8/15 birthday (a 7th grader in many states) so would have be able to either play "up" with their grade or down with 6th graders. I think I would prioritize 7th grade ECNL>7th grade ECRL>6th grade ECNL for the main reason of recruiting. I think you could really get lost being a 7th grader on a mostly 6th grade team. The only caveat might be if the 6th grade team is markedly better than the 7th grade teams

I agree with the priority assuming there are spots on those teams and kids that get bumped down from the 2011s (using your example) don't take them. I think you could potentially get lost being a 7th grader on a 6th grade team, but you could also stand out more if you're that much bigger, more developed player, etc. But being in a different grade altogether mitigates those advantages in my opinion. How many parents of kids in those small windows (Aug birthdays with Sept 1 cutoff for school who started early) will look to "reclassify" their kids to be aligned with their grade? Won't debate pros and cons of "reclassifying/redshirting" because each kid and situation is different and I see both sides (academically, socially, sports/physically, etc.), but that is the other option for consideration assuming this passes (which it clearly is now, IMO)

Again, those of us with August birthday kids in a state where the enrollment cutoff is September 1st did not start them in school early. We started them exactly when the rules said they should start.

[Anonymous]

I agree with the priority assuming there are spots on those teams and kids that get bumped down from the 2011s (using your example) don't take them. I think you could potentially get lost being a 7th grader on a 6th grade team, but you could also stand out more if you're that much bigger, more developed player, etc. But being in a different grade altogether mitigates those advantages in my opinion. How many parents of kids in those small windows (Aug birthdays with Sept 1 cutoff for school who started early) will look to "reclassify" their kids to be aligned with their grade? Won't debate pros and cons of "reclassifying/redshirting" because each kid and situation is different and I see both sides (academically, socially, sports/physically, etc.), but that is the other option for consideration assuming this passes (which it clearly is now, IMO)

Sorry, but this is the absolute wrong approach for a 12 year old. Noone at this age should want a scenario where he/she is dominating. The goal is not 13 year old trophies or MVP labels. It's the same thing for adults in a meeting room. If you're the smartest one in the room, you're in the wrong room. Only those who get pushed throughout their youth are the ones who end up on top. It's no coincidence that younger siblings have a higher chance of going pro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who started the term 'trapped' and why? Once again trapped by WHAT? Lack of talent? Size? Maturity? I don't get how a birthday traps anyone

Trapped because they don't get a full club season in 8th grade while their BY peers are playing HS soccer. And trapped because junior year all the BY peers have already been recruited and stopped going to events. The major recruitment happens sophomore year when the trapped kids can't be recruited as they are freshman. College coaches are on record saying they don't bother with junior and senior teams in a showcase when the 10th graders are the next wave and need to be picked. That's why they are "trapped" not because of their size, maturity or skills.

Im trying to understand how this would play out for aug and sept players who would play down a grade. I dont know much about college recruiting at all. What would happen to a 10th grader playing on a team with 9th graders? Or 11th with 10th, etc? Would they also lose out? Or is it not the same if playing with the grade younger somehow?

Good question. I would think playing with a grade below would not be good because by the time scouts are recruiting your team, you’re already a year older. So if sophomore year is a bi lg recruiting year, you’d be on a 9th grade team where no scouts will come to watch. When your team is all sophomores, that’s when the scouts come so you’d essentially lose out on a year of recruiting it would seem.

I agree with this. Lets say someone on a 2012 team has an 8/15 birthday (a 7th grader in many states) so would have be able to either play "up" with their grade or down with 6th graders. I think I would prioritize 7th grade ECNL>7th grade ECRL>6th grade ECNL for the main reason of recruiting. I think you could really get lost being a 7th grader on a mostly 6th grade team. The only caveat might be if the 6th grade team is markedly better than the 7th grade teams

I agree with the priority assuming there are spots on those teams and kids that get bumped down from the 2011s (using your example) don't take them. I think you could potentially get lost being a 7th grader on a 6th grade team, but you could also stand out more if you're that much bigger, more developed player, etc. But being in a different grade altogether mitigates those advantages in my opinion. How many parents of kids in those small windows (Aug birthdays with Sept 1 cutoff for school who started early) will look to "reclassify" their kids to be aligned with their grade? Won't debate pros and cons of "reclassifying/redshirting" because each kid and situation is different and I see both sides (academically, socially, sports/physically, etc.), but that is the other option for consideration assuming this passes (which it clearly is now, IMO)

Again, those of us with August birthday kids in a state where the enrollment cutoff is September 1st did not start them in school early. We started them exactly when the rules said they should start.

+1 and the cutoff in VA is September 30!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So US Soccer is going to align to school year instead of birth year for the purposes of college recruiting...

As college sports is imploding and undergoing a massive re-shift under NIL, roster limits, athletes eventually becoming employees.

As college teams rely more on international players and taking older players from the portal.

And to move the system further away from alignment with the international system as the USA struggles with development compared to other nations.

Smh. What idiots...

Follow the money...

This is a money grab by ECNL around tournaments. ECNL is also trying to be very clear that they train players fir playing in college not playing professionally.

The leagues that focus on younger players just want an easier way to group teams.

Don't disagree but then why does ECNL subbing rules differ from college?

Parents would go crazy if youth clubs completely negated possession. Clubs need something they can teach players so they can win without the biggest and best players.

You can kind of see what unlimited subs would be like at tournaments. Notice superteams put together with the biggest fastest players. This is what youth soccer would be like during league.

Womens College soccer perhaps could evolve and eliminate unlimited subs. Follow the men.

They're going to be limited to 28 roster spots soon so this gets rid of the 40+ rosters. Which in turn limits the amount of players that can be subbed.

Now that college sports is a form of pro sports there's a good chance that several schools defund their women's programs. Which might put pressure on upping attendance. Unlimited sub soccer is awful to watch.

Defund women’s teams? What about title 9?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So US Soccer is going to align to school year instead of birth year for the purposes of college recruiting...

As college sports is imploding and undergoing a massive re-shift under NIL, roster limits, athletes eventually becoming employees.

As college teams rely more on international players and taking older players from the portal.

And to move the system further away from alignment with the international system as the USA struggles with development compared to other nations.

Smh. What idiots...

Follow the money...

This is a money grab by ECNL around tournaments. ECNL is also trying to be very clear that they train players fir playing in college not playing professionally.

The leagues that focus on younger players just want an easier way to group teams.

Don't disagree but then why does ECNL subbing rules differ from college?

Parents would go crazy if youth clubs completely negated possession. Clubs need something they can teach players so they can win without the biggest and best players.

You can kind of see what unlimited subs would be like at tournaments. Notice superteams put together with the biggest fastest players. This is what youth soccer would be like during league.

Womens College soccer perhaps could evolve and eliminate unlimited subs. Follow the men.

They're going to be limited to 28 roster spots soon so this gets rid of the 40+ rosters. Which in turn limits the amount of players that can be subbed.

Now that college sports is a form of pro sports there's a good chance that several schools defund their women's programs. Which might put pressure on upping attendance. Unlimited sub soccer is awful to watch.

Defund women’s teams? What about title 9?

If it is the number of scholarships title 9 will apply. If the schools are paying men with NIL deals, title 9 doesn't apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I agree with the priority assuming there are spots on those teams and kids that get bumped down from the 2011s (using your example) don't take them. I think you could potentially get lost being a 7th grader on a 6th grade team, but you could also stand out more if you're that much bigger, more developed player, etc. But being in a different grade altogether mitigates those advantages in my opinion. How many parents of kids in those small windows (Aug birthdays with Sept 1 cutoff for school who started early) will look to "reclassify" their kids to be aligned with their grade? Won't debate pros and cons of "reclassifying/redshirting" because each kid and situation is different and I see both sides (academically, socially, sports/physically, etc.), but that is the other option for consideration assuming this passes (which it clearly is now, IMO)

Sorry, but this is the absolute wrong approach for a 12 year old. Noone at this age should want a scenario where he/she is dominating. The goal is not 13 year old trophies or MVP labels. It's the same thing for adults in a meeting room. If you're the smartest one in the room, you're in the wrong room. Only those who get pushed throughout their youth are the ones who end up on top. It's no coincidence that younger siblings have a higher chance of going pro.

No need to apologize. Not saying it’s wrong or right. But there are different level of teams at each age group and you could play up. Just spit balling the pros and cons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who started the term 'trapped' and why? Once again trapped by WHAT? Lack of talent? Size? Maturity? I don't get how a birthday traps anyone

Trapped because they don't get a full club season in 8th grade while their BY peers are playing HS soccer. And trapped because junior year all the BY peers have already been recruited and stopped going to events. The major recruitment happens sophomore year when the trapped kids can't be recruited as they are freshman. College coaches are on record saying they don't bother with junior and senior teams in a showcase when the 10th graders are the next wave and need to be picked. That's why they are "trapped" not because of their size, maturity or skills.

Im trying to understand how this would play out for aug and sept players who would play down a grade. I dont know much about college recruiting at all. What would happen to a 10th grader playing on a team with 9th graders? Or 11th with 10th, etc? Would they also lose out? Or is it not the same if playing with the grade younger somehow?

Good question. I would think playing with a grade below would not be good because by the time scouts are recruiting your team, you’re already a year older. So if sophomore year is a bi lg recruiting year, you’d be on a 9th grade team where no scouts will come to watch. When your team is all sophomores, that’s when the scouts come so you’d essentially lose out on a year of recruiting it would seem.

I agree with this. Lets say someone on a 2012 team has an 8/15 birthday (a 7th grader in many states) so would have be able to either play "up" with their grade or down with 6th graders. I think I would prioritize 7th grade ECNL>7th grade ECRL>6th grade ECNL for the main reason of recruiting. I think you could really get lost being a 7th grader on a mostly 6th grade team. The only caveat might be if the 6th grade team is markedly better than the 7th grade teams

I agree with the priority assuming there are spots on those teams and kids that get bumped down from the 2011s (using your example) don't take them. I think you could potentially get lost being a 7th grader on a 6th grade team, but you could also stand out more if you're that much bigger, more developed player, etc. But being in a different grade altogether mitigates those advantages in my opinion. How many parents of kids in those small windows (Aug birthdays with Sept 1 cutoff for school who started early) will look to "reclassify" their kids to be aligned with their grade? Won't debate pros and cons of "reclassifying/redshirting" because each kid and situation is different and I see both sides (academically, socially, sports/physically, etc.), but that is the other option for consideration assuming this passes (which it clearly is now, IMO)

Again, those of us with August birthday kids in a state where the enrollment cutoff is September 1st did not start them in school early. We started them exactly when the rules said they should start.

Early isn’t the right word. But you get my point. You could have started your kid exactly when the (arbitrary cutoff date) said you should have, or you could have held them back to be on the older end of the range, as opposed to the younger. Some kids are ready and do fine, some choose to hold back.

[Anonymous]

Not PP but what about making a greater impact on a team by getting more touches, more mins and/or ID opportunities, would one or more of those make a good argument?

Honest debate, not trolling feel like that needs to be stated, I’ve been on both sides of this with different kids and honestly my boring answer is- it depends on the kid, their gender and frankly, their individual long term soccer goals