ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

It just helps for better evaluation player to player per grade. I don’t think there should be any issues. Will only make teams and competition stronger by adding 2009 trapped players with 2010 Q1/2 kids.

[Anonymous]

You mean moving back ...back to school year. It was this way a few years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

It just helps for better evaluation player to player per grade. I don’t think there should be any issues. Will only make teams and competition stronger by adding 2009 trapped players with 2010 Q1/2 kids.

The top league that sends the most boys to college teams use BY with many players playing up.
College recruiters have zero problems.

They aren't weeding through hundreds of unknown to them random candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You mean moving back ...back to school year. It was this way a few years ago.

Was youth development better back then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

It just helps for better evaluation player to player per grade. I don’t think there should be any issues. Will only make teams and competition stronger by adding 2009 trapped players with 2010 Q1/2 kids.

The top league that sends the most boys to college teams use BY with many players playing up.
College recruiters have zero problems.

They aren't weeding through hundreds of unknown to them random candidates.

Non sensical argument. The top league sending kids to college 7 years ago were using school year. It’s all relative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

It just helps for better evaluation player to player per grade. I don’t think there should be any issues. Will only make teams and competition stronger by adding 2009 trapped players with 2010 Q1/2 kids.

The top league that sends the most boys to college teams use BY with many players playing up.
College recruiters have zero problems.

They aren't weeding through hundreds of unknown to them random candidates.

Non sensical argument. The top league sending kids to college 7 years ago were using school year. It’s all relative.

Update your calendar
MLS Next wasn't around 7 years ago

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

It just helps for better evaluation player to player per grade. I don’t think there should be any issues. Will only make teams and competition stronger by adding 2009 trapped players with 2010 Q1/2 kids.

The top league that sends the most boys to college teams use BY with many players playing up.
College recruiters have zero problems.

They aren't weeding through hundreds of unknown to them random candidates.

Non sensical argument. The top league sending kids to college 7 years ago were using school year. It’s all relative.

Update your calendar
MLS Next wasn't around 7 years ago

The point was no matter if they keep BY or go SY the top league always sends players to college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

It just helps for better evaluation player to player per grade. I don’t think there should be any issues. Will only make teams and competition stronger by adding 2009 trapped players with 2010 Q1/2 kids.

The top league that sends the most boys to college teams use BY with many players playing up.
College recruiters have zero problems.

They aren't weeding through hundreds of unknown to them random candidates.

MLS next also has bio banding which is basically SY for specific kids. Just not full SY for everyone. But they use the option. Not straight BY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

It just helps for better evaluation player to player per grade. I don’t think there should be any issues. Will only make teams and competition stronger by adding 2009 trapped players with 2010 Q1/2 kids.

The top league that sends the most boys to college teams use BY with many players playing up.
College recruiters have zero problems.

They aren't weeding through hundreds of unknown to them random candidates.

MLS next also has bio banding which is basically SY for specific kids. Just not full SY for everyone. But they use the option. Not straight BY.

If you don't know or fully understand, feel free to listen without contributing nonsense

[Anonymous]

For those who have boys in MLS Next, how much international play do those teams actually do? What benefit does that league particularly get by being aligned with international play?

I feel like for every domestic youth league (leaving out national teams for the moment) except MLS Next, school year cutoff is the clear winner. For MLS Next, I could see why they would resist if they play a lot of international matches or are sending players to Europe as pros when they turn 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those who have boys in MLS Next, how much international play do those teams actually do? What benefit does that league particularly get by being aligned with international play?

I feel like for every domestic youth league (leaving out national teams for the moment) except MLS Next, school year cutoff is the clear winner. For MLS Next, I could see why they would resist if they play a lot of international matches or are sending players to Europe as pros when they turn 18.

Winner at what? What's the real measurable benefit?

This is all a social thing, not a soccer thing.

[Anonymous]

It is clear the majority on here don't understand that RAE and Bio-banding is about kids not getting selected for teams because of physical maturity.
It's not about them not being good players with skills.

Bio-banding isn't about giving low skill younger players time to catch up.
It's about giving physically younger good players with strong potential a place on a team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It also misaligns the ECNL teams with pretty much all leagues and sanctioned bodies outside of ECNL, including national teams and international play.

Does birth year, school year even matter to the players at this level? I'm always told these players are playing 2 or 3 years up anyway and never play with kids their age because they're so much better.

It matters at the younger age groups trying to keep the participation up. Almost no one is playing 2 or 3 years up at the ECNL level and as stated earlier, it's more to help the trapped players/recruiting vs. RAE.

How does it help trapped players with recruiting?
Are their ages and graduation dates currently unknown to the recruiters?

It just helps for better evaluation player to player per grade. I don’t think there should be any issues. Will only make teams and competition stronger by adding 2009 trapped players with 2010 Q1/2 kids.

The top league that sends the most boys to college teams use BY with many players playing up.
College recruiters have zero problems.

They aren't weeding through hundreds of unknown to them random candidates.

MLS next also has bio banding which is basically SY for specific kids. Just not full SY for everyone. But they use the option. Not straight BY.

If you don't know or fully understand, feel free to listen without contributing nonsense

Explain to me how kids who are late born 2010s and play 2011 mls next? Are all mls next teams just ignoring birth year rules?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is clear the majority on here don't understand that RAE and Bio-banding is about kids not getting selected for teams because of physical maturity.
It's not about them not being good players with skills.

Bio-banding isn't about giving low skill younger players time to catch up.
It's about giving physically younger good players with strong potential a place on a team.

So would you be against ECNL adding bio banding? To me it’s just letting a smaller sample size of players get around BY. Obviously it has rules but most kids born Oct-Dec who are decent players get approved.