ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

If USYS, USSF and MLS Next recognize birth year, this ecnl stuff is foolishness

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does this idea work exactly? Different school systems have different cut offs. For example some you have to be 5 by Sept 1 and others by Oct 1. When I was young it was Dec 31! And what about people who redshirt their kids? My August boy was not red shirted but in school with kids up to 18 months older who were. So if it goes to school year does that mean you play with the team in your intended grade vs enrolled grade? I think the birth year is more fair and standardized. Someone will always be the youngest. And it will mess up tournament age groups. While the ECNL boosters like to believe everyone cares what ECNL does, not everyone would follow them. Why would MLSN do that on the boys side?

There’s no point in getting worked up either way over rumors.

When I was young the soccer calendar year the cut off was Aug 1 not Dec 31. It's still a date cut off red shirting has nothing to do with it. Read the thread, listen to the podcast. Even if this change never happens your nonsensicle arguments would be addressed. [/quote

Please read the other posts in this thread. It's been discussed multiple times.

I believe that some form will happen and they will announce before tryouts for next year.

[Anonymous]

like I've bewn saying its for 25-26 prepare accordingly tigers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How does this idea work exactly? Different school systems have different cut offs. For example some you have to be 5 by Sept 1 and others by Oct 1. When I was young it was Dec 31! And what about people who redshirt their kids? My August boy was not red shirted but in school with kids up to 18 months older who were. So if it goes to school year does that mean you play with the team in your intended grade vs enrolled grade? I think the birth year is more fair and standardized. Someone will always be the youngest. And it will mess up tournament age groups. While the ECNL boosters like to believe everyone cares what ECNL does, not everyone would follow them. Why would MLSN do that on the boys side?

There’s no point in getting worked up either way over rumors.

. Tournament age groups will be fine as MLS Next teams have shown with their 3 biobanding kids per team. Just play a year up or shuffle the 2-3 kids per team as appropriate. As it is now, my kid says that he often finds players on other teams at tournaments don't often know their teammates and yet the game survives.

ECNL really wouldn't be reinventing the wheel here if they expanded trapped players to U13-18, at least on the boys side. They would just be copying MLS Next's biobanding rules while adding their own nuisance.

And while much of the world may be calendar year, the country with the league that has the highest value, England, is school dates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does this idea work exactly? Different school systems have different cut offs. For example some you have to be 5 by Sept 1 and others by Oct 1. When I was young it was Dec 31! And what about people who redshirt their kids? My August boy was not red shirted but in school with kids up to 18 months older who were. So if it goes to school year does that mean you play with the team in your intended grade vs enrolled grade? I think the birth year is more fair and standardized. Someone will always be the youngest. And it will mess up tournament age groups. While the ECNL boosters like to believe everyone cares what ECNL does, not everyone would follow them. Why would MLSN do that on the boys side?

There’s no point in getting worked up either way over rumors.

. Tournament age groups will be fine as MLS Next teams have shown with their 3 biobanding kids per team. Just play a year up or shuffle the 2-3 kids per team as appropriate. As it is now, my kid says that he often finds players on other teams at tournaments don't often know their teammates and yet the game survives.

ECNL really wouldn't be reinventing the wheel here if they expanded trapped players to U13-18, at least on the boys side. They would just be copying MLS Next's biobanding rules while adding their own nuisance.

And while much of the world may be calendar year, the country with the league that has the highest value, England, is school dates.

Every MLS Next team doesn't have bioband players. So it's not a system. Nor is it changing age cutoff date.

England uses school dates. A lower tier league in England doesn't use their own dates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ECNL could change the age cut line if they wanted. Of course they could. But, there is little incentive to do so. The role (and input) of the USSF is zero when it comes to league management of the ECNL.

There's a reason why all the major youth soccer leagues use birth year, the USSF. They regulate all the sanctioned tournaments and leagues. I doubt ECNL would want to be the odd league out. There are very few rules that a league can modify. The age matrix is not one of them.

ECNL formed because USSF told girls and women players they don’t matter at all to the USSF. It’s why the league exists in the first place. Club directors across the country would be more than happy to tell the USSF to eat dog droppings. Certainly that’s what the USSF told the clubs and girls/women to do - and still is doing as a matter of fact.

The ECNL leadership will act in their own best interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ECNL could change the age cut line if they wanted. Of course they could. But, there is little incentive to do so. The role (and input) of the USSF is zero when it comes to league management of the ECNL.

There's a reason why all the major youth soccer leagues use birth year, the USSF. They regulate all the sanctioned tournaments and leagues. I doubt ECNL would want to be the odd league out. There are very few rules that a league can modify. The age matrix is not one of them.

ECNL formed because USSF told girls and women players they don’t matter at all to the USSF. It’s why the league exists in the first place. Club directors across the country would be more than happy to tell the USSF to eat dog droppings. Certainly that’s what the USSF told the clubs and girls/women to do - and still is doing as a matter of fact.

The ECNL leadership will act in their own best interests.

LMAO! you're drawing on something from 15 years ago. Times have changed and ECNL knows their place in the hierarchy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ECNL could change the age cut line if they wanted. Of course they could. But, there is little incentive to do so. The role (and input) of the USSF is zero when it comes to league management of the ECNL.

There's a reason why all the major youth soccer leagues use birth year, the USSF. They regulate all the sanctioned tournaments and leagues. I doubt ECNL would want to be the odd league out. There are very few rules that a league can modify. The age matrix is not one of them.

ECNL formed because USSF told girls and women players they don’t matter at all to the USSF. It’s why the league exists in the first place. Club directors across the country would be more than happy to tell the USSF to eat dog droppings. Certainly that’s what the USSF told the clubs and girls/women to do - and still is doing as a matter of fact.

The ECNL leadership will act in their own best interests.

Thought the leadership should be acting in the kids interests?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who’s been a fly on the wall for conversation being had. Nothing is set in stone. But change will happen in some way for 2025/2026 for ECNL. So I’ll say this, make sure your kids are putting in the work and whatever happens your kid is ready for a possible switch up.

ECNL wants to compete with the bio banding allocation for boys mls next and also wants to be a forward thinker on the girls side that is best for kids recruited for college.

Winter is coming… or not..depends on perspective.

Most reasonable people would agree that change is needed. I also think that whose concerned Q1/Q2 parents would be happy since their kids could play with a few older kids, since the center argument was about younger kids getting better by playing with older kids.

I hope they also mandate it to U9-U12 pre-ecnl age brackets because this is where it all begins.

The last sentence is the important one. This only matters if it changes at the youngest age where relative age effect is the greatest. The reason is that the reason it exists is that it provides more opportunities for the more physically advanced kids at their youngest ages, which becomes a self fulfilling cycle of extra or higher level opportunities. The teams at the ECNL ages aren't going to change significantly because of this potential change unless the youngest ages of US Soccer as a whole changes, and there's no indication that it will. Whether this change happens or not, the majority of the kids on ECNL teams will fall in the 1st 2 quarters of whatever the youngest age groups are. There might be 2-3 changes/age group, but overall it's not going to have a material effect at the highest level from a whole is on the team perspective.

Ha! Tell me you haven’t been through U13-U17 with boys.

The biggest differences we have seen are ages 12-16/17. Some boys are done growing by 13 and then there are those like mine that don’t even start truly growing until 15. My sons were 5’4” and skinny as hell at age 14. And still growing at 18. By the end of HS my trapped son was around 6 feet. It did screw up recruiting and he had a host of growth-spurt related injuries. But with college rosters now favoring 20-23 year old players—5th years and transfers it was fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ECNL could change the age cut line if they wanted. Of course they could. But, there is little incentive to do so. The role (and input) of the USSF is zero when it comes to league management of the ECNL.

There's a reason why all the major youth soccer leagues use birth year, the USSF. They regulate all the sanctioned tournaments and leagues. I doubt ECNL would want to be the odd league out. There are very few rules that a league can modify. The age matrix is not one of them.

ECNL formed because USSF told girls and women players they don’t matter at all to the USSF. It’s why the league exists in the first place. Club directors across the country would be more than happy to tell the USSF to eat dog droppings. Certainly that’s what the USSF told the clubs and girls/women to do - and still is doing as a matter of fact.

The ECNL leadership will act in their own best interests.

LMAO! you're drawing on something from 15 years ago. Times have changed and ECNL knows their place in the hierarchy.

15 years ago? What the heck are you talking about? The USSF shut down the Development Academy program - boys and girls - the moment the Yedlin decision came out.

The USSF proved, again, that it does not give a rats rear end about helping youth soccer clubs. And the clubs don’t give a rats rear end about the USSF. They will do whatever they think is best for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ECNL could change the age cut line if they wanted. Of course they could. But, there is little incentive to do so. The role (and input) of the USSF is zero when it comes to league management of the ECNL.

There's a reason why all the major youth soccer leagues use birth year, the USSF. They regulate all the sanctioned tournaments and leagues. I doubt ECNL would want to be the odd league out. There are very few rules that a league can modify. The age matrix is not one of them.

ECNL formed because USSF told girls and women players they don’t matter at all to the USSF. It’s why the league exists in the first place. Club directors across the country would be more than happy to tell the USSF to eat dog droppings. Certainly that’s what the USSF told the clubs and girls/women to do - and still is doing as a matter of fact.

The ECNL leadership will act in their own best interests.

LMAO! you're drawing on something from 15 years ago. Times have changed and ECNL knows their place in the hierarchy.

15 years ago? What the heck are you talking about? The USSF shut down the Development Academy program - boys and girls - the moment the Yedlin decision came out.

The USSF proved, again, that it does not give a rats rear end about helping youth soccer clubs. And the clubs don’t give a rats rear end about the USSF. They will do whatever they think is best for themselves.

ECNL was founded in 2009. Learn basic math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ECNL could change the age cut line if they wanted. Of course they could. But, there is little incentive to do so. The role (and input) of the USSF is zero when it comes to league management of the ECNL.

There's a reason why all the major youth soccer leagues use birth year, the USSF. They regulate all the sanctioned tournaments and leagues. I doubt ECNL would want to be the odd league out. There are very few rules that a league can modify. The age matrix is not one of them.

ECNL formed because USSF told girls and women players they don’t matter at all to the USSF. It’s why the league exists in the first place. Club directors across the country would be more than happy to tell the USSF to eat dog droppings. Certainly that’s what the USSF told the clubs and girls/women to do - and still is doing as a matter of fact.

The ECNL leadership will act in their own best interests.

LMAO! you're drawing on something from 15 years ago. Times have changed and ECNL knows their place in the hierarchy.

15 years ago? What the heck are you talking about? The USSF shut down the Development Academy program - boys and girls - the moment the Yedlin decision came out.

The USSF proved, again, that it does not give a rats rear end about helping youth soccer clubs. And the clubs don’t give a rats rear end about the USSF. They will do whatever they think is best for themselves.

Are you implying that ECNL was only formed after the Yedlin decision? Huh?

If clubs don't care, why aren't any clubs using an age matrix based on school year. They all use calendar year for a reason, they don't set the rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ECNL could change the age cut line if they wanted. Of course they could. But, there is little incentive to do so. The role (and input) of the USSF is zero when it comes to league management of the ECNL.

There's a reason why all the major youth soccer leagues use birth year, the USSF. They regulate all the sanctioned tournaments and leagues. I doubt ECNL would want to be the odd league out. There are very few rules that a league can modify. The age matrix is not one of them.

ECNL formed because USSF told girls and women players they don’t matter at all to the USSF. It’s why the league exists in the first place. Club directors across the country would be more than happy to tell the USSF to eat dog droppings. Certainly that’s what the USSF told the clubs and girls/women to do - and still is doing as a matter of fact.

The ECNL leadership will act in their own best interests.

LMAO! you're drawing on something from 15 years ago. Times have changed and ECNL knows their place in the hierarchy.

15 years ago? What the heck are you talking about? The USSF shut down the Development Academy program - boys and girls - the moment the Yedlin decision came out.

The USSF proved, again, that it does not give a rats rear end about helping youth soccer clubs. And the clubs don’t give a rats rear end about the USSF. They will do whatever they think is best for themselves.

Are you implying that ECNL was only formed after the Yedlin decision? Huh?

If clubs don't care, why aren't any clubs using an age matrix based on school year. They all use calendar year for a reason, they don't set the rules.

Look - it’s obvious you know zero about the ussf/ecnl/da/mlsnext fiascos. That’s fine. You don’t have to know. But, never ever think that non-mls clubs care -at all - what the ussf does or wants. Every club director in the country knows that the ussf has knifed their clubs before, and will happily do it again.

They make decisions based on what is good for their league and member clubs. And the ussf can xxxx off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ECNL could change the age cut line if they wanted. Of course they could. But, there is little incentive to do so. The role (and input) of the USSF is zero when it comes to league management of the ECNL.

There's a reason why all the major youth soccer leagues use birth year, the USSF. They regulate all the sanctioned tournaments and leagues. I doubt ECNL would want to be the odd league out. There are very few rules that a league can modify. The age matrix is not one of them.

ECNL formed because USSF told girls and women players they don’t matter at all to the USSF. It’s why the league exists in the first place. Club directors across the country would be more than happy to tell the USSF to eat dog droppings. Certainly that’s what the USSF told the clubs and girls/women to do - and still is doing as a matter of fact.

The ECNL leadership will act in their own best interests.

LMAO! you're drawing on something from 15 years ago. Times have changed and ECNL knows their place in the hierarchy.

15 years ago? What the heck are you talking about? The USSF shut down the Development Academy program - boys and girls - the moment the Yedlin decision came out.

The USSF proved, again, that it does not give a rats rear end about helping youth soccer clubs. And the clubs don’t give a rats rear end about the USSF. They will do whatever they think is best for themselves.

Are you implying that ECNL was only formed after the Yedlin decision? Huh?

If clubs don't care, why aren't any clubs using an age matrix based on school year. They all use calendar year for a reason, they don't set the rules.

Look - it’s obvious you know zero about the ussf/ecnl/da/mlsnext fiascos. That’s fine. You don’t have to know. But, never ever think that non-mls clubs care -at all - what the ussf does or wants. Every club director in the country knows that the ussf has knifed their clubs before, and will happily do it again.

They make decisions based on what is good for their league and member clubs. And the ussf can xxxx off.

The PP is correct. ECNL can’t make that change competitively without USSF approval. Clubs and ECNL can have internal only programs that are unique, but anything that would reach outside or be open would be required to get approval. It’s due to the sanctioning system that rolls up to the various confederations.

[Anonymous]

When does the schedule come out? MLS NExt already posted their schedule for the 24-25 season.