ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Things posted from the SoCal forum on 9/16.All the same poster.

Back to July 31st cut off for age groups is incoming next year or so. The responses will be glorious when that is announced!

For now, I'm not sure if the older teams will be allowed to finish their careers out or not. My sources have confirmed it's happening but not sure on the exact time/how many ages would be grandfathered in to finish with current teams.

I heard in November it's being voted on at a us soccer board meeting so maybe shortly after that.

I would say I've heard it from enough people "in the game". Directors of big club and of big league organization in CA. I really hope it's wrong but I believe it. Where there is smoke there is....in most cases. If it's not set by the end of 2024 then I'll believe I'm wrong. I think rumors will get stronger in November as that board meeting gets closer. Otherwise, it sounds like it's happening sometime in the near future. Of course, I bet many clubs don't fully change and still keep teams as is especially the HS ages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And from what I understand from one of our club directors, the breakdown by age group like this is intentional. Those age groups already at high school age (U15 and above) are likely to maintain the birth year status as opposed to school year based on birth. In other words, if your kid is 14 or above now, club soccer groups will not change for him or her.

I don't have any inside knowledge but creating an age group for one year of kids that is only 7 months seems odd. Of course kids could play up but then that thins out the year below them also. Will be messy.

You don't understand, so I guess I will spell it out. U14 and below will now read 9/1 to 8/31. U 16 and above will be 1/1 to 12/31. U15 is the undecided but likely to give flexibility to those in that 3 month grey zone. Probably going to expand the age group to 15 months and let clubs play kids with U14 or U15 to avoid the trap player situation for the first year. Those details are probably TBD. But those at high school age already are not going to see their age groups broken up for 25-26.

I'm not sure how you would have this information. But if this was true, would this be a grandfathering situation or would that remain for the older ages.

Yes and yes. Grandfathering situation but for high school ages only right now. Rationale is that they are already in the recruiting process and there is no perceived upside since trapped player is no longer a thing for them. Club directors received an explanation email. At least some did.

Sounds like someone has a 9 or 10th grader who is a Q1 kid.

PP here. Nope. Mine is a quarter 2 kid. Don't understand why all of you are looking to be the oldest in your age group? Find the right coach, team, and environment. The rest will sort itself out. Everyone is going to be OK...they really are.

Ouch, Q2 is now the youngest. Best of luck.

If the cutoff is 9/1. Isn't most of Q3 the youngest?

Expect 8-1, be surprised with 9-1.

Why? If they did 9/1 you’d catch significantly more kids (all the August kids w/ school cut offs with 8/1- 9/1) who would otherwise be playing below their grade. With 9/1 that’s almost a nonissue. 8/1 will be a huge headache (in terms of unhappy kids and parents) that can easily be avoided.

What might be one benefit be of 8/1 that 9/1 can’t provide?

Start reading on page 1 then when you get to page 262 in, I don't know 50 or so hours of reading, you will have clarity on why you should expect 8-1 and be surprised with 9-1. I don't want to give you any spoilers here.

[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:And from what I understand from one of our club directors, the breakdown by age group like this is intentional. Those age groups already at high school age (U15 and above) are likely to maintain the birth year status as opposed to school year based on birth. In other words, if your kid is 14 or above now, club soccer groups will not change for him or her.

I don't have any inside knowledge but creating an age group for one year of kids that is only 7 months seems odd. Of course kids could play up but then that thins out the year below them also. Will be messy.

You don't understand, so I guess I will spell it out. U14 and below will now read 9/1 to 8/31. U 16 and above will be 1/1 to 12/31. U15 is the undecided but likely to give flexibility to those in that 3 month grey zone. Probably going to expand the age group to 15 months and let clubs play kids with U14 or U15 to avoid the trap player situation for the first year. Those details are probably TBD. But those at high school age already are not going to see their age groups broken up for 25-26.

I'm not sure how you would have this information. But if this was true, would this be a grandfathering situation or would that remain for the older ages.

Yes and yes. Grandfathering situation but for high school ages only right now. Rationale is that they are already in the recruiting process and there is no perceived upside since trapped player is no longer a thing for them. Club directors received an explanation email. At least some did.

Sounds like someone has a 9 or 10th grader who is a Q1 kid.

PP here. Nope. Mine is a quarter 2 kid. Don't understand why all of you are looking to be the oldest in your age group? Find the right coach, team, and environment. The rest will sort itself out. Everyone is going to be OK...they really are.

Ouch, Q2 is now the youngest. Best of luck.

If the cutoff is 9/1. Isn't most of Q3 the youngest?

Expect 8-1, be surprised with 9-1.

Why? If they did 9/1 you’d catch significantly more kids (all the August kids w/ school cut offs with 8/1- 9/1) who would otherwise be playing below their grade. With 9/1 that’s almost a nonissue. 8/1 will be a huge headache (in terms of unhappy kids and parents) that can easily be avoided.

What might be one benefit be of 8/1 that 9/1 can’t provide?

Start reading on page 1 then when you get to page 262 in, I don't know 50 or so hours of reading, you will have clarity on why you should expect 8-1 and be surprised with 9-1. I don't want to give you any spoilers here.

🤣💀

[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:And from what I understand from one of our club directors, the breakdown by age group like this is intentional. Those age groups already at high school age (U15 and above) are likely to maintain the birth year status as opposed to school year based on birth. In other words, if your kid is 14 or above now, club soccer groups will not change for him or her.

I don't have any inside knowledge but creating an age group for one year of kids that is only 7 months seems odd. Of course kids could play up but then that thins out the year below them also. Will be messy.

You don't understand, so I guess I will spell it out. U14 and below will now read 9/1 to 8/31. U 16 and above will be 1/1 to 12/31. U15 is the undecided but likely to give flexibility to those in that 3 month grey zone. Probably going to expand the age group to 15 months and let clubs play kids with U14 or U15 to avoid the trap player situation for the first year. Those details are probably TBD. But those at high school age already are not going to see their age groups broken up for 25-26.

I'm not sure how you would have this information. But if this was true, would this be a grandfathering situation or would that remain for the older ages.

Yes and yes. Grandfathering situation but for high school ages only right now. Rationale is that they are already in the recruiting process and there is no perceived upside since trapped player is no longer a thing for them. Club directors received an explanation email. At least some did.

Sounds like someone has a 9 or 10th grader who is a Q1 kid.

PP here. Nope. Mine is a quarter 2 kid. Don't understand why all of you are looking to be the oldest in your age group? Find the right coach, team, and environment. The rest will sort itself out. Everyone is going to be OK...they really are.

Ouch, Q2 is now the youngest. Best of luck.

If the cutoff is 9/1. Isn't most of Q3 the youngest?

Expect 8-1, be surprised with 9-1.

Why? If they did 9/1 you’d catch significantly more kids (all the August kids w/ school cut offs with 8/1- 9/1) who would otherwise be playing below their grade. With 9/1 that’s almost a nonissue. 8/1 will be a huge headache (in terms of unhappy kids and parents) that can easily be avoided.

What might be one benefit be of 8/1 that 9/1 can’t provide?

Start reading on page 1 then when you get to page 262 in, I don't know 50 or so hours of reading, you will have clarity on why you should expect 8-1 and be surprised with 9-1. I don't want to give you any spoilers here.

Well, I actually started this thread, have listened to the podcasts, read pretty much every post here and on other boards and complete disagree, as do many others.

I appreciate your inability to name a single reason why 8/1 works better than 9/1. That was honest of you.

[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:And from what I understand from one of our club directors, the breakdown by age group like this is intentional. Those age groups already at high school age (U15 and above) are likely to maintain the birth year status as opposed to school year based on birth. In other words, if your kid is 14 or above now, club soccer groups will not change for him or her.

I don't have any inside knowledge but creating an age group for one year of kids that is only 7 months seems odd. Of course kids could play up but then that thins out the year below them also. Will be messy.

You don't understand, so I guess I will spell it out. U14 and below will now read 9/1 to 8/31. U 16 and above will be 1/1 to 12/31. U15 is the undecided but likely to give flexibility to those in that 3 month grey zone. Probably going to expand the age group to 15 months and let clubs play kids with U14 or U15 to avoid the trap player situation for the first year. Those details are probably TBD. But those at high school age already are not going to see their age groups broken up for 25-26.

I'm not sure how you would have this information. But if this was true, would this be a grandfathering situation or would that remain for the older ages.

Yes and yes. Grandfathering situation but for high school ages only right now. Rationale is that they are already in the recruiting process and there is no perceived upside since trapped player is no longer a thing for them. Club directors received an explanation email. At least some did.

Sounds like someone has a 9 or 10th grader who is a Q1 kid.

PP here. Nope. Mine is a quarter 2 kid. Don't understand why all of you are looking to be the oldest in your age group? Find the right coach, team, and environment. The rest will sort itself out. Everyone is going to be OK...they really are.

Ouch, Q2 is now the youngest. Best of luck.

If the cutoff is 9/1. Isn't most of Q3 the youngest?

Expect 8-1, be surprised with 9-1.

Why? If they did 9/1 you’d catch significantly more kids (all the August kids w/ school cut offs with 8/1- 9/1) who would otherwise be playing below their grade. With 9/1 that’s almost a nonissue. 8/1 will be a huge headache (in terms of unhappy kids and parents) that can easily be avoided.

What might be one benefit be of 8/1 that 9/1 can’t provide?

Start reading on page 1 then when you get to page 262 in, I don't know 50 or so hours of reading, you will have clarity on why you should expect 8-1 and be surprised with 9-1. I don't want to give you any spoilers here.

Well, I actually started this thread, have listened to the podcasts, read pretty much every post here and on other boards and complete disagree, as do many others.

I appreciate your inability to name a single reason why 8/1 works better than 9/1. That was honest of you.

Wasn't debating the merits, not judging the merits. Expect 8-1, be surprised with 9-1. It's been a long slog, 4 more days.

[Anonymous]

Where did the info come from that suggested high school may be staying birth year? Was that an email sent to (some) club coaches?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where did the info come from that suggested high school may be staying birth year? Was that an email sent to (some) club coaches?

If HS stays in BY, that will be unfair to the trapped players for recruiting and defeating the purpose of the change.

[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:And from what I understand from one of our club directors, the breakdown by age group like this is intentional. Those age groups already at high school age (U15 and above) are likely to maintain the birth year status as opposed to school year based on birth. In other words, if your kid is 14 or above now, club soccer groups will not change for him or her.

I don't have any inside knowledge but creating an age group for one year of kids that is only 7 months seems odd. Of course kids could play up but then that thins out the year below them also. Will be messy.

You don't understand, so I guess I will spell it out. U14 and below will now read 9/1 to 8/31. U 16 and above will be 1/1 to 12/31. U15 is the undecided but likely to give flexibility to those in that 3 month grey zone. Probably going to expand the age group to 15 months and let clubs play kids with U14 or U15 to avoid the trap player situation for the first year. Those details are probably TBD. But those at high school age already are not going to see their age groups broken up for 25-26.

I'm not sure how you would have this information. But if this was true, would this be a grandfathering situation or would that remain for the older ages.

Yes and yes. Grandfathering situation but for high school ages only right now. Rationale is that they are already in the recruiting process and there is no perceived upside since trapped player is no longer a thing for them. Club directors received an explanation email. At least some did.

Sounds like someone has a 9 or 10th grader who is a Q1 kid.

PP here. Nope. Mine is a quarter 2 kid. Don't understand why all of you are looking to be the oldest in your age group? Find the right coach, team, and environment. The rest will sort itself out. Everyone is going to be OK...they really are.

Ouch, Q2 is now the youngest. Best of luck.

If the cutoff is 9/1. Isn't most of Q3 the youngest?

Expect 8-1, be surprised with 9-1.

Why? If they did 9/1 you’d catch significantly more kids (all the August kids w/ school cut offs with 8/1- 9/1) who would otherwise be playing below their grade. With 9/1 that’s almost a nonissue. 8/1 will be a huge headache (in terms of unhappy kids and parents) that can easily be avoided.

What might be one benefit be of 8/1 that 9/1 can’t provide?

Start reading on page 1 then when you get to page 262 in, I don't know 50 or so hours of reading, you will have clarity on why you should expect 8-1 and be surprised with 9-1. I don't want to give you any spoilers here.

Well, I actually started this thread, have listened to the podcasts, read pretty much every post here and on other boards and complete disagree, as do many others.

I appreciate your inability to name a single reason why 8/1 works better than 9/1. That was honest of you.

I believe Aug 1 captures much more of the country, although not perfect. Also, many of the people against the birth year mandate want to go back to the way it was before, which was the Aug 1 cutoff. If it worked then as a school year cutoff, then it will work again.

[Anonymous]

No clue 8/1 or 9/1, but rumors seem to be tilting 9/1 in the last few days. This would surprise me, but thus far the smoke of every rumor seems to be coming to fruition, so we should maybe trust the 9/1 smoke.

[Anonymous]

The smoke also indicating MLSN will be following suit. Every whisper over the last 6 months seems to slowly build and all coming true. I am very much starting to trust the latest rumors.

[Anonymous]

Follow the latest rumors. They have all been correct so far

[Anonymous]

This is the best post I have seen to explain (in layman's terms) the 'trapped player' issue that soccer is trying to address with this change

https://socalsoccer.com/threads/get-ready-folks.21527/post-482786

[Anonymous]

ECNL podcast drops on Wednesday. Get ready for somthing good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where did the info come from that suggested high school may be staying birth year? Was that an email sent to (some) club coaches?

its not. Just some posters worried about the impact to there unaffected kids who this wont impact. Folks forget there are also impacts to rising seniors who are late birth years. Basically get two birth years combined. A bunch of unfortunate cuts happen to the rising juniors. This will solve the issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Follow the latest rumors. They have all been correct so far

What’s been correct? There are so many competing rumors that no one knows what they’re talking about. But, come Friday, we will all know.