ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are coming up on an entire 24 hours with only the one Michigan league posting anything

It’s very funny that the entire US soccer universe is going off of this one random FB post taken as the truth. Not even one corroborating report besides “I heard it, too.”

Until someone from US Soccer actually sends out a formal presser, everyone is just arguing for no reason.

lol and this is what you ECNL dweebs were basing your “it’s happening whether you like it or not” phrases.

Accept it. It’s not changing.

DING DING DING

Shoe is on the other foot, and they’re acting exactly like the same lunatic crew they were when they were shoving their “facts” down everyone’s throat off a dumb twitter post.

I was really hoping for the change obviously for my kid to be able to punch down. Rather try and punch up.

But it’s definitely not changing for next year and everyone will have to accept that. Probably will not change for the foreseeable future.

Back to the grind Q4 families.

The fact that you were looking forward to your kid "punching down" instead of "punching up" is everything wrong with ECNL parents.

First no top player has ever looked forward to playing down. It's boring and not a challenge.

Second looking forward to playing down is pathetic.

Would have fun to see who’s actually good at soccer. Not just who’s good at playing when you’re the same age as the vast majority of kids you play against.

[Anonymous]

Playing down is scinetifically better for a chlld's developing ego

[Anonymous]

Every Q1/2 parent was silently panicking and they know it. Competition within ECNL is hard enough for Q1/2 kids and is tough for them would have added an additional layer of difficulty. But the facts are no change for fall 25 and that’s the facts. So everyone just needs to stop complaining and encourage their kids to work as hard as possible because that’s all they can control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every Q1/2 parent was silently panicking and they know it. Competition within ECNL is hard enough for Q1/2 kids and is tough for them would have added an additional layer of difficulty. But the facts are no change for fall 25 and that’s the facts. So everyone just needs to stop complaining and encourage their kids to work as hard as possible because that’s all they can control.

Are the facts that you speak of in the room with us right now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are coming up on an entire 24 hours with only the one Michigan league posting anything

It’s very funny that the entire US soccer universe is going off of this one random FB post taken as the truth. Not even one corroborating report besides “I heard it, too.”

Until someone from US Soccer actually sends out a formal presser, everyone is just arguing for no reason.

lol and this is what you ECNL dweebs were basing your “it’s happening whether you like it or not” phrases.

Accept it. It’s not changing.

DING DING DING

Shoe is on the other foot, and they’re acting exactly like the same lunatic crew they were when they were shoving their “facts” down everyone’s throat off a dumb twitter post.

I was really hoping for the change obviously for my kid to be able to punch down. Rather try and punch up.

But it’s definitely not changing for next year and everyone will have to accept that. Probably will not change for the foreseeable future.

Back to the grind Q4 families.

I hope you’re joking.

But the idea that an age cutoff change would mean no grind is truly what I think some parents actually believe.

it’s a race to the top of the mountain but for Q4 families I we have to start at the base and everyone else gets to start a little higher up. Still a grind for everyone that’s a fact.

Like I said back to work we go! If people want to argue there’s no advantage for Q1/2 kids go try and play up ECNL see how many can make that team or even get a real option to play.

High ho high ho it’s back to work we go….

So what’s the different in “base camp” for a July baby vs August?

For a September baby vs October?

For a Q4 girl that starts puberty at 8 vs a Q4 girls that starts at 10? Etc….

You all are arguing a class action based on birth month for a very individual issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are coming up on an entire 24 hours with only the one Michigan league posting anything

It’s very funny that the entire US soccer universe is going off of this one random FB post taken as the truth. Not even one corroborating report besides “I heard it, too.”

Until someone from US Soccer actually sends out a formal presser, everyone is just arguing for no reason.

lol and this is what you ECNL dweebs were basing your “it’s happening whether you like it or not” phrases.

Accept it. It’s not changing.

DING DING DING

Shoe is on the other foot, and they’re acting exactly like the same lunatic crew they were when they were shoving their “facts” down everyone’s throat off a dumb twitter post.

I was really hoping for the change obviously for my kid to be able to punch down. Rather try and punch up.

But it’s definitely not changing for next year and everyone will have to accept that. Probably will not change for the foreseeable future.

Back to the grind Q4 families.

The fact that you were looking forward to your kid "punching down" instead of "punching up" is everything wrong with ECNL parents.

First no top player has ever looked forward to playing down. It's boring and not a challenge.

Second looking forward to playing down is pathetic.

Yes, every Q1-Q2 kid playing in their own age group should have been campaigning hard for SY. If they're happy being the oldest in BY, they are pathetic. Play up an age group or hold your head in shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every Q1/2 parent was silently panicking and they know it. Competition within ECNL is hard enough for Q1/2 kids and is tough for them would have added an additional layer of difficulty. But the facts are no change for fall 25 and that’s the facts. So everyone just needs to stop complaining and encourage their kids to work as hard as possible because that’s all they can control.

Mind reading silent panic. You’re skilled

[Anonymous]

No matter what the age cutoff is, NO ONE IS PLAYING DOWN. Stop with this BS that any Q4 kid that would change teams/age divisions is doing so to play down. They would simply be playing their age bracket. How hard is this concept to understand. When things changed in 2017, was every Q4 kid now PLAYING UP? No!! They were playing their age division. The only way to play down is to falsify one's age to unfairly play in a league they are not eligible to play in. Good grief.

[Anonymous]

I think US Club will go it alone next year and USYS will follow the next year. Together they claim about 85% of the number of registrants in US Soccer. The heads of both of those organizations have stated a unified position on this matter which is a return to school year registration. I don't think that US Club hiring the VP of safeguarding from US Soccer, yesterday, is a coincidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To grab at a share of parents pay to play money, US Soccer pulls in about $10 million from youth soccer registrations and overinflated coach license fees. And US Soccer has the expense of running major pro tournaments in the near future, the cost of moving their headquarters and couldn't even afford to pay there men's national team coach without a donation.

If US Soccer continually sides with a few years youth national teams (say 100 kids) trying to get a couple of relatively meaningless wins at the expense of grass roots soccer plus what I will call mainstream travel soccer plus the youth soccer pathway into the college game (millions of kids), I just can't see a scenario where youth soccer, AYSO, USYS and USCS, doesn't tell US Soccer to pound sand and start their own governance.

Not arguing whether youth soccer should be SY or CY but US Soccer is completely responsible for blindly allowing RAE to thrive and not coming up with any tangible solutions. The crazy thing is that it is in US Soccer's best interest to grow the game and allow the younger half of an age group to be on something close to equal footing with the older half in opportunity but US Soccer has been wholly negligent.

US Soccer would have better senior national teams if they were able to make a dent in RAE as they could have the opportunity to pull from a pool of players up to double the current pool to pick the best players.

The billions of dollars in the youth soccer economy waiting for orders from US Soccer who only pulls in about $150 million a year is too imbalanced to continue. I can't see a scenario where youth soccer doesn't splinter at this point.

So to be clear, US Soccer's failure isn't centered on not listening to youth soccer who want to adjust their age dates, it is on not being a leader in fixing RAE.

So many things to correct in here, not worth the time or effort.

I’ll just focus on RAE. US soccer has nothing to do with how children physically mature. (See genetics, nutrition, and sleep for that).

US soccer has done as solid a job of any at the national team level accounting for RAE. They made it a huge area of focus at all level when they made the change in 2015, as well as when they ran DA.

US soccer also has little to do with the nature of time as it regards to RAE and cutoff dates.

Your issue on this should start in the mirror, and maybe at the club and coach level. Parents are what drive clubs and coaches to make short term decisions. And the clubs and some coaches certainly know better than to dismiss maturation rate differences.

But look, the idea that some sorry of Soviet 5 year top down systemic plan would develop better talent or even keep more kids in sport (in this case soccer) past the age of 12 is just laughable. Kids quit sports, most of them quit just after puberty….

Why? Because it gets harder to be good when the physical playing field changes. Some unathletic kids who survived in sport before, can’t survive anymore. The sorting takes place for more serious competition on bigger fields and tons of kids just don’t want to play if they can’t win now (also a parenting problem I’d argue). This is just such as stupid argument “more kids will play if we make it less competitive” is silly. Competition is how we separate the winners from the losers - nothing more, nothing less. And some people hate losing, but not enough to motivate them to work really hard to not lose. Thats life! Do we do the same thing for non-sport competition? Dating pool? Job market? College admissions? Promotions? Etc? This whole “more kids should play and it should be less serious” is the millennial parent equivalent of the boomer parent participation trophy. Enough of the BS!

Dude you are annoying as hell with the RAE crap. If your kid is good, they are good. That’s it. Nothing more to it.

Good relatively to what? There's always someone better. At another club or in another league or in another state or in another country. The your kid is good or not comments are beyond pointless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think US Club will go it alone next year and USYS will follow the next year. Together they claim about 85% of the number of registrants in US Soccer. The heads of both of those organizations have stated a unified position on this matter which is a return to school year registration. I don't think that US Club hiring the VP of safeguarding from US Soccer, yesterday, is a coincidence.

Agreed I noticed that too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No matter what the age cutoff is, NO ONE IS PLAYING DOWN. Stop with this BS that any Q4 kid that would change teams/age divisions is doing so to play down. They would simply be playing their age bracket. How hard is this concept to understand. When things changed in 2017, was every Q4 kid now PLAYING UP? No!! They were playing their age division. The only way to play down is to falsify one's age to unfairly play in a league they are not eligible to play in. Good grief.

Q4 kids play UP a grade based off of graduation and recruiting for college. Comparing apples to oranges. Kids could theoretically compete against their club teammates for college slots (2 CM) but only one is recruitable, the other kid never gets to compete outside of HS with their graduation year peers. How stupid are people? This was the second dumbest post except for the SY Deniers insisting yesterday's leak was hack and forgery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To grab at a share of parents pay to play money, US Soccer pulls in about $10 million from youth soccer registrations and overinflated coach license fees. And US Soccer has the expense of running major pro tournaments in the near future, the cost of moving their headquarters and couldn't even afford to pay there men's national team coach without a donation.

If US Soccer continually sides with a few years youth national teams (say 100 kids) trying to get a couple of relatively meaningless wins at the expense of grass roots soccer plus what I will call mainstream travel soccer plus the youth soccer pathway into the college game (millions of kids), I just can't see a scenario where youth soccer, AYSO, USYS and USCS, doesn't tell US Soccer to pound sand and start their own governance.

Not arguing whether youth soccer should be SY or CY but US Soccer is completely responsible for blindly allowing RAE to thrive and not coming up with any tangible solutions. The crazy thing is that it is in US Soccer's best interest to grow the game and allow the younger half of an age group to be on something close to equal footing with the older half in opportunity but US Soccer has been wholly negligent.

US Soccer would have better senior national teams if they were able to make a dent in RAE as they could have the opportunity to pull from a pool of players up to double the current pool to pick the best players.

The billions of dollars in the youth soccer economy waiting for orders from US Soccer who only pulls in about $150 million a year is too imbalanced to continue. I can't see a scenario where youth soccer doesn't splinter at this point.

So to be clear, US Soccer's failure isn't centered on not listening to youth soccer who want to adjust their age dates, it is on not being a leader in fixing RAE.

So many things to correct in here, not worth the time or effort.

I’ll just focus on RAE. US soccer has nothing to do with how children physically mature. (See genetics, nutrition, and sleep for that).

US soccer has done as solid a job of any at the national team level accounting for RAE. They made it a huge area of focus at all level when they made the change in 2015, as well as when they ran DA.

US soccer also has little to do with the nature of time as it regards to RAE and cutoff dates.

Your issue on this should start in the mirror, and maybe at the club and coach level. Parents are what drive clubs and coaches to make short term decisions. And the clubs and some coaches certainly know better than to dismiss maturation rate differences.

But look, the idea that some sorry of Soviet 5 year top down systemic plan would develop better talent or even keep more kids in sport (in this case soccer) past the age of 12 is just laughable. Kids quit sports, most of them quit just after puberty….

Why? Because it gets harder to be good when the physical playing field changes. Some unathletic kids who survived in sport before, can’t survive anymore. The sorting takes place for more serious competition on bigger fields and tons of kids just don’t want to play if they can’t win now (also a parenting problem I’d argue). This is just such as stupid argument “more kids will play if we make it less competitive” is silly. Competition is how we separate the winners from the losers - nothing more, nothing less. And some people hate losing, but not enough to motivate them to work really hard to not lose. Thats life! Do we do the same thing for non-sport competition? Dating pool? Job market? College admissions? Promotions? Etc? This whole “more kids should play and it should be less serious” is the millennial parent equivalent of the boomer parent participation trophy. Enough of the BS!

Wow, US Soccer admits even more point blank that it doesn't give a crab about kids soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every Q1/2 parent was silently panicking and they know it. Competition within ECNL is hard enough for Q1/2 kids and is tough for them would have added an additional layer of difficulty. But the facts are no change for fall 25 and that’s the facts. So everyone just needs to stop complaining and encourage their kids to work as hard as possible because that’s all they can control.

Didn't realize all Q1 and Q2 players were automatically superior and exceptional in their age groups

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To grab at a share of parents pay to play money, US Soccer pulls in about $10 million from youth soccer registrations and overinflated coach license fees. And US Soccer has the expense of running major pro tournaments in the near future, the cost of moving their headquarters and couldn't even afford to pay there men's national team coach without a donation.

If US Soccer continually sides with a few years youth national teams (say 100 kids) trying to get a couple of relatively meaningless wins at the expense of grass roots soccer plus what I will call mainstream travel soccer plus the youth soccer pathway into the college game (millions of kids), I just can't see a scenario where youth soccer, AYSO, USYS and USCS, doesn't tell US Soccer to pound sand and start their own governance.

Not arguing whether youth soccer should be SY or CY but US Soccer is completely responsible for blindly allowing RAE to thrive and not coming up with any tangible solutions. The crazy thing is that it is in US Soccer's best interest to grow the game and allow the younger half of an age group to be on something close to equal footing with the older half in opportunity but US Soccer has been wholly negligent.

US Soccer would have better senior national teams if they were able to make a dent in RAE as they could have the opportunity to pull from a pool of players up to double the current pool to pick the best players.

The billions of dollars in the youth soccer economy waiting for orders from US Soccer who only pulls in about $150 million a year is too imbalanced to continue. I can't see a scenario where youth soccer doesn't splinter at this point.

So to be clear, US Soccer's failure isn't centered on not listening to youth soccer who want to adjust their age dates, it is on not being a leader in fixing RAE.

So many things to correct in here, not worth the time or effort.

I’ll just focus on RAE. US soccer has nothing to do with how children physically mature. (See genetics, nutrition, and sleep for that).

US soccer has done as solid a job of any at the national team level accounting for RAE. They made it a huge area of focus at all level when they made the change in 2015, as well as when they ran DA.

US soccer also has little to do with the nature of time as it regards to RAE and cutoff dates.

Your issue on this should start in the mirror, and maybe at the club and coach level. Parents are what drive clubs and coaches to make short term decisions. And the clubs and some coaches certainly know better than to dismiss maturation rate differences.

But look, the idea that some sorry of Soviet 5 year top down systemic plan would develop better talent or even keep more kids in sport (in this case soccer) past the age of 12 is just laughable. Kids quit sports, most of them quit just after puberty….

Why? Because it gets harder to be good when the physical playing field changes. Some unathletic kids who survived in sport before, can’t survive anymore. The sorting takes place for more serious competition on bigger fields and tons of kids just don’t want to play if they can’t win now (also a parenting problem I’d argue). This is just such as stupid argument “more kids will play if we make it less competitive” is silly. Competition is how we separate the winners from the losers - nothing more, nothing less. And some people hate losing, but not enough to motivate them to work really hard to not lose. Thats life! Do we do the same thing for non-sport competition? Dating pool? Job market? College admissions? Promotions? Etc? This whole “more kids should play and it should be less serious” is the millennial parent equivalent of the boomer parent participation trophy. Enough of the BS!

Dude you are annoying as hell with the RAE crap. If your kid is good, they are good. That’s it. Nothing more to it.

Good relatively to what? There's always someone better. At another club or in another league or in another state or in another country. The your kid is good or not comments are beyond pointless.

I have the same reaction to the trash talk over who is "good." You would never know reading this thread that 99% of kids are playing youth soccer for fun (or at least should be), because most college commits are to crappy schools with a pittance of athletic aid. People are acting like their kids are headed for full rides at Stanford, Duke, and Harvard.

I think most kids and parents out there are happy to admit someone is better than them at soccer. But I guess those millions of players don't matter to those fighting over who gets $5k/yr in aid to play at Crap U.