MLSnext 2 and GA moves to school year cutoff from 26-27 season

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Yes, you could be right. I'm just saying I haven't seen any of this data from US soccer (after deliberating and announcing they'd punt the decision to lower organizations), or from US Club Soccer who announced the change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Yes, you could be right. I'm just saying I haven't seen any of this data from US soccer (after deliberating and announcing they'd punt the decision to lower organizations), or from US Club Soccer who announced the change.

And then there's this: https://www.forsoccer.com/insight/soccer-participation-in-the-united-states/

Soccer participation rates recently increased 8%. Not a decrease!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Yes, you could be right. I'm just saying I haven't seen any of this data from US soccer (after deliberating and announcing they'd punt the decision to lower organizations), or from US Club Soccer who announced the change.

And then there's this: https://www.forsoccer.com/insight/soccer-participation-in-the-united-states/

Soccer participation rates recently increased 8%. Not a decrease!

It's a mixed story. Yes it increased but it's still not at pre-covid levels. And youth sports participation in general has dropped a lot in the last 10-15 years.

https://projectplay.org has some good data and insights about how participation changes as kids get older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Yes, you could be right. I'm just saying I haven't seen any of this data from US soccer (after deliberating and announcing they'd punt the decision to lower organizations), or from US Club Soccer who announced the change.

And then there's this: https://www.forsoccer.com/insight/soccer-participation-in-the-united-states/

Soccer participation rates recently increased 8%. Not a decrease!

It's a mixed story. Yes it increased but it's still not at pre-covid levels. And youth sports participation in general has dropped a lot in the last 10-15 years.

https://projectplay.org has some good data and insights about how participation changes as kids get older.

Then to me that points to the long-lasting effects of COVID, not the 2016 change to BY. Kids now are only four years removed from COVID, and if they quit sports due to COVID I don't really see the argument that SY will get them to play again.

To me, if it's increasing that's a good sign and trend. The more removed from COVID we get the better. The change to SY flis favorable for my kid but I I am surprised by the change and breaking up teams again while participation is currently on the rise.

[Anonymous]

Sucks to Suck summer families. My kid was born in November has been doing just fine. Get a private trainer and tell them to work hard and it will workout. That's what you told us in 2016.
Life's not fair figure it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sucks to Suck summer families. My kid was born in November has been doing just fine. Get a private trainer and tell them to work hard and it will workout. That's what you told us in 2016.
Life's not fair figure it out.

I'm a RL coach and also heard concerns from Q4 kids. Some don't care, and some want to stay with their team rather than switching to a team that they view as "playing down". They may be older and better than the majority of players in the younger bracket but it's not really the best scenario for them development-wise. This younger team is also not as successful in their division compared to the older team. Only so many spots on every team and yeah, we'll have to just figure it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sucks to Suck summer families. My kid was born in November has been doing just fine. Get a private trainer and tell them to work hard and it will workout. That's what you told us in 2016.
Life's not fair figure it out.

My September kid was told he wasn’t “rangy” enough…. Fast forward to the new age cutoff 10 months later now he’s 5 inches taller and looks plenty “rangy”.

It’s all about the RAE.

[Anonymous]

has anyone heard an announcement from GA regarding SY??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:has anyone heard an announcement from GA regarding SY??

Nope. Other thread someone claimed it was 50/50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sucks to Suck summer families. My kid was born in November has been doing just fine. Get a private trainer and tell them to work hard and it will workout. That's what you told us in 2016.
Life's not fair figure it out.

My September kid was told he wasn’t “rangy” enough…. Fast forward to the new age cutoff 10 months later now he’s 5 inches taller and looks plenty “rangy”.

It’s all about the RAE.

Yeah and that’s why all the BY people are freaking out…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

The issue is no one has seen this data because it doesn't exist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

The issue is no one has seen this data because it doesn't exist

US Soccer is allowing leagues to go SY to increase participation rates. No finding of studies needed, done deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Yes, you could be right. I'm just saying I haven't seen any of this data from US soccer (after deliberating and announcing they'd punt the decision to lower organizations), or from US Club Soccer who announced the change.

Because there isn’t any, despite what PP suggested with their “can’t prove a negative” two smart by half response,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Yes, you could be right. I'm just saying I haven't seen any of this data from US soccer (after deliberating and announcing they'd punt the decision to lower organizations), or from US Club Soccer who announced the change.

And then there's this: https://www.forsoccer.com/insight/soccer-participation-in-the-united-states/

Soccer participation rates recently increased 8%. Not a decrease!

It's a mixed story. Yes it increased but it's still not at pre-covid levels. And youth sports participation in general has dropped a lot in the last 10-15 years.

https://projectplay.org has some good data and insights about how participation changes as kids get older.

Insights = opinions.

They lay out some data, and then have some random yahoos that are not data scientists but rando-coaches and administrators “interpret” the data as supporting their long standing opinions.

Project play data is good, the analysis of it is hot garbage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:common language for most american players.... culture etc.

Sending an 18 year old from Iowa to italy/spain would be a complete disater.

Not necessarily. Pulicic, from Hershey, PA, went to Brossia Dortmund at age 16 I think? Point is that MLS and Youth Soccer are trying to make the US more competitive and developmentally mature, and I can see why MLS Next sticking to BY might be their preference to align with the majority of the world. That was their argument when the change to BY happened in '16.

Whether that is realistic or would work out over time is TBD. It would take generations before an answer is known.

Um, no, they are not trying to help anything other than having older kids on the U.S. U-kid international teams. That's it.

How can they have kids older than the age group on the USYNTs?

The previous age change from SY to BY was because they were trying to give the advantage of the RAE to the January-march birthdays as those birthdays are the oldest possible group for youth national teams as those teams are also BY. Having the RAE benefit from the August-October birthdays on SY teams wasn’t as helpful as those birthdays were younger on the ynt.

Unfortunately for US soccer, success at the ynt age groups doesnt necessarily translate to the senior level. In order to improve the senior teams, we need a better overall soccer culture in the US. Maybe more kids playing because of SY teams will help that.

School year is the way to go to reduce trapped players and they probably never should have changed it, but I'm pretty skeptical that declining participation rates in soccer are due to not being aligned with SY. I haven't seen any data that confirms that.

I suspect any declining participation rates are primarily due to this:

1. Pay-to-play, and add in economic downturn cycles and fewer folks can afford it.
2. Travel requirements - most working families don't have the time. Forget about it for single-parent households. Also adds to costs.
3. COVID
4. The rise of Pickleball (kidding!)

Just because you haven’t seen or looked for the data doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

The issue is no one has seen this data because it doesn't exist

US Soccer is allowing leagues to go SY to increase participation rates. No finding of studies needed, done deal.

Can you follow a thread or are you just being a butthole?