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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

[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.

Yep, it appears a done deal. In about 5 years, we will be able to tell whether the 99% of people who thought it would increase participation were right, or if the couple posters on this forum who doubted it were right. Good luck to both sides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A six month age/maturity difference in BY is a six month age/maturity difference in SY

How does SY solve that?

It doesn't solve it, it shifts it. That's why this whole argument is stupid. June, July, and August kids are just the ones that will be most Disadvantaged. But they will at least be playing with those in their same grade unlike Q4 is now.

They don't even go to the same schools or live in same neighborhoods
So what difference does same grade make?

Playdates?

The same emotional maturity. My 3rd grader has some 5th graders on her team. They all have cell phones. We aren't there yet. Obviously this is just one example.

Soccer skills and talents are tied to cell phone access?

Are you deliberately obtuse? At younger ages skill is tied to how old you are. Being in the same grade is tied to emotional maturity. I'm sorry you cannot think about more than one thing at once.

Tiger Woods was on National TV hitting golf shots at 3 years old
If skills were tied to age, we would all be able to do that at 3

Guess what, some would be able to do that if their dad had them swinging a club from the time they can stand.

Which proves the point, skill and talent is not tied to age and grade.

This guy thinks his 7-year old son could beat a 21-year old man in soccer. On to the next sideshow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A six month age/maturity difference in BY is a six month age/maturity difference in SY

How does SY solve that?

Did you play sports in school? When you were in 7th grade did you play with the 8th graders? How did that go?

The question was about 6 month difference existing in both BY and SY, not about grades.

I won't play semantics with you; you can have it.

Pretty sure it isn't semantics when discussing a six month gap difference on the calendar

It ain't tomato tomato`

You are an insufferable person, coagulations.

I rest my case Your Honor

I request this SY magic pill narrative be dismissed with extreme prejudice

You should consider cutting back on your ADHD medicine, you are delusional.

Ad Hominem attacks is a clear sign one has lost the argument

Provide specific bullet points to prove your assertion that “Ad Hominem attacks is a clear sign… (blah, blah, blah)… argument.” We all need you to provide empirical evidence and science based facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best league in the world plays on a 9/1 calender. USA would be stupid to do anything but especialy with our trapped player and college issues.

Best league is in Spain imo, and the rest of the global leagues with top academy teams on BY outweigh English academies.

This misses an important distinction. The countries that have soccer teams on BY do it that way because their school years are also done by BY. So the rest of the world aligns their soccer leagues with their school year. Their school years just happen to be by BY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

It just shifts the birth month quarters
Doesn't eliminate RAE

RAE is about late developers in the age cutoff group, not the month.
You can be a late developer born in the 1st or 2nd quarters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

It just shifts the birth month quarters
Doesn't eliminate RAE

RAE is about late developers in the age cutoff group, not the month.
You can be a late developer born in the 1st or 2nd quarters

Age cutoff changes completely change RAE impacts for each kid because RAE is not some strictly late developer thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

It just shifts the birth month quarters
Doesn't eliminate RAE

RAE is about late developers in the age cutoff group, not the month.
You can be a late developer born in the 1st or 2nd quarters

Age cutoff changes completely change RAE impacts for each kid because RAE is not some strictly late developer thing.

RAE is not about late developers (not getting selected) within age groups?

Then all the research papers are wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

It just shifts the birth month quarters
Doesn't eliminate RAE

RAE is about late developers in the age cutoff group, not the month.
You can be a late developer born in the 1st or 2nd quarters

Age cutoff changes completely change RAE impacts for each kid because RAE is not some strictly late developer thing.

RAE is not about late developers (not getting selected) within age groups?

Then all the research papers are wrong

Your biases are clouding your vision when understanding research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

It just shifts the birth month quarters
Doesn't eliminate RAE

RAE is about late developers in the age cutoff group, not the month.
You can be a late developer born in the 1st or 2nd quarters

Age cutoff changes completely change RAE impacts for each kid because RAE is not some strictly late developer thing.

RAE is not about late developers (not getting selected) within age groups?

Then all the research papers are wrong

Your biases are clouding your vision when understanding research.

No bro, you’re digging in because you need to be right. You’re wrong. Two PP have pointed it out and you just keep plowing forward like some drunk car dealership owner at the steak buffet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

It just shifts the birth month quarters
Doesn't eliminate RAE

RAE is about late developers in the age cutoff group, not the month.
You can be a late developer born in the 1st or 2nd quarters

Age cutoff changes completely change RAE impacts for each kid because RAE is not some strictly late developer thing.

RAE is not about late developers (not getting selected) within age groups?

Then all the research papers are wrong

Your biases are clouding your vision when understanding research.

No bro, you’re digging in because you need to be right. You’re wrong. Two PP have pointed it out and you just keep plowing forward like some drunk car dealership owner at the steak buffet.

Conflating late and later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

The BIG question that we're about to see play out is how this all affects kids who have played years in BY. Chances are the older you are, the less of an impact, especially if you're already playing 11v11. But it's undeniable that strong SeptQ4 players will have opportunities this year and next as clubs look for an edge (and the opportunity MIGHT be playing up). RAE, with speed, size and coach attention, will have a greater impact the younger you go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

The BIG question that we're about to see play out is how this all affects kids who have played years in BY. Chances are the older you are, the less of an impact, especially if you're already playing 11v11. But it's undeniable that strong SeptQ4 players will have opportunities this year and next as clubs look for an edge (and the opportunity MIGHT be playing up). RAE, with speed, size and coach attention, will have a greater impact the younger you go.

BY doesn’t change or solve RAE. It just shifts to affect a different group of players. BY does reduce the number of trapped players which is why it’s being done. RAE has nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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…

🫢 who is going to tell PP that age cutoffs don’t change RAE?

Age cutoffs completely change RAE impacts for each kid. If this wasn't true, nobody would care about the change.

The BIG question that we're about to see play out is how this all affects kids who have played years in BY. Chances are the older you are, the less of an impact, especially if you're already playing 11v11. But it's undeniable that strong SeptQ4 players will have opportunities this year and next as clubs look for an edge (and the opportunity MIGHT be playing up). RAE, with speed, size and coach attention, will have a greater impact the younger you go.

BY doesn’t change or solve RAE. It just shifts to affect a different group of players. BY does reduce the number of trapped players which is why it’s being done. RAE has nothing to do with it.

Sorry meant to put SY
SY doesn’t change or solve RAE. It just shifts to affect a different group of players. SY does reduce the number of trapped players which is why it’s being done. RAE has nothing to do with it.