ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just a quick note from a parent of a trapped player (Q4). She is best technical player on her team (top 100 nationally) and one of the most valuable in terms of wins and losses, but she is small. I want the status quo as the other two options are not as good. She can either A) stay on the current team but now there will be even bigger/older girls by an additional 5 months so she could be playing with girls 14/15 months. older or B) drop down and totally outclass her correct grade. Both options worse in my eyes.

Also, I dont think trapped, for recruiting purposes, is a big deal at all. Your club should be advocating for you, you should be advocating for you, you should be attending ID camps, etc. If you use trapped as a recruiting excuse it means you aren't trying hard enough. Period.

Your story is what some pro SY people don't understand and why they should slowly phase this in starting with the younger age groups. With what's been shared and a possible rollout now in fall 26, hopefully that will happen OR at least the inclusion of flexible rules where people can more easily stay with their current teams. With such a big change, they should try to minimize disruption which also then minimizes harm.

You can stay in the team if you pass the tryout. No club will be tough on a star player. Melanie played two years up in Surf.

Of course not. But there's already been talk in forums about supposed "rules" informal or otherwise of no playing up that'll affect the vast majority of players.

[Anonymous]

https://www.insideworldfootball.com/2024/11/29/ussf-backs-away-mandating-youth-soccer-registration-changes-leaving-leagues-decide/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.insideworldfootball.com/2024/11/29/ussf-backs-away-mandating-youth-soccer-registration-changes-leaving-leagues-decide/

The take of the author after reporting the news ...

"At first glance, this announcement feels like classic buck passing from the Federation. At second glance it re-enforces the USSF’s total disregard for taking leadership in the youth game. Instead of being a voice of reason for the millions of youth players, it has thrown a problem back to the capitalistic club owners that run the youth game.

Instead of having a uniform decision, organizations and leagues will now use different age criteria as a marketing tool, once again throwing the game into abject confusion.

The alphabet soup of leagues that many complain about, will only multiply, and the losers will be parents, players, and ultimately the developmental pathway for talented American players.

It appears that the USSF understands that considerably less than 1% of players will end up as professional, and yet they’re terrified that the other 99% will leave the game because they will never end up as professionals. By allowing states to pick their own poison, they have missed the opportunity to create a coherent structure, ceding their leadership to ‘mom and pop’ organizations to dictate American soccer – surely a recipe for continued disaster."

[Anonymous]

We're not the only country where only 1% or less becomes professionals.

[Anonymous]

I agree that the decision to allow each club to decide for themselves is a total cop-out and demonstrates a lack of leadership. It's every player/club for themselves, and it's crap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the decision to allow each club to decide for themselves is a total cop-out and demonstrates a lack of leadership. It's every player/club for themselves, and it's crap

I think we need to give a little more time on clarity of the "eco systems" and if they will establish specific guidelines depending on the level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the decision to allow each club to decide for themselves is a total cop-out and demonstrates a lack of leadership. It's every player/club for themselves, and it's crap

It’s not each club it’s each league. Clubs don’t set the rules leagues do. It’s true clubs decide on leagues and platforms and many play in multiple but they will organize their teams around the rules of the leagues they play in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.insideworldfootball.com/2024/11/29/ussf-backs-away-mandating-youth-soccer-registration-changes-leaving-leagues-decide/

The take of the author after reporting the news ...

"At first glance, this announcement feels like classic buck passing from the Federation. At second glance it re-enforces the USSF’s total disregard for taking leadership in the youth game. Instead of being a voice of reason for the millions of youth players, it has thrown a problem back to the capitalistic club owners that run the youth game.

Instead of having a uniform decision, organizations and leagues will now use different age criteria as a marketing tool, once again throwing the game into abject confusion.

The alphabet soup of leagues that many complain about, will only multiply, and the losers will be parents, players, and ultimately the developmental pathway for talented American players.

It appears that the USSF understands that considerably less than 1% of players will end up as professional, and yet they’re terrified that the other 99% will leave the game because they will never end up as professionals. By allowing states to pick their own poison, they have missed the opportunity to create a coherent structure, ceding their leadership to ‘mom and pop’ organizations to dictate American soccer – surely a recipe for continued disaster."

Spot on.

Why? Because those club owners are the ones that run the committee that cooked up this mess in the first place. Then they did an astroturf blitz and USSF board was caught sleeping, so they made a non-choice because of the “complexities” of the US soccer landscape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the decision to allow each club to decide for themselves is a total cop-out and demonstrates a lack of leadership. It's every player/club for themselves, and it's crap

I think we need to give a little more time on clarity of the "eco systems" and if they will establish specific guidelines depending on the level.

The eco system would suggest that the closer to get to the top of the pyramid, the closer it should align to BY, and the lower levels and grassroots should be SY.

That said, the clubs and leagues that are at the top are pushing for SY because they make all their money from the non-ECNL tier teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our director is talking about forming SY teams and having them play up since 25/26 is now a wash. So the 2012 age group is now Aug 1 2012 to July 31 2013. 2013 is now Aug 1 2013 to July 31 2014

Where do Q3 kids who started school early go under the new approach? For example, October 2013 birthday currently playing U12 and already in 6th grade? The above cutoffs would move them down a soccer year, but that would have them playing with kids a grade below them. Maybe an advantage playing against younger kids, but they’re already used to playing with older kids and moving down would mess up their recruiting cycle.

I don’t feel bad for kids who started school early or late. It’s a problem of your own making.

Again, many of the kids in these situations are in states that have a 9/1 or later deadline for school enrollment. For example, August birthday's in a state with a September 1 deadline started school exactly on time. They didn't start early.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our director is talking about forming SY teams and having them play up since 25/26 is now a wash. So the 2012 age group is now Aug 1 2012 to July 31 2013. 2013 is now Aug 1 2013 to July 31 2014

Where do Q3 kids who started school early go under the new approach? For example, October 2013 birthday currently playing U12 and already in 6th grade? The above cutoffs would move them down a soccer year, but that would have them playing with kids a grade below them. Maybe an advantage playing against younger kids, but they’re already used to playing with older kids and moving down would mess up their recruiting cycle.

I don’t feel bad for kids who started school early or late. It’s a problem of your own making.

Again, many of the kids in these situations are in states that have a 9/1 or later deadline for school enrollment. For example, August birthday's in a state with a September 1 deadline started school exactly on time. They didn't start early.

Right so 9/1 or a 9/30 date makes more sense than 8/1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our director is talking about forming SY teams and having them play up since 25/26 is now a wash. So the 2012 age group is now Aug 1 2012 to July 31 2013. 2013 is now Aug 1 2013 to July 31 2014

Where do Q3 kids who started school early go under the new approach? For example, October 2013 birthday currently playing U12 and already in 6th grade? The above cutoffs would move them down a soccer year, but that would have them playing with kids a grade below them. Maybe an advantage playing against younger kids, but they’re already used to playing with older kids and moving down would mess up their recruiting cycle.

I don’t feel bad for kids who started school early or late. It’s a problem of your own making.

Again, many of the kids in these situations are in states that have a 9/1 or later deadline for school enrollment. For example, August birthday's in a state with a September 1 deadline started school exactly on time. They didn't start early.

How will one of these kids handle the recruiting process when their teammates are one grade behind them? They have an athletic advantage because they are the oldest on their team, but will recruiters even see them when they’re playing with kids who are a full grade behind the grade the recruiters typically focus on? And will their success on the field be heavily discounted by recruiters because they’re playing against kids a grade below?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the decision to allow each club to decide for themselves is a total cop-out and demonstrates a lack of leadership. It's every player/club for themselves, and it's crap

It’s not each club it’s each league. Clubs don’t set the rules leagues do. It’s true clubs decide on leagues and platforms and many play in multiple but they will organize their teams around the rules of the leagues they play in.

Who do you think run the leagues?
These people are club leaders and oftentimes parents of players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our director is talking about forming SY teams and having them play up since 25/26 is now a wash. So the 2012 age group is now Aug 1 2012 to July 31 2013. 2013 is now Aug 1 2013 to July 31 2014

Where do Q3 kids who started school early go under the new approach? For example, October 2013 birthday currently playing U12 and already in 6th grade? The above cutoffs would move them down a soccer year, but that would have them playing with kids a grade below them. Maybe an advantage playing against younger kids, but they’re already used to playing with older kids and moving down would mess up their recruiting cycle.

I don’t feel bad for kids who started school early or late. It’s a problem of your own making.

Again, many of the kids in these situations are in states that have a 9/1 or later deadline for school enrollment. For example, August birthday's in a state with a September 1 deadline started school exactly on time. They didn't start early.

How will one of these kids handle the recruiting process when their teammates are one grade behind them? They have an athletic advantage because they are the oldest on their team, but will recruiters even see them when they’re playing with kids who are a full grade behind the grade the recruiters typically focus on? And will their success on the field be heavily discounted by recruiters because they’re playing against kids a grade below?

Just use some simple math and logic here. This keeps coming up now that BY parents are panicking. These kids ARE NOT trapped, they are just in a strange situation with options and there will be a very small number of them. In the case where school cutoff is 9/1. Your DD birthday is in August and ECNL decides 8/1 is the cutoff. She'll be in 10th grade and all her club teammates are in 9th grade. Only 1% of all players go to college, but lets say that is her aspiration and she thinks she is good enough. The answer is simple, she needs to be in the top 1%, not of her club team but of her graduating year. So play up and find out. There is no disadvatage here AT ALL. She is in 10th grade. She is getting recruited with 10th graders. Club soccer didn't determine her grade. So play with 10th graders. Im not sure why this is so complicated.

My DD is currently trapped. And yes, trapped. No options. She is forced to play above her grade. When she is in 10th grade her teamates will be 11th graders. No option to play with 10th graders and to develop and be recruited with her class. Its really strange, its screws with her development over the years and there are TONS of kids locked into this dumb situation. You can't make it perfect for everyone in a large country that has school dates starting randomly and where we're tied to the NCAA system as the most likely path post HS. Everyone is looking to USYS to fix it all. How? Just do what is best for the majority of kids and move on. This isn't that hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just a quick note from a parent of a trapped player (Q4). She is best technical player on her team (top 100 nationally) and one of the most valuable in terms of wins and losses, but she is small. I want the status quo as the other two options are not as good. She can either A) stay on the current team but now there will be even bigger/older girls by an additional 5 months so she could be playing with girls 14/15 months. older or B) drop down and totally outclass her correct grade. Both options worse in my eyes.

Also, I dont think trapped, for recruiting purposes, is a big deal at all. Your club should be advocating for you, you should be advocating for you, you should be attending ID camps, etc. If you use trapped as a recruiting excuse it means you aren't trying hard enough. Period.

Your story is what some pro SY people don't understand and why they should slowly phase this in starting with the younger age groups. With what's been shared and a possible rollout now in fall 26, hopefully that will happen OR at least the inclusion of flexible rules where people can more easily stay with their current teams. With such a big change, they should try to minimize disruption which also then minimizes harm.

You can stay in the team if you pass the tryout. No club will be tough on a star player. Melanie played two years up in Surf.

Of course not. But there's already been talk in forums about supposed "rules" informal or otherwise of no playing up that'll affect the vast majority of players.

Absolutely not true.

Any player can play up if their patents want them to.

The catch is that if your kid chooses to play up they need to be better than players that are that age.

My kid is a late Sept trapped birthday birthday on her team but there's also an early Jan (a year down) player that's playing up essentially 2 grades. She's the daughter of a pro sports parent and has freaky natural talent. Both my kid and the pro sport parent kid start so everything works out.

Before the pearl clutchers start. I'm not worried about recruitment at all. This is a top 50 nationally team + recruiters are already sniffing around. At both my kid and the pro sports kid.