ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Neither RAE nor global warming are conspiracies, to be clear. I know you want them to be, but they are real things we need to deal with. To your point, we can mitigate the impact to some degree by working harder outside practice . I too, think RAE can become a crutch that is compounded by the parents . This is another reason quite frankly that having multiple age cutoffs just turns the focus even more on RAE. Parents will leave clubs for that advantage and it will be the main thing people talk about instead of player development.

Don't agree about global cooling or rae but let me ask you a question. How do B teams affect or interact with your belief in rae? My take is B teams allow smaller players when younger get reps in. When they get older they'll be the same size as older players and competing for A team rosters spots.

There is at least 1000 pages here dispelling the nonsense you wrote here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Neither RAE nor global warming are conspiracies, to be clear. I know you want them to be, but they are real things we need to deal with. To your point, we can mitigate the impact to some degree by working harder outside practice . I too, think RAE can become a crutch that is compounded by the parents . This is another reason quite frankly that having multiple age cutoffs just turns the focus even more on RAE. Parents will leave clubs for that advantage and it will be the main thing people talk about instead of player development.

Don't agree about global cooling or rae but let me ask you a question. How do B teams affect or interact with your belief in rae? My take is B teams allow smaller players when younger get reps in. When they get older they'll be the same size as older players and competing for A team rosters spots.

Let me tell you what I see (2016g parent)

Asian and latin players develop early and coaches that want to win when young recruit them. But when I look at the sidelines and see that both parents are under 5'3" the early development makes sense. They're nearly full grown at u12.

That's only half the story. The other half is the white girls who grow and don't develop at all. They have size, sometimes speed, but mostly don't understand the game. They play kickball. They get recruited but end up sitting on the bench not understanding why they don't get to play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Neither RAE nor global warming are conspiracies, to be clear. I know you want them to be, but they are real things we need to deal with. To your point, we can mitigate the impact to some degree by working harder outside practice . I too, think RAE can become a crutch that is compounded by the parents . This is another reason quite frankly that having multiple age cutoffs just turns the focus even more on RAE. Parents will leave clubs for that advantage and it will be the main thing people talk about instead of player development.

Don't agree about global cooling or rae but let me ask you a question. How do B teams affect or interact with your belief in rae? My take is B teams allow smaller players when younger get reps in. When they get older they'll be the same size as older players and competing for A team rosters spots.

There is at least 1000 pages here dispelling the nonsense you wrote here.

No theres not. You saw the YNT link that complely invalidated itself.

Theres parents that have discovered rae and use it as the ultimate crutch, an excuse for anything.

[Anonymous]

So, I see there's nothing new on the age group changes today!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Neither RAE nor global warming are conspiracies, to be clear. I know you want them to be, but they are real things we need to deal with. To your point, we can mitigate the impact to some degree by working harder outside practice . I too, think RAE can become a crutch that is compounded by the parents . This is another reason quite frankly that having multiple age cutoffs just turns the focus even more on RAE. Parents will leave clubs for that advantage and it will be the main thing people talk about instead of player development.

Don't agree about global cooling or rae but let me ask you a question. How do B teams affect or interact with your belief in rae? My take is B teams allow smaller players when younger get reps in. When they get older they'll be the same size as older players and competing for A team rosters spots.

Let me tell you what I see (2016g parent)

Asian and latin players develop early and coaches that want to win when young recruit them. But when I look at the sidelines and see that both parents are under 5'3" the early development makes sense. They're nearly full grown at u12.

That's only half the story. The other half is the white girls who grow and don't develop at all. They have size, sometimes speed, but mostly don't understand the game. They play kickball. They get recruited but end up sitting on the bench not understanding why they don't get to play.

When you're 5'1" you might look fast when running but that's only because it takes 3 steps to keep up with every step someone 5'9" takes

[Anonymous]

Thread gone off the rails and over the cliff Indiana Jones style

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thread gone off the rails and over the cliff Indiana Jones style

Agree needs to be shut down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thread gone off the rails and over the cliff Indiana Jones style

Its all the same topics just rehashed in different ways. The problem is different people view soccer in different ways. Professional Orgs, Leagues, Clubs, Owners. Docs, Coaches, Parents, and Players all have different perspectives. Add in that goals change and can vary based on age and level. Some people view competition as something that can be exploited. Others view competition as something that needs to be protected. In America it doesnt help that everything is setup to funnel money in pockets with development comming in second. In other countries money funnels into pockets but creating best in the world talent comes first. Because of the way MLS and NWSL are structured/setup (league owns the clubs) things will never change in America and people will keep argueing on this thread about things that dont matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thread gone off the rails and over the cliff Indiana Jones style

Its all the same topics just rehashed in different ways. The problem is different people view soccer in different ways. Professional Orgs, Leagues, Clubs, Owners. Docs, Coaches, Parents, and Players all have different perspectives. Add in that goals change and can vary based on age and level. Some people view competition as something that can be exploited. Others view competition as something that needs to be protected. In America it doesnt help that everything is setup to funnel money in pockets with development comming in second. In other countries money funnels into pockets but creating best in the world talent comes first. Because of the way MLS and NWSL are structured/setup (league owns the clubs) things will never change in America and people will keep argueing on this thread about things that dont matter.

So you're saying we need to start our own soccer club (I think there's a thread about that, already, too)!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thread gone off the rails and over the cliff Indiana Jones style

Its all the same topics just rehashed in different ways. The problem is different people view soccer in different ways. Professional Orgs, Leagues, Clubs, Owners. Docs, Coaches, Parents, and Players all have different perspectives. Add in that goals change and can vary based on age and level. Some people view competition as something that can be exploited. Others view competition as something that needs to be protected. In America it doesnt help that everything is setup to funnel money in pockets with development comming in second. In other countries money funnels into pockets but creating best in the world talent comes first. Because of the way MLS and NWSL are structured/setup (league owns the clubs) things will never change in America and people will keep argueing on this thread about things that dont matter.

So you're saying we need to start our own soccer club (I think there's a thread about that, already, too)!

USL is already trying to do this.

I'd say the biggest variable right now is if US Soccer can guide college soccer into something other than a complete crapfest. College coaches control the college narrative and their interests dont align with pro soccer. An easy example of this is the unlimited subs rule. College coaches sell it as a way to let more players play. But in reality it makes recruiting much easier because you can focus on speed and aggression instead of skill. Without unlimited subs players need to stay on the field longer and have a higher level of skills.

Hopefully now that college players are getting paid things will change. If college players can unite, unionize, and create a players association everything will change overnight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Neither RAE nor global warming are conspiracies, to be clear. I know you want them to be, but they are real things we need to deal with. To your point, we can mitigate the impact to some degree by working harder outside practice . I too, think RAE can become a crutch that is compounded by the parents . This is another reason quite frankly that having multiple age cutoffs just turns the focus even more on RAE. Parents will leave clubs for that advantage and it will be the main thing people talk about instead of player development.

Don't agree about global cooling or rae but let me ask you a question. How do B teams affect or interact with your belief in rae? My take is B teams allow smaller players when younger get reps in. When they get older they'll be the same size as older players and competing for A team rosters spots.

No, parents will do biobanding to play down to stay in the A team rather than go to the B team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Neither RAE nor global warming are conspiracies, to be clear. I know you want them to be, but they are real things we need to deal with. To your point, we can mitigate the impact to some degree by working harder outside practice . I too, think RAE can become a crutch that is compounded by the parents . This is another reason quite frankly that having multiple age cutoffs just turns the focus even more on RAE. Parents will leave clubs for that advantage and it will be the main thing people talk about instead of player development.

Don't agree about global cooling or rae but let me ask you a question. How do B teams affect or interact with your belief in rae? My take is B teams allow smaller players when younger get reps in. When they get older they'll be the same size as older players and competing for A team rosters spots.

No, parents will do biobanding to play down to stay in the A team rather than go to the B team.

Are the parents the coach and club management and league owner?

[Anonymous]

Changing topics to what I hope is a more productive discussion, for the kids that get red shirted a year before GA, ECNL, MLS, etc., what do you work on with the extra year? Do you stay the course or any new areas you might work on with the extra year? What stands out the most from an evaluation standpoint?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Neither RAE nor global warming are conspiracies, to be clear. I know you want them to be, but they are real things we need to deal with. To your point, we can mitigate the impact to some degree by working harder outside practice . I too, think RAE can become a crutch that is compounded by the parents . This is another reason quite frankly that having multiple age cutoffs just turns the focus even more on RAE. Parents will leave clubs for that advantage and it will be the main thing people talk about instead of player development.

Don't agree about global cooling or rae but let me ask you a question. How do B teams affect or interact with your belief in rae? My take is B teams allow smaller players when younger get reps in. When they get older they'll be the same size as older players and competing for A team rosters spots.

No, parents will do biobanding to play down to stay in the A team rather than go to the B team.

Are the parents the coach and club management and league owner?

You're talking to the GY troll. He wants to play is older kid down on younger teams. Also his son plays ECNL so he likes to throw out irrational comments about Biobanding. Which ironically is what he wants in ECNL via GY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Changing topics to what I hope is a more productive discussion, for the kids that get red shirted a year before GA, ECNL, MLS, etc., what do you work on with the extra year? Do you stay the course or any new areas you might work on with the extra year? What stands out the most from an evaluation standpoint?

Theres no such thing as redshirting in youth club soccer. This is because eligibility is bookended by dates currently in BY 1/1-12/31 and soon to change to SY 8/1-7/31.

If you hold your kid back in school they'll play on the grade up team in club. Basically nullifying the advantage you get from redshirting and trying to play againt younger players..

Most clubs do let u18 Juniors and u19 Seniors play together on a mixed u18/u19 team. This is the one time a holdback could play on a team with their grade. (which isnt really a team exclusively that grade)