ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TS is saying that US Soccer has blocked the motion for an immediate change from BY to SY. They prefer a phased approach. Also MLS is against the change.

If true what this means is all the girl dad's that post endlessly about ECNL might soon learn who's really in charge at US Soccer.

I'm sorry for your loss...

What is TS? Other than Taylor Swift?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

Swimming = Soccer is definitely crazy new maths

Note high school runners improve about 5 percent per year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

Swimming = Soccer is definitely crazy new maths

Not the OP but it's a sport that allows a mathematical analysis and measurement of improvements that most sports don't (maybe track, speed skating and a few others also can be measured). You don't have to accept the numbers but they seem reasonable. Do you think older players are only 1% better? 30% better?

I think 5-10% is probably about right. Feel free to disagree and if you can do so without sounding like such a "regard" . . . even better!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

Swimming = Soccer is definitely crazy new maths

I have the correct math...if your kid is good enough you will know.

Seriously, parents are great scouts for their own kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TS is saying that US Soccer has blocked the motion for an immediate change from BY to SY. They prefer a phased approach. Also MLS is against the change.

If true what this means is all the girl dad's that post endlessly about ECNL might soon learn who's really in charge at US Soccer.

I'm sorry for your loss...

What is TS? Other than Taylor Swift?

Omigod! What did Taylor Swift say?!?!?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TS is saying that US Soccer has blocked the motion for an immediate change from BY to SY. They prefer a phased approach. Also MLS is against the change.

If true what this means is all the girl dad's that post endlessly about ECNL might soon learn who's really in charge at US Soccer.

I'm sorry for your loss...

What is TS? Other than Taylor Swift?

Omigod! What did Taylor Swift say?!?!?!

Taylor is all on GY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

Swimming = Soccer is definitely crazy new maths

I have the correct math...if your kid is good enough you will know.

Seriously, parents are great scouts for their own kid?

No, but the scouts are, and they talk to parents. So are coaches and also talk to parents. And comments are made by other parents and players. It's not a secret to the parents of top-level players that their kid is good. If you are thinking it's a secret, it might just be that your kid isn't good enough and those comments are never coming. I know...it's a tough one to swallow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

Swimming = Soccer is definitely crazy new maths

I have the correct math...if your kid is good enough you will know.

Seriously, parents are great scouts for their own kid?

No, but the scouts are, and they talk to parents. So are coaches and also talk to parents. And comments are made by other parents and players. It's not a secret to the parents of top-level players that their kid is good. If you are thinking it's a secret, it might just be that your kid isn't good enough and those comments are never coming. I know...it's a tough one to swallow.

Meh, fish fish in a small pond syndrome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

Swimming = Soccer is definitely crazy new maths

I have the correct math...if your kid is good enough you will know.

Seriously, parents are great scouts for their own kid?

No, but the scouts are, and they talk to parents. So are coaches and also talk to parents. And comments are made by other parents and players. It's not a secret to the parents of top-level players that their kid is good. If you are thinking it's a secret, it might just be that your kid isn't good enough and those comments are never coming. I know...it's a tough one to swallow.

Meh, fish fish in a small pond syndrome.

Haha you hope

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

Swimming = Soccer is definitely crazy new maths

Not the OP but it's a sport that allows a mathematical analysis and measurement of improvements that most sports don't (maybe track, speed skating and a few others also can be measured). You don't have to accept the numbers but they seem reasonable. Do you think older players are only 1% better? 30% better?

I think 5-10% is probably about right. Feel free to disagree and if you can do so without sounding like such a "regard" . . . even better!

Put the Bethesda U16's against the Over 40 Sunday League and tell me later what percentage better the Over 40's were

Better yet, put the SYC U14's against an NCSL U16's and tell me how much better by percentage the NCSL team was

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

If my Q4 daughter is 10% faster than her new teammates and they are 10% slower than her old teammates then this is about to get very fun next season.

Track and Field or Soccer??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

If my Q4 daughter is 10% faster than her new teammates and they are 10% slower than her old teammates then this is about to get very fun next season.

Track and Field or Soccer??

Great question.
People fail to grasp that we measure brain speed in football not footspeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

Note that in swimming kids get 5-10% faster/better every year. So in soccer expect q3-4 to be about 5-10% better and q1-2 to to be about 5-10% worse in their respective age brackets.

If my Q4 daughter is 10% faster than her new teammates and they are 10% slower than her old teammates then this is about to get very fun next season.

Track and Field or Soccer??

Great question.
People fail to grasp that we measure brain speed in football not footspeed.

Yep
You can tell real soccer people.

They know its about speed of play driven by speed of observation then speed of decision and speed of execution.

The majority thinks its size and 40 yard dash speeds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

I’ll start - my DD’s ECNL team has four Q4 starters! Four! That’s gonna be a shake up. I’m wondering where they’re gonna get extra talent from because the team one age group above only has one trapped player. I’m hoping there are good ECNL-RL players hiding somewhere otherwise her team is about to be decimated. And for all the people who say that those starters will just play up — for how long? and why would you continue to play up when it hurts your recruiting chances? Better to start playing with your new team so you can get used to playing with each other before the recruiting years begin.

They don't have play in their age group. If they are that good, then they should continue to player bigger/older players.

There's absolutely no reason for them to go play with the younger team and they won't. They will have no problem getting seen and scouted with the grade above and the club is not going to decimate one of their high-performing teams. That's not the intent of the SY change. If it doesn't benefit the player and the club, no movement will happen. It could, however, help the Q4 players who are not getting much playing time. They'll have an opportunity to play with the younger team and remain ECNL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's do something interesting. Use actual facts.

How about we all look at the birth months of our kids current rosters and post the number/percentage of kids born in Q3/Q4

I'm quite sure every single ECNL team in the dmv are represented in these 2,000 pages

I’ll start - my DD’s ECNL team has four Q4 starters! Four! That’s gonna be a shake up. I’m wondering where they’re gonna get extra talent from because the team one age group above only has one trapped player. I’m hoping there are good ECNL-RL players hiding somewhere otherwise her team is about to be decimated. And for all the people who say that those starters will just play up — for how long? and why would you continue to play up when it hurts your recruiting chances? Better to start playing with your new team so you can get used to playing with each other before the recruiting years begin.

They don't have play in their age group. If they are that good, then they should continue to player bigger/older players.

There's absolutely no reason for them to go play with the younger team and they won't. They will have no problem getting seen and scouted with the grade above and the club is not going to decimate one of their high-performing teams. That's not the intent of the SY change. If it doesn't benefit the player and the club, no movement will happen. It could, however, help the Q4 players who are not getting much playing time. They'll have an opportunity to play with the younger team and remain ECNL.

They will move players. It is broader than the club's or coaches' decisions.