ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reviewed all 50 states school entry dates. 99.9% have a date after 8-1 (some random 7-31 dates and wonky county dates earlier). 90+% are no later than Sept 15th. So it seems like a no brainer that they make the date 8-1 to include virtually all kids in a grade. Then for those "tweeners" with August or September birthdays but are in a grade above, they are "allowed" to play up with their current team or other team in their correct grade classification. Much easier to allow a child to play up vs playing down.

I get that the August birthday playing up is a disadvantage as they will now be the youngest on a team. And, I guess, the child could self select to play with the grade below technically there by being the oldest. So they have an "option" to be with their current grade OR be "reverse trapped" and be the oldest on a team. Seems pretty reasonable on the surface.

You don’t understand the August kid issue. At all.

A 9/1 date captures virtually everyone, not 8/1. 8/1 carves out the August kids who had a school cut off later than 8/1.

An 8/1 date will cause a kid with an 8/2 birthday in a school jurisdiction with a 9/1 cutoff to be assigned to a team with kids a year behind them in school.

This, kids, is what we call confidently incorrect.

And, you would be confidently wrong with that assertion. This is exactly the issue with the 8/1 cut off for all jurisdictions with a start date later than 8/1. You are created a group of kids who won’t be aligned with their grade that a 9/1 cutoff won’t create.

You are like a Fields of Dreams on 9-1. If I believe l, it will happen. Hash tag stophatingaugustplayers

I’m not arguing the date. I don’t care. I’ve got an August kid and they will be happy staying where they are or they will be an absolute beast playing with the grade younger. I don’t care. I’m not in it for scholarship money.

I’m arguing the position that 8/1 will capture ‘virtually everyone’. It won’t. 9/1 will.

I'm sorry you are flustered by this.

Thank you! Your empathy is greatly appreciated. My pain has been unbearable until you came along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reviewed all 50 states school entry dates. 99.9% have a date after 8-1 (some random 7-31 dates and wonky county dates earlier). 90+% are no later than Sept 15th. So it seems like a no brainer that they make the date 8-1 to include virtually all kids in a grade. Then for those "tweeners" with August or September birthdays but are in a grade above, they are "allowed" to play up with their current team or other team in their correct grade classification. Much easier to allow a child to play up vs playing down.

I get that the August birthday playing up is a disadvantage as they will now be the youngest on a team. And, I guess, the child could self select to play with the grade below technically there by being the oldest. So they have an "option" to be with their current grade OR be "reverse trapped" and be the oldest on a team. Seems pretty reasonable on the surface.

You don’t understand the August kid issue. At all.

A 9/1 date captures virtually everyone, not 8/1. 8/1 carves out the August kids who had a school cut off later than 8/1.

An 8/1 date will cause a kid with an 8/2 birthday in a school jurisdiction with a 9/1 cutoff to be assigned to a team with kids a year behind them in school.

This, kids, is what we call confidently incorrect.

And, you would be confidently wrong with that assertion. This is exactly the issue with the 8/1 cut off for all jurisdictions with a start date later than 8/1. You are created a group of kids who won’t be aligned with their grade that a 9/1 cutoff won’t create.

You are like a Fields of Dreams on 9-1. If I believe l, it will happen. Hash tag stophatingaugustplayers

I’m not arguing the date. I don’t care. I’ve got an August kid and they will be happy staying where they are or they will be an absolute beast playing with the grade younger. I don’t care. I’m not in it for scholarship money.

I’m arguing the position that 8/1 will capture ‘virtually everyone’. It won’t. 9/1 will.

I'm sorry you are flustered by this.

Thank you! Your empathy is greatly appreciated. My pain has been unbearable until you came along.

I know you are being sarcastic but as teacher I feel like I failed you in having you learn something very basic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reviewed all 50 states school entry dates. 99.9% have a date after 8-1 (some random 7-31 dates and wonky county dates earlier). 90+% are no later than Sept 15th. So it seems like a no brainer that they make the date 8-1 to include virtually all kids in a grade. Then for those "tweeners" with August or September birthdays but are in a grade above, they are "allowed" to play up with their current team or other team in their correct grade classification. Much easier to allow a child to play up vs playing down.

I get that the August birthday playing up is a disadvantage as they will now be the youngest on a team. And, I guess, the child could self select to play with the grade below technically there by being the oldest. So they have an "option" to be with their current grade OR be "reverse trapped" and be the oldest on a team. Seems pretty reasonable on the surface.

You don’t understand the August kid issue. At all.

A 9/1 date captures virtually everyone, not 8/1. 8/1 carves out the August kids who had a school cut off later than 8/1.

An 8/1 date will cause a kid with an 8/2 birthday in a school jurisdiction with a 9/1 cutoff to be assigned to a team with kids a year behind them in school.

This, kids, is what we call confidently incorrect.

And, you would be confidently wrong with that assertion. This is exactly the issue with the 8/1 cut off for all jurisdictions with a start date later than 8/1. You are created a group of kids who won’t be aligned with their grade that a 9/1 cutoff won’t create.

You are like a Fields of Dreams on 9-1. If I believe l, it will happen. Hash tag stophatingaugustplayers

I’m not arguing the date. I don’t care. I’ve got an August kid and they will be happy staying where they are or they will be an absolute beast playing with the grade younger. I don’t care. I’m not in it for scholarship money.

I’m arguing the position that 8/1 will capture ‘virtually everyone’. It won’t. 9/1 will.

I'm sorry you are flustered by this.

Thank you! Your empathy is greatly appreciated. My pain has been unbearable until you came along.

I know you are being sarcastic but as teacher I feel like I failed you in having you learn something very basic.

The weird turns this forum takes really cracks me up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reviewed all 50 states school entry dates. 99.9% have a date after 8-1 (some random 7-31 dates and wonky county dates earlier). 90+% are no later than Sept 15th. So it seems like a no brainer that they make the date 8-1 to include virtually all kids in a grade. Then for those "tweeners" with August or September birthdays but are in a grade above, they are "allowed" to play up with their current team or other team in their correct grade classification. Much easier to allow a child to play up vs playing down.

I get that the August birthday playing up is a disadvantage as they will now be the youngest on a team. And, I guess, the child could self select to play with the grade below technically there by being the oldest. So they have an "option" to be with their current grade OR be "reverse trapped" and be the oldest on a team. Seems pretty reasonable on the surface.

You don’t understand the August kid issue. At all.

A 9/1 date captures virtually everyone, not 8/1. 8/1 carves out the August kids who had a school cut off later than 8/1.

An 8/1 date will cause a kid with an 8/2 birthday in a school jurisdiction with a 9/1 cutoff to be assigned to a team with kids a year behind them in school.

This, kids, is what we call confidently incorrect.

And, you would be confidently wrong with that assertion. This is exactly the issue with the 8/1 cut off for all jurisdictions with a start date later than 8/1. You are created a group of kids who won’t be aligned with their grade that a 9/1 cutoff won’t create.

I will attempt to explain this in basic terms. If it is 9-1 and a state starts 8-1 then you will have kids from 8-1 to 9-1 STILL TRAPPED!!! They dont have the option of playing down, they are stuck being a grade below everyone else on their team. Now contrast that with your assertion of an 8-15 birthday with an 8-1 cut off. Your kid can play up with his/her grade OR play down with the grade below. That is considered an OPTION. The kids born 8-15 in a 9-1 cut off scenario dont get that option. They are forced to play with grade level above and will still be trapped. The only way to avoid trapped players is to have the cut off on the earliest date to get the most kids possible in the grade. I genuinely dont know why that is so hard to grasp.

[Anonymous]

August 1st was the old cut-off date. I suspect they will revert to that.

I wonder how long it will take for the info to leak....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reviewed all 50 states school entry dates. 99.9% have a date after 8-1 (some random 7-31 dates and wonky county dates earlier). 90+% are no later than Sept 15th. So it seems like a no brainer that they make the date 8-1 to include virtually all kids in a grade. Then for those "tweeners" with August or September birthdays but are in a grade above, they are "allowed" to play up with their current team or other team in their correct grade classification. Much easier to allow a child to play up vs playing down.

I get that the August birthday playing up is a disadvantage as they will now be the youngest on a team. And, I guess, the child could self select to play with the grade below technically there by being the oldest. So they have an "option" to be with their current grade OR be "reverse trapped" and be the oldest on a team. Seems pretty reasonable on the surface.

You don’t understand the August kid issue. At all.

A 9/1 date captures virtually everyone, not 8/1. 8/1 carves out the August kids who had a school cut off later than 8/1.

An 8/1 date will cause a kid with an 8/2 birthday in a school jurisdiction with a 9/1 cutoff to be assigned to a team with kids a year behind them in school.

This, kids, is what we call confidently incorrect.

And, you would be confidently wrong with that assertion. This is exactly the issue with the 8/1 cut off for all jurisdictions with a start date later than 8/1. You are created a group of kids who won’t be aligned with their grade that a 9/1 cutoff won’t create.

I will attempt to explain this in basic terms. If it is 9-1 and a state starts 8-1 then you will have kids from 8-1 to 9-1 STILL TRAPPED!!! They dont have the option of playing down, they are stuck being a grade below everyone else on their team. Now contrast that with your assertion of an 8-15 birthday with an 8-1 cut off. Your kid can play up with his/her grade OR play down with the grade below. That is considered an OPTION. The kids born 8-15 in a 9-1 cut off scenario dont get that option. They are forced to play with grade level above and will still be trapped. The only way to avoid trapped players is to have the cut off on the earliest date to get the most kids possible in the grade. I genuinely dont know why that is so hard to grasp.

Save yourself, Mr. or Mrs. September is a lost cause. When someone has that much invested in trying to be the smartest person in the room and they are proving they are the dumbest, you can't help them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:August 1st was the old cut-off date. I suspect they will revert to that.

I wonder how long it will take for the info to leak....

I saw some recent emails from clubs stating it will consider to change to 9/1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:August 1st was the old cut-off date. I suspect they will revert to that.

I wonder how long it will take for the info to leak....

I saw some recent emails from clubs stating it will consider to change to 9/1

Not this again - go back about 7-8 pages and you’ll see why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Which league does the MLS club academies play in?

Do they only play each other in another league outside MLSN?

That’s a very good question.

So many times I have read in this post that MLNS Academy will remain BY, while MLNS Next could move to SY.

However, as far as I know there is just ONE MLS Next league. Am I wrong?

I would appreciate if some could clarify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me repeat: after 11/22, MLSN and EA will be forced to move to SY because of potential $$$ loss.

Only MLS Academy will remain in BY.

Only MLS Academy is way on top. MLSN and ECNL are the same two pay-to-play leagues.

I don’t understand this.

Does MLS Academies play different league than MLSN Next teams?

I don’t think so …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me repeat: after 11/22, MLSN and EA will be forced to move to SY because of potential $$$ loss.

Only MLS Academy will remain in BY.

Only MLS Academy is way on top. MLSN and ECNL are the same two pay-to-play leagues.

I don’t understand this.

Does MLS Academies play different league than MLSN Next teams?

I don’t think so …

The change is for all leagues, except MLS Academy.

[Anonymous]

I saw some recent emails from clubs stating it will consider to change to 9/1

"Some" doesn't seem like a sufficient sample size and clubs don't make the call on the dates.

Guess we will find out soon- i hope. (kid is a November birthday, so no stake in either Sept or Aug).

[Anonymous]

Nothing official will be posted until the end of the year but clubs will start finding out soon enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I saw some recent emails from clubs stating it will consider to change to 9/1

"Some" doesn't seem like a sufficient sample size and clubs don't make the call on the dates.

Guess we will find out soon- i hope. (kid is a November birthday, so no stake in either Sept or Aug).

If it is still between 8/1 and 9/1, the email should not only mention 9/1. It was sent 3 days ago.

[Anonymous]

Call me dense… but doesn’t it depend on what the cutoffs are defining??? Here we have 9/1 as “cutoff” to enter K. But it simply means you must have turned 5 BEFORE that cutoff. So 9/1 in this case is broader because the August kids are captured. Mine is one of them. Teammates that are in their grade that have 9/2 birthdays are a year older because they hadn’t reached that age BEFORE 9/1 to enter the higher grade.
If the cutoff is 8/1, in that scenario my DD would have to play down.
I guess we will see soon enough but just saying 9/1 or 8/1 is not so clear to me.