ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

I agree. But then the problem is zero clubs that are both MLSN2 for their top teams and ECRL for their lower teams have announced that MLSN2 will be BY and everyone else is SY.

And if it stays BY, say goodbye to playing state cup and local tourneys? These MLSN2 teams, at least in my state, are not elite. Travelling out of state half the time because you can only play other mlsn2 teams is ridiculous. If MLSN2 stays BY, I'd want my kid to stay on the RCL team. If he turns out to actually be an elite player and wants higher level competition, I'd look to MLSN1 or ECNL. MLSN2 is not a pathway to anything, other than unnecessary road trips, if they stay BY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

I agree. But then the problem is zero clubs that are both MLSN2 for their top teams and ECRL for their lower teams have announced that MLSN2 will be BY and everyone else is SY.

And if it stays BY, say goodbye to playing state cup and local tourneys? These MLSN2 teams, at least in my state, are not elite. Travelling out of state half the time because you can only play other mlsn2 teams is ridiculous. If MLSN2 stays BY, I'd want my kid to stay on the RCL team. If he turns out to actually be an elite player and wants higher level competition, I'd look to MLSN1 or ECNL. MLSN2 is not a pathway to anything, other than unnecessary road trips, if they stay BY.

In may area top level teams are either ECNL or MLSN2. My son will be playing MLSN2 by 2025/26.

However, depending if MLSN2 goes SY/BY we'll make decisions about moving to ECNL or staying MLSN2.

He is October, so whatever platform offers SY it will be easier for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

I agree. But then the problem is zero clubs that are both MLSN2 for their top teams and ECRL for their lower teams have announced that MLSN2 will be BY and everyone else is SY.

And if it stays BY, say goodbye to playing state cup and local tourneys? These MLSN2 teams, at least in my state, are not elite. Travelling out of state half the time because you can only play other mlsn2 teams is ridiculous. If MLSN2 stays BY, I'd want my kid to stay on the RCL team. If he turns out to actually be an elite player and wants higher level competition, I'd look to MLSN1 or ECNL. MLSN2 is not a pathway to anything, other than unnecessary road trips, if they stay BY.

In may area top level teams are either ECNL or MLSN2. My son will be playing MLSN2 by 2025/26.

However, depending if MLSN2 goes SY/BY we'll make decisions about moving to ECNL or staying MLSN2.

He is October, so whatever platform offers SY it will be easier for him.

Nobody cares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

I agree. But then the problem is zero clubs that are both MLSN2 for their top teams and ECRL for their lower teams have announced that MLSN2 will be BY and everyone else is SY.

And if it stays BY, say goodbye to playing state cup and local tourneys? These MLSN2 teams, at least in my state, are not elite. Travelling out of state half the time because you can only play other mlsn2 teams is ridiculous. If MLSN2 stays BY, I'd want my kid to stay on the RCL team. If he turns out to actually be an elite player and wants higher level competition, I'd look to MLSN1 or ECNL. MLSN2 is not a pathway to anything, other than unnecessary road trips, if they stay BY.

MLSN2 will absolutely be SY. That is already known to most directors at MLSN2 clubs.

As far people saying, 'well why don't they (MLSN) say anything? It must mean X'. When the hell does MLSN communicate about anything? It would not surprise me in the least if they 'announced' a switch to SY the week before tryouts.

[Anonymous]

But you have all these clubs that are now MLS2 (but really only for their top team). Their B, C, and lower teams will remain in RCL leagues and stay school year. Many new MLSN2 clubs have announced soccer is changing to SY, but haven't specified what the MLSN2 team age formation will be. Parents will assume everything is SY based on club messaging.

At the club level, comms actually implies SY, while MLSN staying silent implies BY.

It's a cluster. Thank you to US Soccer for punting on the overall decision. Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My club is joining MLSNext2, my son will play U14.

August 4th and no news, no notifications from MLS Next about schedules for September.

Same is true for ECNL -- at least on its website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

Talk to your MLSN director, ours and most others are saying likely or definitely SY. How do you explain that? What does yours say?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

Talk to your MLSN director, ours and most others are saying likely or definitely SY. How do you explain that? What does yours say?

They've said they dont know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

Talk to your MLSN director, ours and most others are saying likely or definitely SY. How do you explain that? What does yours say?

This is basically the problem though. It's all word of mouth. Why is there nothing documented or posted online by any of the hundreds of MLSN2 clubs to just put this question to rest? Why would a club director say "likely" (assumes they're not certain).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

Talk to your MLSN director, ours and most others are saying likely or definitely SY. How do you explain that? What does yours say?

This is basically the problem though. It's all word of mouth. Why is there nothing documented or posted online by any of the hundreds of MLSN2 clubs to just put this question to rest? Why would a club director say "likely" (assumes they're not certain).

I think people in the business are saying "likely" because they all understand it makes the most sense to change. There are no good reasons to stay BY for youth soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

Talk to your MLSN director, ours and most others are saying likely or definitely SY. How do you explain that? What does yours say?

This is basically the problem though. It's all word of mouth. Why is there nothing documented or posted online by any of the hundreds of MLSN2 clubs to just put this question to rest? Why would a club director say "likely" (assumes they're not certain).

I think people in the business are saying "likely" because they all understand it makes the most sense to change. There are no good reasons to stay BY for youth soccer.

There are good reasons, especially perhaps in the short-term to cater to any demand from players/families who have played their entire careers in the BY system and still do not want to have their teams disrupted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

Talk to your MLSN director, ours and most others are saying likely or definitely SY. How do you explain that? What does yours say?

This is basically the problem though. It's all word of mouth. Why is there nothing documented or posted online by any of the hundreds of MLSN2 clubs to just put this question to rest? Why would a club director say "likely" (assumes they're not certain).

I think people in the business are saying "likely" because they all understand it makes the most sense to change. There are no good reasons to stay BY for youth soccer.

I totally agree. But why club directors can't get an answer is insane to me. People say "well, MLS doesn't have to announce anything if they don't intend to change to SY". OK, I get that. But wouldn't MLS Next need to answer this question for club directors? Club directors need an answer. And the whole point of announcing all these changes earlier was so clubs could prepare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

Talk to your MLSN director, ours and most others are saying likely or definitely SY. How do you explain that? What does yours say?

This is basically the problem though. It's all word of mouth. Why is there nothing documented or posted online by any of the hundreds of MLSN2 clubs to just put this question to rest? Why would a club director say "likely" (assumes they're not certain).

I think people in the business are saying "likely" because they all understand it makes the most sense to change. There are no good reasons to stay BY for youth soccer.

I totally agree. But why club directors can't get an answer is insane to me. People say "well, MLS doesn't have to announce anything if they don't intend to change to SY". OK, I get that. But wouldn't MLS Next need to answer this question for club directors? Club directors need an answer. And the whole point of announcing all these changes earlier was so clubs could prepare.

It's not just MLSN... ECNL hasn't even given out ANYTHING in terms of transition rules. Oh, the humanity!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of the problem is assuming people are arguing from a pro MLSN or pro ECNL standpoint. Not everyone is. There are teams that are ECNL/ECRL now in clubs switching to MLSN2 next year. They still don't have schedules. They still don't know if they'll even be able to play in the state cup tourney. They still don't know if they'll have to travel out of state and when.

And clubs don't know whether to or how they'll need to move kids up from their RCL teams to MLSN2 if RCL is SY and MLSN2 stays BY.

It's a mess, all because MLSN and MLSN2 won't announce whether they're sticking to BY or going SY. They could at least affirm they're sticking to BY if that's the case. It's radio silence.

By not saying anything they're saying BY

Talk to your MLSN director, ours and most others are saying likely or definitely SY. How do you explain that? What does yours say?

They've said they dont know.

So don’t know to you equals Yes?