MLS Next Announcement

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

Ok play on the B team with players your kids grade. Its not that hard.

If you cant compete its not everyone else's responsibility to let your kid play down.

[Anonymous]

If a kid doesn’t have the physical build to play at the highest level why waste time on them?

I would put the resources into the kid who has a chance.

Physicality is non negotiable for everyone playing D1 or better.

Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

Ok play on the B team with players your kids grade. Its not that hard.
If you cant compete its not everyone else's responsibility to let your kid play down.

Why? when he play A team with the school grade system in ECNL?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a kid doesn’t have the physical build to play at the highest level why waste time on them?

I would put the resources into the kid who has a chance.

Physicality is non negotiable for everyone playing D1 or better.

Sorry.

Sorry you don't understand that children develop and grow at different rates.

[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:So my August birthday U15, 9th grade son will spend next season as a 10th grader playing with a team of 9th graders and, essentially repeating his U15 season? How does that make sense.

If fact, on an MLS2 team of 18 players my son in the only one with an August or later birthday.

And before anyone asks, the enrollment cutoff in our state is 9/1.

There are 50 states and at least 54 soccer associations under USYS plus the District. Someone will always get shafted. If we begin to understand that the USA does not evolve around our little house, city, county or even our state, we will all be better for it.

My kid is a Q4 and left behind this summer as he was not eligible for middle school camps with his teammates. It was the first time we ever noticed we were behind the rest of the team in grade levels as they are not in the same school. Big whoop.

You folks are making this waaaaay harder than it has to be. Everybody will be in one-year brackets just like it has always been. While the reference is SY, don't confuse the fact that it is a 365-day age bracket just like it has always been. There was always trapped players and there will always be trapped players as long as we have state and county autonomy over school districts. If you are dominating MLS NEXT II, do you really think your club or another club in MLS NEXT I won't notice? If a club is dominating MLS NEXT II and sending players to academies, do you really think they won't have the opportunity to be promoted to MLS NEXT I?

This change is as overrated at the Y2K bug that did not blow up my clock at 12:00am on 1/1/2000.

There is no MLS1 option at our current club. Closests ECNL team is 2.5 hours away. My DS already doesn't play with his school friends because most of the HS team are rec players or EDP level. Now he won't be playing with his longtime club friends either and will be finishing out his club career with kids an entire grade below him from completely different school districts. I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Theres only 2 ways what you wrote can be true.

1st is if you kid was biobanded has a Junior or Senior in HS which isnt very likely.

2nd is if your kid is a young august birthday for their age and when BY switches to SY chooses to play on a grade down team. This is also very unlikely for a Junior or Senior in HS

99% chance that you are a liar and making things up.

It's #2 in a state with a 9/1 cutoff if you care. So three more years of playing with the players in the grade below him.

You need to speak with your DOC and explain that your kid and you want to be playing on the correct grade team. If they ignore you or your request take your business elsewhere.

Theres an entire thread about the issue with young Aug birthdays playing down a grade. The net is if you do this as an older your kid will have no chance at being recruited to play in college. Also as you've highlighted your kid would rather play with kids in their grade not a grade down.

You're in a unique/ weird situation which is easily addressed in SY by playing up.

Playing MLSN2 as a boy. No real chance for college ball.

The boy should do what he wants, up, down, sideways, it doesn't matter.

There is not an entire thread about August birthdays. Just one yahoo that wants an August girl of his daughter's team at all costs.

So you're saying to not even try to play in college if your kid plays MLS2?

Because if clubs are forcing young Aug players to play on grade down teams that is what's happening.

You assumed the kid wants to play in college so you could spit out more garbage on how you think colleges select players. They take the best players they can.

I assume every kid wants the opportunity to play in college.

You seem to want to take that from them.

Bad assumptions and trying to apply girl soccer rules to boys doesn't work.

I should have said option not opportunity.

Playing down a grade takes that away.

That isn't girls soccer, it's boys.

OK go dazzle coaches with your ability to play down.

Idk why you are assuming biobanding and playing down for the kid now. Dazzling in the assigned age group is always the plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
... , as it aligns with FIFA standards, the global professional pathway ...

For those who had a son in MLSN Homegrown last year:

(1) How many international events did your club team play last year? Were they friendlies, or was the competitive outcome otherwise important to the development of your players?

(2) How many players did your club sell to a foreign pro club/academy?

This sounds like more talk of alignment for the sake of alignment itself, which is not a self-evidently good thing if it doesn't have any connection to developing better/more pros. The youth national team part makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a kid doesn’t have the physical build to play at the highest level why waste time on them?

I would put the resources into the kid who has a chance.

Physicality is non negotiable for everyone playing D1 or better.

Sorry.

WOOOOSH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

Ok play on the B team with players your kids grade. Its not that hard.

If you cant compete its not everyone else's responsibility to let your kid play down.

Use Biobanding clause to play down if you cannot play in your own group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

Can you find somewhere where someone used the relative age effect as an excuse because that seems like you just made that up and can you find a study that shows that the relative age effects revert back after puberty? Seems you made that up also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So my August birthday U15, 9th grade son will spend next season as a 10th grader playing with a team of 9th graders and, essentially repeating his U15 season? How does that make sense.

If fact, on an MLS2 team of 18 players my son in the only one with an August or later birthday.

And before anyone asks, the enrollment cutoff in our state is 9/1.

There are 50 states and at least 54 soccer associations under USYS plus the District. Someone will always get shafted. If we begin to understand that the USA does not evolve around our little house, city, county or even our state, we will all be better for it.

My kid is a Q4 and left behind this summer as he was not eligible for middle school camps with his teammates. It was the first time we ever noticed we were behind the rest of the team in grade levels as they are not in the same school. Big whoop.

You folks are making this waaaaay harder than it has to be. Everybody will be in one-year brackets just like it has always been. While the reference is SY, don't confuse the fact that it is a 365-day age bracket just like it has always been. There was always trapped players and there will always be trapped players as long as we have state and county autonomy over school districts. If you are dominating MLS NEXT II, do you really think your club or another club in MLS NEXT I won't notice? If a club is dominating MLS NEXT II and sending players to academies, do you really think they won't have the opportunity to be promoted to MLS NEXT I?

This change is as overrated at the Y2K bug that did not blow up my clock at 12:00am on 1/1/2000.

There is no MLS1 option at our current club. Closests ECNL team is 2.5 hours away. My DS already doesn't play with his school friends because most of the HS team are rec players or EDP level. Now he won't be playing with his longtime club friends either and will be finishing out his club career with kids an entire grade below him from completely different school districts. I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Theres only 2 ways what you wrote can be true.

1st is if you kid was biobanded has a Junior or Senior in HS which isnt very likely.

2nd is if your kid is a young august birthday for their age and when BY switches to SY chooses to play on a grade down team. This is also very unlikely for a Junior or Senior in HS

99% chance that you are a liar and making things up.

It's #2 in a state with a 9/1 cutoff if you care. So three more years of playing with the players in the grade below him.

You need to speak with your DOC and explain that your kid and you want to be playing on the correct grade team. If they ignore you or your request take your business elsewhere.

Theres an entire thread about the issue with young Aug birthdays playing down a grade. The net is if you do this as an older your kid will have no chance at being recruited to play in college. Also as you've highlighted your kid would rather play with kids in their grade not a grade down.

You're in a unique/ weird situation which is easily addressed in SY by playing up.

Playing MLSN2 as a boy. No real chance for college ball.

The boy should do what he wants, up, down, sideways, it doesn't matter.

There is not an entire thread about August birthdays. Just one yahoo that wants an August girl of his daughter's team at all costs.

If boys are going to college to play ball from EDP, then they can from MLSN2

Because recruiting individual players to colleges isn't what you think it is

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So my August birthday U15, 9th grade son will spend next season as a 10th grader playing with a team of 9th graders and, essentially repeating his U15 season? How does that make sense.

If fact, on an MLS2 team of 18 players my son in the only one with an August or later birthday.

And before anyone asks, the enrollment cutoff in our state is 9/1.

There are 50 states and at least 54 soccer associations under USYS plus the District. Someone will always get shafted. If we begin to understand that the USA does not evolve around our little house, city, county or even our state, we will all be better for it.

My kid is a Q4 and left behind this summer as he was not eligible for middle school camps with his teammates. It was the first time we ever noticed we were behind the rest of the team in grade levels as they are not in the same school. Big whoop.

You folks are making this waaaaay harder than it has to be. Everybody will be in one-year brackets just like it has always been. While the reference is SY, don't confuse the fact that it is a 365-day age bracket just like it has always been. There was always trapped players and there will always be trapped players as long as we have state and county autonomy over school districts. If you are dominating MLS NEXT II, do you really think your club or another club in MLS NEXT I won't notice? If a club is dominating MLS NEXT II and sending players to academies, do you really think they won't have the opportunity to be promoted to MLS NEXT I?

This change is as overrated at the Y2K bug that did not blow up my clock at 12:00am on 1/1/2000.

There is no MLS1 option at our current club. Closests ECNL team is 2.5 hours away. My DS already doesn't play with his school friends because most of the HS team are rec players or EDP level. Now he won't be playing with his longtime club friends either and will be finishing out his club career with kids an entire grade below him from completely different school districts. I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Theres only 2 ways what you wrote can be true.

1st is if you kid was biobanded has a Junior or Senior in HS which isnt very likely.

2nd is if your kid is a young august birthday for their age and when BY switches to SY chooses to play on a grade down team. This is also very unlikely for a Junior or Senior in HS

99% chance that you are a liar and making things up.

It's #2 in a state with a 9/1 cutoff if you care. So three more years of playing with the players in the grade below him.

You need to speak with your DOC and explain that your kid and you want to be playing on the correct grade team. If they ignore you or your request take your business elsewhere.

Theres an entire thread about the issue with young Aug birthdays playing down a grade. The net is if you do this as an older your kid will have no chance at being recruited to play in college. Also as you've highlighted your kid would rather play with kids in their grade not a grade down.

You're in a unique/ weird situation which is easily addressed in SY by playing up.

Playing MLSN2 as a boy. No real chance for college ball.

The boy should do what he wants, up, down, sideways, it doesn't matter.

There is not an entire thread about August birthdays. Just one yahoo that wants an August girl of his daughter's team at all costs.

So you're saying to not even try to play in college if your kid plays MLS2?

Because if clubs are forcing young Aug players to play on grade down teams that is what's happening.

Okay, I keep seeing this "young august" and "young September" stuff

What's a young august versus august?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We’re excited to welcome you to Mesa, Arizona for the premier winter showcase and the largest scouting and recruiting event on the continent! Over the next two weeks, more than 30,000 of North America’s top elite youth soccer talent will take the field, gaining unmatched exposure to hundreds of college soccer program, national team and professional club scouts-all elevated by the energy and atmosphere of the MLS NEXT experience.

No need for this, all the honest with themselves ECNL parents knows MLS Next is the superior league

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re excited to welcome you to Mesa, Arizona for the premier winter showcase and the largest scouting and recruiting event on the continent! Over the next two weeks, more than 30,000 of North America’s top elite youth soccer talent will take the field, gaining unmatched exposure to hundreds of college soccer program, national team and professional club scouts-all elevated by the energy and atmosphere of the MLS NEXT experience.

No need for this, all the honest with themselves ECNL parents knows MLS Next is the superior league

How do you that? I know so many ECNL beating p2p MLS Next teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re excited to welcome you to Mesa, Arizona for the premier winter showcase and the largest scouting and recruiting event on the continent! Over the next two weeks, more than 30,000 of North America’s top elite youth soccer talent will take the field, gaining unmatched exposure to hundreds of college soccer program, national team and professional club scouts-all elevated by the energy and atmosphere of the MLS NEXT experience.

No need for this, all the honest with themselves ECNL parents knows MLS Next is the superior league

All you need to do is check the Surf College Cup last weekend. A lot of MLS1 teams are at the bottom of their group. The Albion 2010 team is comprised of many top players from all its franchised clubs, most of whom are 2010 MLS1 players, and is tied with the Surf 2011 ECNL team that plays 1 year up.

Keep your record straight before you make shit.