ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

Dude GA already confirmed they are going SY! What is so hard to understand? There will be no BY GA leagues. My god, I thought the BY nutters all left.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

Dude GA already confirmed they are going SY! What is so hard to understand? There will be no BY GA leagues. My god, I thought the BY nutters all left.

for anyone new who doesn't actually know - https://girlsacademyleague.com/2025/09/girls-academy-to-adopt-seasonal-year-age-group-formation-beginning-in-2026-2027/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

Dude GA already confirmed they are going SY! What is so hard to understand? There will be no BY GA leagues. My god, I thought the BY nutters all left.

Unfortunately they wont until MLS announces something.

[Anonymous]

The more I read the more convinced I am that P2P clubs in MLSNext1/2 can't play any way other than SY.

So MLSNext1/2 will move SY, it makes perfect sense.

Regarding MLS academies, if they decided to roster their teams with BY in MLSNext1 (SY) they would play 5 months ahead, no problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

Dude GA already confirmed they are going SY! What is so hard to understand? There will be no BY GA leagues. My god, I thought the BY nutters all left.

Details are important. Just because you seem to function purely on emotion doesnt mean thats how the world works.

Also because GA self sanctions it means that can add whatever rule into SY they want whenever that want to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The more I read the more convinced I am that P2P clubs in MLSNext1/2 can't play any way other than SY.

So MLSNext1/2 will move SY, it makes perfect sense.

Regarding MLS academies, if they decided to roster their teams with BY in MLSNext1 (SY) they would play 5 months ahead, no problem.

I mean, I could see a case for the MLSN1 P2P clubs to make a carve out for BY for just those teams. It would suck, but they would do it if they had no choice. And potentially MLSN will give them no choice... But for MLSN2 clubs? Makes 0 sense to not be SY.

[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:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

Dude GA already confirmed they are going SY! What is so hard to understand? There will be no BY GA leagues. My god, I thought the BY nutters all left.

Details are important. Just because you seem to function purely on emotion doesnt mean thats how the world works.

Also because GA self sanctions it means that can add whatever rule into SY they want whenever that want to.

GA self sanctions under USSF just like US Club and USYS. All of whom could decide to do whatever. And they have all decided to go with the new recommended SY model. There is nothing emotional about that, it is just a straight up fact. I'm not sure why that pill is so hard to swallow for some people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The more I read the more convinced I am that P2P clubs in MLSNext1/2 can't play any way other than SY.

So MLSNext1/2 will move SY, it makes perfect sense.

Regarding MLS academies, if they decided to roster their teams with BY in MLSNext1 (SY) they would play 5 months ahead, no problem.

I mean, I could see a case for the MLSN1 P2P clubs to make a carve out for BY for just those teams. It would suck, but they would do it if they had no choice. And potentially MLSN will give them no choice... But for MLSN2 clubs? Makes 0 sense to not be SY.

If the end goal is for MLS1 and MLS2 to be feeders for MLS Homegrown then it would make sense for then to stay BY. Also if Homegrown and Academy teams play each other it would make sense to stay BY if Homegrown stays BY.

[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:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

Dude GA already confirmed they are going SY! What is so hard to understand? There will be no BY GA leagues. My god, I thought the BY nutters all left.

Details are important. Just because you seem to function purely on emotion doesnt mean thats how the world works.

Also because GA self sanctions it means that can add whatever rule into SY they want whenever that want to.

GA self sanctions under USSF just like US Club and USYS. All of whom could decide to do whatever. And they have all decided to go with the new recommended SY model. There is nothing emotional about that, it is just a straight up fact. I'm not sure why that pill is so hard to swallow for some people.

Can ECNL self sanction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The more I read the more convinced I am that P2P clubs in MLSNext1/2 can't play any way other than SY.

So MLSNext1/2 will move SY, it makes perfect sense.

Regarding MLS academies, if they decided to roster their teams with BY in MLSNext1 (SY) they would play 5 months ahead, no problem.

I mean, I could see a case for the MLSN1 P2P clubs to make a carve out for BY for just those teams. It would suck, but they would do it if they had no choice. And potentially MLSN will give them no choice... But for MLSN2 clubs? Makes 0 sense to not be SY.

If the end goal is for MLS1 and MLS2 to be feeders for MLS Homegrown then it would make sense for then to stay BY. Also if Homegrown and Academy teams play each other it would make sense to stay BY if Homegrown stays BY.

Why couldn't they do that with a SY system?

[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:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

Dude GA already confirmed they are going SY! What is so hard to understand? There will be no BY GA leagues. My god, I thought the BY nutters all left.

Details are important. Just because you seem to function purely on emotion doesnt mean thats how the world works.

Also because GA self sanctions it means that can add whatever rule into SY they want whenever that want to.

GA self sanctions under USSF just like US Club and USYS. All of whom could decide to do whatever. And they have all decided to go with the new recommended SY model. There is nothing emotional about that, it is just a straight up fact. I'm not sure why that pill is so hard to swallow for some people.

Can ECNL self sanction?

Who cares.

[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:MLSN staying BY makes zero sense in the business sense. That model is already on the edge with all the travel, rules, etc. parents are growing tired of it and MLSN2 is going to have talent issues with many parents and kids not wanting all the restrictions and travel. A lot of kids are multi sports athletes and don’t want to play soccer in HS either, but don’t want soccer matches in the middle of winter. Many parents and kids are wanting the NPL route now and some of these kids are super talented and could be MLSN1 starters. Staying BY would reduce MLSN player pool further.

Here’s how it will work. All of soccer up to u13 will become SY. Those top teams/players will be predominantly Aug-Mar kids. At u13, if faced with an age cutoff change, those parents and kids will overwhelmingly choose a SY cutoff league to maintain their trajectory (not saying that is right or wrong, it will just be true). Therefore MLsN will lose priority in the top player pool.

There was some argument back a few hundred pages that insisted that MLSN (while partnering with GA) would have complete BY clubs. So clubs would have MLSN1/2 and GA for BY and then create youth leagues for BY. And complete BY tournaments etc. That obviously looks much less likely now that we know GA is going SY.

Thats not what they said. They said IF some leagues stayed BY and others changed to SY that tournaments sponsored by different clubs would have either BY or SY groupings. They also said that if some leagues stayed BY there was a very good chance that they would need to create youngers BY leagues. GA probably considered all this and decided against it.

I mean yeah, that kinda summarizes exactly what I said just in a longer format. With some added IFs. Also, leagues cannot decide to be BY, they will be what their parent org is. All USYS, GA, US Club, AYSO, leagues will be SY. There are no IFs.

Hey smart guy both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. Which means both leagues can choose to do whatever they want.

MLSN could and should but GA probably benefits more from being in the common ecosystem with ECNL, USYA, etc than sanctioning itself.

Again both MLSN and GA can sanction themselves. GA used to use USSSA for sanctioning but I think theyre doing it on their own now.

For the ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means. GA can create and issue their own player paperwork/cards. Basically they function as a league and what US Club does for ECNL but all as one entity instead of two seperate entities. GA can also sanction other leagues if they want to.

Dude, they already confirmed they are going SY! That is the reason why people are saying GA is going SY. It has nothing to do with " ECNL people that dont know what sanctioning means".

Dude the PP said that GA league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want which is completely untrue. GA can choose to do whatever that want because they self sanction. ECNL league cant choose to do whatever grouping they want because thay are dependent on US Club grouping decisions for sanctioning .

Dude GA already confirmed they are going SY! What is so hard to understand? There will be no BY GA leagues. My god, I thought the BY nutters all left.

Details are important. Just because you seem to function purely on emotion doesnt mean thats how the world works.

Also because GA self sanctions it means that can add whatever rule into SY they want whenever that want to.

GA self sanctions under USSF just like US Club and USYS. All of whom could decide to do whatever. And they have all decided to go with the new recommended SY model. There is nothing emotional about that, it is just a straight up fact. I'm not sure why that pill is so hard to swallow for some people.

Can ECNL self sanction?

Who cares.

Again, details matter.

Because ECNL can't self sanction they're dependent on US Club and committee decisions for rule changes/updates. Not that this is a big deal it just takes longer for things to occur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The more I read the more convinced I am that P2P clubs in MLSNext1/2 can't play any way other than SY.

So MLSNext1/2 will move SY, it makes perfect sense.

Regarding MLS academies, if they decided to roster their teams with BY in MLSNext1 (SY) they would play 5 months ahead, no problem.

I mean, I could see a case for the MLSN1 P2P clubs to make a carve out for BY for just those teams. It would suck, but they would do it if they had no choice. And potentially MLSN will give them no choice... But for MLSN2 clubs? Makes 0 sense to not be SY.

If the end goal is for MLS1 and MLS2 to be feeders for MLS Homegrown then it would make sense for then to stay BY. Also if Homegrown and Academy teams play each other it would make sense to stay BY if Homegrown stays BY.

Why couldn't they do that with a SY system?

Because MLSN was created by MLS to be a funnel for pro talent. Professional leagues around the world group players by year not bt grade in school.