ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Also, puberty generally doesn't end until 17 years old which is essentially after youth soccer (U19 team) and the RAE effects are cumulative.

If a kid is a late bloomer at 15 and is getting good coaching and training and playing in competitive games, RAE is not an issue.

It's an issue if he's on the C team with bad coaching and poor quality games.

[Anonymous]

I think one of the most interesting things about USSF deciding that everyone can go their own way, is that it could be really good for resolving relative age effects. If, for example, MLS Next/GA stays BY and then by extension all those clubs just play teams BY all the way down to their U-littles, then those clubs will give the advantage to their Q1/Q2 kids. While ECNL clubs will give their advantage to their Q3/Q4 kids. That gives families choice, and scouts more opportunities to see different kids. Any kid in a big city will get to chose the right club for them and we could actually follow how big of am impact RAE is.

[Anonymous]

A friend of mine who is an ECNL director said he emailed ECNL directly to get clarification on if this meant NO change for Fall 25. As the information he received did not rule it out only that is soccer recommends 26/27 and is not removing the mandate until then.

He said US Club would be sending out additional information. Did not say anything specific. He received that email yesterday morning and later on the day CST posted we would know today.

My guess is we will get information from Us club by end of the week what their plan is.

US Club may advise all their teams to start early and play “up” to not go against the mandate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the most interesting things about USSF deciding that everyone can go their own way, is that it could be really good for resolving relative age effects. If, for example, MLS Next/GA stays BY and then by extension all those clubs just play teams BY all the way down to their U-littles, then those clubs will give the advantage to their Q1/Q2 kids. While ECNL clubs will give their advantage to their Q3/Q4 kids. That gives families choice, and scouts more opportunities to see different kids. Any kid in a big city will get to chose the right club for them and we could actually follow how big of am impact RAE is.

In an area with as many clubs as we have that is an interesting idea. But all of those teams have to play in a league. Would there be different leagues created think NCSL or other?

[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:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Yes, when your Q1 player plays against quality Q3 players the year above, you will find out if your kid was really talented or just older. Sounds like you are worried about that.

Shaking in my Crocs

Depending on the Age window Q1's are still relatively safe. it's the Q2 and early Q3 that will get the short end of the RAE stick.

People, you must also remember, in true soccer cultures, RAE is about talented late bloomers with obvious skills and potential.

It's not just about being born in X months.
If your kid is November and 12 years old and can't juggle to 20 or control a pass, RAE is not their issue!

RAE has a sizeable part in determining winners and losers well before puberty. And look at the "years born" of the USMNT Olympics team. They lean very much to the older side and everyone is beyond puberty. Finally, science doesn't know international borders.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Yes, when your Q1 player plays against quality Q3 players the year above, you will find out if your kid was really talented or just older. Sounds like you are worried about that.

Shaking in my Crocs

Depending on the Age window Q1's are still relatively safe. it's the Q2 and early Q3 that will get the short end of the RAE stick.

People, you must also remember, in true soccer cultures, RAE is about talented late bloomers with obvious skills and potential.

It's not just about being born in X months.
If your kid is November and 12 years old and can't juggle to 20 or control a pass, RAE is not their issue!

RAE has a sizeable part in determining winners and losers well before puberty. And look at the "years born" of the USMNT Olympics team. They lean very much to the older side and everyone is beyond puberty. Finally, science doesn't know international borders.

I guess you didn't read the explanation for the skewed q1 and q2 rosters

Or you just like to repeat the obvious

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Yes, when your Q1 player plays against quality Q3 players the year above, you will find out if your kid was really talented or just older. Sounds like you are worried about that.

Shaking in my Crocs

Depending on the Age window Q1's are still relatively safe. it's the Q2 and early Q3 that will get the short end of the RAE stick.

People, you must also remember, in true soccer cultures, RAE is about talented late bloomers with obvious skills and potential.

It's not just about being born in X months.
If your kid is November and 12 years old and can't juggle to 20 or control a pass, RAE is not their issue!

RAE has a sizeable part in determining winners and losers well before puberty. And look at the "years born" of the USMNT Olympics team. They lean very much to the older side and everyone is beyond puberty. Finally, science doesn't know international borders.

Winners and Losers of what?

RAE is about coaches and clubs choosing not to select talented and skilled late developers to their teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Also, puberty generally doesn't end until 17 years old which is essentially after youth soccer (U19 team) and the RAE effects are cumulative.

If a kid is a late bloomer at 15 and is getting good coaching and training and playing in competitive games, RAE is not an issue.

It's an issue if he's on the C team with bad coaching and poor quality games.

RAE is well beyond just some Euro biobanding thing says 389 pages and going and going and going.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A friend of mine who is an ECNL director said he emailed ECNL directly to get clarification on if this meant NO change for Fall 25. As the information he received did not rule it out only that is soccer recommends 26/27 and is not removing the mandate until then.

He said US Club would be sending out additional information. Did not say anything specific. He received that email yesterday morning and later on the day CST posted we would know today.

My guess is we will get information from Us club by end of the week what their plan is.

US Club may advise all their teams to start early and play “up” to not go against the mandate.

US Club Soccer should skip the lame duck year and make its own competitions all "school year." Why not. If the individual clubs want to compete in USYS events, they can always reorganize their roster to BY for next year. Will that disrupt the BY "team" next year? Yes. But who cares. The BY teams will be disbanded after next year anyway.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Yes, when your Q1 player plays against quality Q3 players the year above, you will find out if your kid was really talented or just older. Sounds like you are worried about that.

Shaking in my Crocs

Depending on the Age window Q1's are still relatively safe. it's the Q2 and early Q3 that will get the short end of the RAE stick.

People, you must also remember, in true soccer cultures, RAE is about talented late bloomers with obvious skills and potential.

It's not just about being born in X months.
If your kid is November and 12 years old and can't juggle to 20 or control a pass, RAE is not their issue!

RAE has a sizeable part in determining winners and losers well before puberty. And look at the "years born" of the USMNT Olympics team. They lean very much to the older side and everyone is beyond puberty. Finally, science doesn't know international borders.

Winners and Losers of what?

RAE is about coaches and clubs choosing not to select talented and skilled late developers to their teams.

I don't know how to be more clear than saying Google it, "The relative age effect (RAE) is a bias where people born earlier in a selection period are more likely to participate in certain activities than would be expected. This can be seen in sports, academia, and other areas:
Sports
Athletes born earlier in the year are more likely to be selected for age-restricted sports. This is because they are often more physically and emotionally mature than their peers."

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Yes, when your Q1 player plays against quality Q3 players the year above, you will find out if your kid was really talented or just older. Sounds like you are worried about that.

Shaking in my Crocs

Depending on the Age window Q1's are still relatively safe. it's the Q2 and early Q3 that will get the short end of the RAE stick.

People, you must also remember, in true soccer cultures, RAE is about talented late bloomers with obvious skills and potential.

It's not just about being born in X months.
If your kid is November and 12 years old and can't juggle to 20 or control a pass, RAE is not their issue!

RAE has a sizeable part in determining winners and losers well before puberty. And look at the "years born" of the USMNT Olympics team. They lean very much to the older side and everyone is beyond puberty. Finally, science doesn't know international borders.

Winners and Losers of what?

RAE is about coaches and clubs choosing not to select talented and skilled late developers to their teams.

I don't know how to be more clear than saying Google it, "The relative age effect (RAE) is a bias where people born earlier in a selection period are more likely to participate in certain activities than would be expected. This can be seen in sports, academia, and other areas:
Sports
Athletes born earlier in the year are more likely to be selected for age-restricted sports. This is because they are often more physically and emotionally mature than their peers."

You're repeating what you heard.
Thats different than knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A friend of mine who is an ECNL director said he emailed ECNL directly to get clarification on if this meant NO change for Fall 25. As the information he received did not rule it out only that is soccer recommends 26/27 and is not removing the mandate until then.

He said US Club would be sending out additional information. Did not say anything specific. He received that email yesterday morning and later on the day CST posted we would know today.

My guess is we will get information from Us club by end of the week what their plan is.

US Club may advise all their teams to start early and play “up” to not go against the mandate.

Interesting….

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Yes, when your Q1 player plays against quality Q3 players the year above, you will find out if your kid was really talented or just older. Sounds like you are worried about that.

Shaking in my Crocs

Depending on the Age window Q1's are still relatively safe. it's the Q2 and early Q3 that will get the short end of the RAE stick.

People, you must also remember, in true soccer cultures, RAE is about talented late bloomers with obvious skills and potential.

It's not just about being born in X months.
If your kid is November and 12 years old and can't juggle to 20 or control a pass, RAE is not their issue!

RAE has a sizeable part in determining winners and losers well before puberty. And look at the "years born" of the USMNT Olympics team. They lean very much to the older side and everyone is beyond puberty. Finally, science doesn't know international borders.

Winners and Losers of what?

RAE is about coaches and clubs choosing not to select talented and skilled late developers to their teams.

I don't know how to be more clear than saying Google it, "The relative age effect (RAE) is a bias where people born earlier in a selection period are more likely to participate in certain activities than would be expected. This can be seen in sports, academia, and other areas:
Sports
Athletes born earlier in the year are more likely to be selected for age-restricted sports. This is because they are often more physically and emotionally mature than their peers."

You're repeating what you heard.
Thats different than knowledge.

What? The definition of a definition is the definition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if everyone put this much energy and effort into playing an active role in developing their kid versus looking for an advantage and easy route

Unfortunately, it's the typical reaction to a system where ultra competitive clubs and leagues look for every advantage, large or small, so it's no surprise that parents would do the same and it's very soccer parent to do that to the nth degree. What is interesting is figuring out what the advantage is. What parents need to understand is that what's in the best interest of the club may not align with the best interest of their kid and a lot of what's said here is more from the perspective of ultra competitive club.

Misplaced anger here from parents losing an advantage for their kids. Parents gaining an advantage for their kids don't create the rules.

Pure jealousy couched as unfair outrage.

What advantage?

If you are new to the discussion here it would be tough to get you up to speed if you are starting on page 386.

I see perceived and imagined advantages and disadvantages

Nothing that's real or substantial

Not to be rude but I see real science and ignore fake gut feelings from self proclaimed experts.

What does the real science tell you about RAE after puberty?

Also, how is RAE eliminated when all is being done is shuffling Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, not eliminating late bloomers?

Your kid playing down against weaker physical opponents is an illusion of high level performance. Sooner or later that bill comes due.

Yes, when your Q1 player plays against quality Q3 players the year above, you will find out if your kid was really talented or just older. Sounds like you are worried about that.

Not the previous poster — but isn’t this happening already in competitive ECNL teams as part of their regular training and development? For years these players have been training with and playing against the ECNL teams a year or 2 older than them.

[Anonymous]

Every ECNL team plays up. Create a new age group for U19 for 25/26.

This will follow the US Soccer mandate and still provide a good transition. It also solves most trap players' issues.