ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To step up as a responsible organization for youth soccer development, ECNL should change to grade year and allow certain number of bio-banding. You will develop more future soccer stars for sure by doing this.

Because ECNL is supposed to take on US Soccer’s mandate?

Dude, ECNL is a platform for getting the middle 68.3% of top competitive soccer players into college by using athletics as their “spike.” Don’t overthink the mission.

Your ECNL club sucks at soccer overall, so does the other one down the street, and the one across the country. These are kids, playing a sport at an high amateur level and 98%+ of them are on an amateur pathway.

Everyone is paying for the platform so college coaches can swipe left or right on your kid at a handful of showcases annually.

Yes, ECNL has some stars, especially in the women’s side. And you can probably name every single one of them…making them what? The 0.05% of the pool each from a given year?

ECNL, GA, even MLS Next are not in the “star making” business. You and your kid may be! Read about Messi. Newell wasn’t in the “star making” either, Messi and has dad were though! Even Barca wasn’t fully onboard until Real Madrid got into the discussion with the Messi’s (just to screw with Barca).

Read about Son, he and his dad were in the “star making” business.

Read about whoever it is. Clubs don’t care about you, your kid, your kid’s future. An individual coach might, sure. Nobody is going to do the heavy lifting to “develop more future stars”, that is an investment that doesn’t pencil for anyone EXCEPT the athlete themselves.

Most of the top players on the YNTs play ECNL. Almost all of the USYNT player pools are ECNL.

On the women’s side, yes.

I guess you missed the middle part of the post:

“Yes, ECNL has some stars, especially in the women’s side. And you can probably name every single one of them…making them what? The 0.05% of the pool each from a given year?”

How many of those YNT players go on to the NT? 😂 How many of those YNT players are stars?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

I literally have 0 say it what’s going on. A buddy of mine who is an ECNL director was able to get some information everything is in the hands of US soccer at this point. More talks will start up again next week or so regarding the switch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

I literally have 0 say it what’s going on. A buddy of mine who is an ECNL director was able to get some information everything is in the hands of US soccer at this point. More talks will start up again next week or so regarding the switch.

🐺🐺🐺🐺🐺

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

You don't understand biobanding

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

What does fair environment even mean in this context?

Isn't real life about overcoming adversities and the cream rising to the top?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

What does fair environment even mean in this context?

Isn't real life about overcoming adversities and the cream rising to the top?

By the overcoming adversities logic, we shouldn't have any age categories or gender categories or have coaches or fields or soccer balls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

You don't understand biobanding

I think they do, meaning some excuse to let a few players play down a year. Kind of like MLS' late developer loophole.

[Anonymous]

Yikes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

You don't understand biobanding

I think they do, meaning some excuse to let a few players play down a year. Kind of like MLS' late developer loophole.

I know January kids who get to play down with bio banding. It has more to do with size then birth month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

What does fair environment even mean in this context?

Isn't real life about overcoming adversities and the cream rising to the top?

By the overcoming adversities logic, we shouldn't have any age categories or gender categories or have coaches or fields or soccer balls.

Hyperbole much?

More dramatic than a 1920's silver screen actress

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

You don't understand biobanding

I think they do, meaning some excuse to let a few players play down a year. Kind of like MLS' late developer loophole.

Then you don't understand it either.

Clubs wishing to abuse it doesn't change what biobanding is for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

What does fair environment even mean in this context?

Isn't real life about overcoming adversities and the cream rising to the top?

By the overcoming adversities logic, we shouldn't have any age categories or gender categories or have coaches or fields or soccer balls.

Hyperbole much?

More dramatic than a 1920's silver screen actress

Hyperbole doesn't change the fact that opportunities are more valuable than barriers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of this thread was is ECNL changing age groups. And the answer is not right now. We can all argue why things should or should not change. But ECNL won’t change anything and the purpose of the podcast was just entertainment and insight not a call to action.

That’s how the thread started, sure. Off a rando tweet.

But it’s become so so much more. Come for the tea, stay for the drama.

The change is a very strong possibility. Not a done deal yet. Momentum is moving in that direction and more conversations will start taking place in the next week or so with a decision being finalized by November.

Strong possibility according to whom? Point to one reliable publicly verifiable source saying it’s “a strong possibility”

If I could post a screen shot of the email I would. Definitely not a done deal also. More conversations to finalize decisions will be taking place soon. As of now it’s leaning more towards a change for Fall 2025 than not.

Can we allow bio banding at minimum? I think grade year + bio banding will make most people happy and a fair, but competitive environment which is good for soccer development.

What does fair environment even mean in this context?

Isn't real life about overcoming adversities and the cream rising to the top?

By the overcoming adversities logic, we shouldn't have any age categories or gender categories or have coaches or fields or soccer balls.

Hyperbole much?

More dramatic than a 1920's silver screen actress

Hyperbole doesn't change the fact that opportunities are more valuable than barriers.

When you get the opportunity because snowplow dad removed all obstacles to enter, kid still has to perform