ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

Never thought about that.

Haha GA would stay aligned with BY for USWNT recruiting but at the same time could participate in ECNL SY tournaments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

Agree the early adopter will get more of the market share in this one. Most Q3-Q-4 won’t want to sit around on a team they will be ineligible for the next year..that just doesn’t make any sense . They would be the odd man out with it hanging over their head all year. Why would you be a mercenary for a year knowing you are booted the following..if ECNL goes early or figures out a work around they will allow for more settling earlier…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"No change for the 2025-2026 season. There should be no registration change for the
2025-2026 season. This allows organizations transitioning to school year calendars to
prepare their operations and provide the best experience for all participants. The
RECOMMENDATION is based on overwhelming feedback from the engagement process."

US Club will change next fall, believe that.

Yup ECNL changing things up Fall 25! Also I heard the 12% was people mostly wanting grad year.

What's the difference between GY and SY?

GY (Grade Year) means your age group is based on the year you graduate, regardless of your actual age.
SY (School Year) means your age group is based on the year you SHOULD graduate based on your birth date (players in the age group will all be the same relative age within the timeframe specified).

Danke

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

Agree the early adopter will get more of the market share in this one. Most Q3-Q-4 won’t want to sit around on a team they will be ineligible for the next year..that just doesn’t make any sense . They would be the odd man out with it hanging over their head all year. Why would you be a mercenary for a year knowing you are booted the following..if ECNL goes early or figures out a work around they will allow for more settling earlier…

Yep, if the change is indeed coming in 26, every club will have incentive to unofficially change earlier to grab Q3/Q4 kids before their value increases. Combine that with the parent outrage on display about the delay causing awkward temporary rosters for even more club incentive to jump the gun. At minimum, expect A teams to put some more late birthdays on their bench to prepare for the future. The mere prospect of change coming in 26-27 will cause a miraculous improvement in RAE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

What about USYS (NL, Elite64, etc)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

What about USYS (NL, Elite64, etc)?

They could choose to do things however they want. People are thinking that everyone has to be BY or SY. It's not true. ECNL could allow biobanding tomorrow and teams would be SY within a BY construct.

There's even ways to arrange BY so it virtually eliminates trapped players. (July1 to July1 instead of Jan1 to Jan1)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

Agree the early adopter will get more of the market share in this one. Most Q3-Q-4 won’t want to sit around on a team they will be ineligible for the next year..that just doesn’t make any sense . They would be the odd man out with it hanging over their head all year. Why would you be a mercenary for a year knowing you are booted the following..if ECNL goes early or figures out a work around they will allow for more settling earlier…

But isn’t it no change mandated for the 25-26 year? And then change is possible in 2 years (26-27) but even then it’s all vague with individual choices seemingly all a go and these differences across (even within?) clubs and regions will still work? Is this even realistic or legitimate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

Agree the early adopter will get more of the market share in this one. Most Q3-Q-4 won’t want to sit around on a team they will be ineligible for the next year..that just doesn’t make any sense . They would be the odd man out with it hanging over their head all year. Why would you be a mercenary for a year knowing you are booted the following..if ECNL goes early or figures out a work around they will allow for more settling earlier…

Yep, if the change is indeed coming in 26, every club will have incentive to unofficially change earlier to grab Q3/Q4 kids before their value increases. Combine that with the parent outrage on display about the delay causing awkward temporary rosters for even more club incentive to jump the gun. At minimum, expect A teams to put some more late birthdays on their bench to prepare for the future. The mere prospect of change coming in 26-27 will cause a miraculous improvement in RAE.

Any RAE change is temporary UNLESS some top leagues keep BY to guarantee a more diversified grouping. Otherwise in a few years, it'll be fewer summer birth months on teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

What about USYS (NL, Elite64, etc)?

They could choose to do things however they want. People are thinking that everyone has to be BY or SY. It's not true. ECNL could allow biobanding tomorrow and teams would be SY within a BY construct.

There's even ways to arrange BY so it virtually eliminates trapped players. (July1 to July1 instead of Jan1 to Jan1)

Exactly!

This entire push is ECNL just trying to get back at US Soccer for switching to BY back in 2017 and US Soccer denying ECNL is their way to tell ECNL to sit down.

If either ECNL or US Soccer cared about trapped players both or either could solve the "issue" tomorrow.

This is about power and control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

What about USYS (NL, Elite64, etc)?

They could choose to do things however they want. People are thinking that everyone has to be BY or SY. It's not true. ECNL could allow biobanding tomorrow and teams would be SY within a BY construct.

There's even ways to arrange BY so it virtually eliminates trapped players. (July1 to July1 instead of Jan1 to Jan1)

Simple rule change for ECNL to allow kids born after Aug1 to play down would fix the trapped player BS on the spot and then make a full date change when alloud in 26.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

What about USYS (NL, Elite64, etc)?

They could choose to do things however they want. People are thinking that everyone has to be BY or SY. It's not true. ECNL could allow biobanding tomorrow and teams would be SY within a BY construct.

There's even ways to arrange BY so it virtually eliminates trapped players. (July1 to July1 instead of Jan1 to Jan1)

Simple rule change for ECNL to allow kids born after Aug1 to play down would fix the trapped player BS on the spot and then make a full date change when alloud in 26.....

... so ... go SY but call it "BY with unlimited exceptions"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

What about USYS (NL, Elite64, etc)?

They could choose to do things however they want. People are thinking that everyone has to be BY or SY. It's not true. ECNL could allow biobanding tomorrow and teams would be SY within a BY construct.

There's even ways to arrange BY so it virtually eliminates trapped players. (July1 to July1 instead of Jan1 to Jan1)

Exactly!

This entire push is ECNL just trying to get back at US Soccer for switching to BY back in 2017 and US Soccer denying ECNL is their way to tell ECNL to sit down.

If either ECNL or US Soccer cared about trapped players both or either could solve the "issue" tomorrow.

This is about power and control.

Easy to blame ECNL but if the survey results are correct, the bulk of youth soccer wanted to stop using calendar year. And US Soccer is more or less following what the masses want, change but slowly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

What about USYS (NL, Elite64, etc)?

They could choose to do things however they want. People are thinking that everyone has to be BY or SY. It's not true. ECNL could allow biobanding tomorrow and teams would be SY within a BY construct.

There's even ways to arrange BY so it virtually eliminates trapped players. (July1 to July1 instead of Jan1 to Jan1)

Simple rule change for ECNL to allow kids born after Aug1 to play down would fix the trapped player BS on the spot and then make a full date change when alloud in 26.....

... so ... go SY but call it "BY with unlimited exceptions"?

BY with 18 biobanding options allowing 8/1 to Dec 31st players.

Boom SY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

All GA has to do is allow biobanding then stay BY. (Just like MLSN)

One step closer to NWSL Next.

What about USYS (NL, Elite64, etc)?

They could choose to do things however they want. People are thinking that everyone has to be BY or SY. It's not true. ECNL could allow biobanding tomorrow and teams would be SY within a BY construct.

There's even ways to arrange BY so it virtually eliminates trapped players. (July1 to July1 instead of Jan1 to Jan1)

Exactly!

This entire push is ECNL just trying to get back at US Soccer for switching to BY back in 2017 and US Soccer denying ECNL is their way to tell ECNL to sit down.

If either ECNL or US Soccer cared about trapped players both or either could solve the "issue" tomorrow.

This is about power and control.

Easy to blame ECNL but if the survey results are correct, the bulk of youth soccer wanted to stop using calendar year. And US Soccer is more or less following what the masses want, change but slowly.

Different age groups have different needs.

It's not a one size fits all situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How loud is the silence on ECNL?? Thats what makes the 'leak' legit in my mind and I hope it means someone is about to go rogue.

ECNL goes rogue with a fall 25 change!?

That would be bold.

That would be too bold. If there was no change ever, maybe. But pushing it to 26 has to be just enough to make ECNL grumble, go along with it, and just make some transitory change for 25.

I'd be with you on the logic here but zero mention in the announcement? They thanked everyone and their grandma for their input and alignment but ECNL, the #1 talent destination for female players doesn't even get a nod. No way that's by accident. They question is, why? I look forward to 70 pages of speculation but my guess is they made their position clear...and its threatening.

What are you talking about, they thanked them first. You guys are clueless. US Club = ECNL.

If the google doc is real, I think it gives US Club enough wiggle room to start immediately, even if that means some sort of waiver system for the rest of 25'.

Whoever starts earlier will be able to get more Q3/4 players, currently there’s a lack of a full age group in the older teams. Those clubs that start early will be able to have plenty of players when time comes and all the other leagues do it formally.

Agree the early adopter will get more of the market share in this one. Most Q3-Q-4 won’t want to sit around on a team they will be ineligible for the next year..that just doesn’t make any sense . They would be the odd man out with it hanging over their head all year. Why would you be a mercenary for a year knowing you are booted the following..if ECNL goes early or figures out a work around they will allow for more settling earlier…

Yep, if the change is indeed coming in 26, every club will have incentive to unofficially change earlier to grab Q3/Q4 kids before their value increases. Combine that with the parent outrage on display about the delay causing awkward temporary rosters for even more club incentive to jump the gun. At minimum, expect A teams to put some more late birthdays on their bench to prepare for the future. The mere prospect of change coming in 26-27 will cause a miraculous improvement in RAE.

A club can decide to be ahead, or stay behind and find not enough talent when the change formally rolls out in ‘26.