ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you heard from your ECNL coaches/directors if they’re planning for an 8/1 cutoff or 9/1?

Seems the cut off is 08/31.

8/31 hasn't been discussed at all.

The push has been to revert back to the old way, which was 8/1 - 7/31. The questionnaire/comment request that was sent US Soccer generally mentioned reverting to school year and used both 8/1 and 9/1 as examples. Nothing has been decided or voted on yet, but that is why 9/1 has now entered the chat.

My personal opinion is that it will revert back to what it was, and that US Soccer threw out 9/1 to make it seem like they're considering other options. Sort of like they are considering everyone's opinion with the bogus comment request.

I really, really hope you’re right. Thanks for that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you heard from your ECNL coaches/directors if they’re planning for an 8/1 cutoff or 9/1?

Seems the cut off is 08/31.

8/31 hasn't been discussed at all.

The push has been to revert back to the old way, which was 8/1 - 7/31. The questionnaire/comment request that was sent US Soccer generally mentioned reverting to school year and used both 8/1 and 9/1 as examples. Nothing has been decided or voted on yet, but that is why 9/1 has now entered the chat.

My personal opinion is that it will revert back to what it was, and that US Soccer threw out 9/1 to make it seem like they're considering other options. Sort of like they are considering everyone's opinion with the bogus comment request.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love for it to take effect this spring for Aug-December 2010 and below. It would be great to not waste time and to see how teams shape up with this change immediately.

Wouldn't they need to do try outs with the new age groups since some years have more/less talent and kids might be knocked down/up a team or two?

We are ecnl in another state but they have not mentioned mid-year winter try outs.

[Anonymous]

I think 9/1 is leading 70/30.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think 9/1 is leading 70/30.

9/1 doesn’t make sense nationally. Which is why it was 8/1 before.

[Anonymous]

Any player can play up. No players can play down. 9/1 screws over any states with August or July cutoffs. No one loses if it’s 8/1

[Anonymous]

Set 9/1 to avoid the reverse trap.

Players who need to play down after the 9/1 cut-off are currently trapped as well.

I believe ECNL will give those players waiver to be able to play down in their grade during ECNL showcase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Set 9/1 to avoid the reverse trap.

Players who need to play down after the 9/1 cut-off are currently trapped as well.

I believe ECNL will give those players waiver to be able to play down in their grade during ECNL showcase.

1. After setting the cut off to be 9/1, only a very small number of players born before 9/1, but choose to go to school late will be impacted. Those players are currently trapped as well. ECNL can give them waivers to play down in the showcase.

2. For another very small number of players after 9/1, but choose to go to school early, play up is the option if they want to stay in their grade and can play as the youngest in the older group.

No new solution can be perfect to everyone. But set to 9/1 will significantly reduce the # of current trapped players.

[Anonymous]

Waivers are only for the showcase and not for league games. Waivers don’t solve the trap problem. The only thing that solves it nationally is to match the cut off to the earliest cut off used by any state - 8/1

[Anonymous]

It makes so much sense to me that on the verge of making a good and easy decision like "lets just revert the change we did in 2017 and go back the old way the next obvious time, Fall 2025"

US Soccer might do the dumbest version of the thing like change to a brand new date and delay it a wasted year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Set 9/1 to avoid the reverse trap.

Players who need to play down after the 9/1 cut-off are currently trapped as well.

I believe ECNL will give those players waiver to be able to play down in their grade during ECNL showcase.

1. After setting the cut off to be 9/1, only a very small number of players born before 9/1, but choose to go to school late will be impacted. Those players are currently trapped as well. ECNL can give them waivers to play down in the showcase.

2. For another very small number of players after 9/1, but choose to go to school early, play up is the option if they want to stay in their grade and can play as the youngest in the older group.

No new solution can be perfect to everyone. But set to 9/1 will significantly reduce the # of current trapped players.

They discussed going back to Aug, not a new date. So they are voting on reverting back to Aug 1-July 31.

See https://www.usyouthsoccer.org/news/2024/10/23/us-youth-soccer-us-club-soccer-ayso-statement-on-forthcoming-u-s-soccer-decision-on-calendar-year-vs-birth-year-registration/.

Posters wanting 9-1 and arguing for is irrelevant. This is still US Soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Set 9/1 to avoid the reverse trap.

Players who need to play down after the 9/1 cut-off are currently trapped as well.

I believe ECNL will give those players waiver to be able to play down in their grade during ECNL showcase.

Probably not because on one of the podcasts, ECNL didn't support biobanding waivers or waivers in general. Other than a survey done on the 11th hour, there is no mention of the Nov 22 vote being anything other than Aug 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for it to take effect this spring for Aug-December 2010 and below. It would be great to not waste time and to see how teams shape up with this change immediately.

Wouldn't they need to do try outs with the new age groups since some years have more/less talent and kids might be knocked down/up a team or two?

We are ecnl in another state but they have not mentioned mid-year winter try outs.

This wouldn't change until Fall 25 so clubs have time to plan for it. No mid-year tryouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Set 9/1 to avoid the reverse trap.

Players who need to play down after the 9/1 cut-off are currently trapped as well.

I believe ECNL will give those players waiver to be able to play down in their grade during ECNL showcase.

1. After setting the cut off to be 9/1, only a very small number of players born before 9/1, but choose to go to school late will be impacted. Those players are currently trapped as well. ECNL can give them waivers to play down in the showcase.

2. For another very small number of players after 9/1, but choose to go to school early, play up is the option if they want to stay in their grade and can play as the youngest in the older group.

No new solution can be perfect to everyone. But set to 9/1 will significantly reduce the # of current trapped players.

They discussed going back to Aug, not a new date. So they are voting on reverting back to Aug 1-July 31.

See https://www.usyouthsoccer.org/news/2024/10/23/us-youth-soccer-us-club-soccer-ayso-statement-on-forthcoming-u-s-soccer-decision-on-calendar-year-vs-birth-year-registration/.

Posters wanting 9-1 and arguing for is irrelevant. This is still US Soccer.

Sorry but there is nothing in the public announcement that suggests they are simply going to vote to "repeal" the birth year decision and revert back to the previous system. It also doesn't state that if they do vote for a return to school year based age groups that either the school year dates nor when this change would be implemented will be decided at this particular meeting. That could all be determined down the road. Unless you have the agenda (not yet published on the website), you are also engaging in pure speculation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Set 9/1 to avoid the reverse trap.

Players who need to play down after the 9/1 cut-off are currently trapped as well.

I believe ECNL will give those players waiver to be able to play down in their grade during ECNL showcase.

1. After setting the cut off to be 9/1, only a very small number of players born before 9/1, but choose to go to school late will be impacted. Those players are currently trapped as well. ECNL can give them waivers to play down in the showcase.

2. For another very small number of players after 9/1, but choose to go to school early, play up is the option if they want to stay in their grade and can play as the youngest in the older group.

No new solution can be perfect to everyone. But set to 9/1 will significantly reduce the # of current trapped players.

They discussed going back to Aug, not a new date. So they are voting on reverting back to Aug 1-July 31.

See https://www.usyouthsoccer.org/news/2024/10/23/us-youth-soccer-us-club-soccer-ayso-statement-on-forthcoming-u-s-soccer-decision-on-calendar-year-vs-birth-year-registration/.

Posters wanting 9-1 and arguing for is irrelevant. This is still US Soccer.

Sorry but there is nothing in the public announcement that suggests they are simply going to vote to "repeal" the birth year decision and revert back to the previous system. It also doesn't state that if they do vote for a return to school year based age groups that either the school year dates nor when this change would be implemented will be decided at this particular meeting. That could all be determined down the road. Unless you have the agenda (not yet published on the website), you are also engaging in pure speculation.

They are reviewing the decision that took them from 8-1 to 1-1. Speculation would be saying 9-1 is 70% going to happen. To suggest 9-1 is anything but a speculation would be a farce.