ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

This is all just silly. Next week will be like this week. Well it could look like this or maybe we will go in this direction. Real answers are deep into 2025.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone catch how he was mocking people my guess is MLSN people… We are getting the script early for directors of MLSN clubs recruiting your kids to stay grad year.

“the reason I say that is because you still have so many of these people who say, well, if you're, if you're aspiring to be a top level pro or a national team player, you have to play birth year. It's just complete garbage. Um, it has actually nothing to do with that. That's just an attempt to weaponize age groups.”

I did, my take is that MLSN didn't want to give up their advantage with their bio-banding program.

bio-banding is not used properly in most MLSN clubs, and players generally do not like bio-banding in their team. They are not game changers, and only play down to steal game time.

I do not doubt that it is improperly used but let's not act like the premier league doesn't have top players that benefited from bio-banding.

MLSN is Not Premier League Academy. They are pay to play clubs and majority players there will not even be able to play college. To allow biobanding, so a mediocre player can play down and legally beat down 18 months younger player is not what sports should teach kids.

Sounds like MLSN isn't a place where I would want my kid to play. They might become the big losers in all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone catch how he was mocking people my guess is MLSN people… We are getting the script early for directors of MLSN clubs recruiting your kids to stay grad year.

“the reason I say that is because you still have so many of these people who say, well, if you're, if you're aspiring to be a top level pro or a national team player, you have to play birth year. It's just complete garbage. Um, it has actually nothing to do with that. That's just an attempt to weaponize age groups.”

I did, my take is that MLSN didn't want to give up their advantage with their bio-banding program.

bio-banding is not used properly in most MLSN clubs, and players generally do not like bio-banding in their team. They are not game changers, and only play down to steal game time.

I do not doubt that it is improperly used but let's not act like the premier league doesn't have top players that benefited from bio-banding.

MLSN is Not Premier League Academy. They are pay to play clubs and majority players there will not even be able to play college. To allow biobanding, so a mediocre player can play down and legally beat down 18 months younger player is not what sports should teach kids.

Biobanding is supposed to be for promising players that have not gone through puberty yet.

The expectation is after puberty a biobanded player might grow 12" and gain 50lbs + be a monster.

Other teams benefit from playing against a player that's the same size but higher level of skills. If your goal is development you want this. If the goal is wins you don't want this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is all just silly. Next week will be like this week. Well it could look like this or maybe we will go in this direction. Real answers are deep into 2025.

Didn't US Soccer say that we would know more by the end of the year and have a directive by March of 25'?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone catch how he was mocking people my guess is MLSN people… We are getting the script early for directors of MLSN clubs recruiting your kids to stay grad year.

“the reason I say that is because you still have so many of these people who say, well, if you're, if you're aspiring to be a top level pro or a national team player, you have to play birth year. It's just complete garbage. Um, it has actually nothing to do with that. That's just an attempt to weaponize age groups.”

I did, my take is that MLSN didn't want to give up their advantage with their bio-banding program.

bio-banding is not used properly in most MLSN clubs, and players generally do not like bio-banding in their team. They are not game changers, and only play down to steal game time.

I do not doubt that it is improperly used but let's not act like the premier league doesn't have top players that benefited from bio-banding.

MLSN is Not Premier League Academy. They are pay to play clubs and majority players there will not even be able to play college. To allow biobanding, so a mediocre player can play down and legally beat down 18 months younger player is not what sports should teach kids.

Biobanding is supposed to be for promising players that have not gone through puberty yet.

The expectation is after puberty a biobanded player might grow 12" and gain 50lbs + be a monster.

Other teams benefit from playing against a player that's the same size but higher level of skills. If your goal is development you want this. If the goal is wins you don't want this.

It sounds like they use if for kids that are more mature for their age as well, so they play a kid up that isn't benefitting from playing younger opponents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8/31, 9/1, 9/30. Or later. Just saying if it is 8/1 chosen because of those 8 states. There is at least a month of mismatched created that would not be if 9/1 was selected.

That month of mismatched kids could opt to play up to be aligned with their grade (or not). They would have options. But with a 9/1 cutoff the August kids don’t have an option. They remain trapped with the grade above their own grade, and even worse than in birth year because their 9/1 to 12/31 classmates are no longer trapped with them.

This this this!! It’s not a misalignment for August kids with 8/1 start dates. They are trapped. August kids with 9/1 start dates are misaligned. That’s nbd

You all act like every soccer parent is as invested as you are. Most people sign their kids up, they won't know that little sally is actually playing with kids a grade lower than her. They are just going to be like look how good my kid is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone catch how he was mocking people my guess is MLSN people… We are getting the script early for directors of MLSN clubs recruiting your kids to stay grad year.

“the reason I say that is because you still have so many of these people who say, well, if you're, if you're aspiring to be a top level pro or a national team player, you have to play birth year. It's just complete garbage. Um, it has actually nothing to do with that. That's just an attempt to weaponize age groups.”

I did, my take is that MLSN didn't want to give up their advantage with their bio-banding program.

bio-banding is not used properly in most MLSN clubs, and players generally do not like bio-banding in their team. They are not game changers, and only play down to steal game time.

I do not doubt that it is improperly used but let's not act like the premier league doesn't have top players that benefited from bio-banding.

MLSN is Not Premier League Academy. They are pay to play clubs and majority players there will not even be able to play college. To allow biobanding, so a mediocre player can play down and legally beat down 18 months younger player is not what sports should teach kids.

Biobanding is supposed to be for promising players that have not gone through puberty yet.

The expectation is after puberty a biobanded player might grow 12" and gain 50lbs + be a monster.

Other teams benefit from playing against a player that's the same size but higher level of skills. If your goal is development you want this. If the goal is wins you don't want this.

It sounds like they use if for kids that are more mature for their age as well, so they play a kid up that isn't benefitting from playing younger opponents.

This is true for all clubs a leagues. You can play any kid up without an issue, but you need a waiver (a bioband waiver) to play an older kid down with younger kids for the specific purpose of developing that physically smaller player.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone catch how he was mocking people my guess is MLSN people… We are getting the script early for directors of MLSN clubs recruiting your kids to stay grad year.

“the reason I say that is because you still have so many of these people who say, well, if you're, if you're aspiring to be a top level pro or a national team player, you have to play birth year. It's just complete garbage. Um, it has actually nothing to do with that. That's just an attempt to weaponize age groups.”

I did, my take is that MLSN didn't want to give up their advantage with their bio-banding program.

bio-banding is not used properly in most MLSN clubs, and players generally do not like bio-banding in their team. They are not game changers, and only play down to steal game time.

I do not doubt that it is improperly used but let's not act like the premier league doesn't have top players that benefited from bio-banding.

MLSN is Not Premier League Academy. They are pay to play clubs and majority players there will not even be able to play college. To allow biobanding, so a mediocre player can play down and legally beat down 18 months younger player is not what sports should teach kids.[/qu


Biobanding is supposed to be for promising players that have not gone through puberty yet.

The expectation is after puberty a biobanded player might grow 12" and gain 50lbs + be a monster.

Other teams benefit from playing against a player that's the same size but higher level of skills. If your goal is development you want this. If the goal is wins you don't want this.

It sounds like they use if for kids that are more mature for their age as well, so they play a kid up that isn't benefitting from playing younger opponents.

This is true for all clubs a leagues. You can play any kid up without an issue, but you need a waiver (a bioband waiver) to play an older kid down with younger kids for the specific purpose of developing that physically smaller player.

I just don't see it very often here. Most clubs/coaches will take that advantage of having a larger player with no concern for development.

[Anonymous]

Throughout this thread, and I have been here from the start, I have had the sense that people have no idea how decisions are made and yes implemented in large organizations. It is stunning to me as I assume a level of experience for the people in DCUM. Nothing is done quickly or without an exceptional level of planning. That takes time. And even then it does not work the way you think it will. But for all the people saying this is easy and not rocket science, you are wrong. It is very complicated. One decision impacts dozens of other related and unrelated issues.

Take the whole ECNL can do whatever it wants. Sure/maybe. But why would they. They will need US Soccer for something down the line. It is just not the way organizations act They have to act cooperatively or nothing would ever get done.

The amount of planning for this change is massive. They are not going to do something and just see how it works and adjust later for things they did not think of. They will march through this and consider all possible outcomes and things that might mess up other things later. They will get broad input from others to make sure they have not missed anything. This is a project that if it started today would just be completed in time for 26/27 with no time to spare.

And there is the cost. Before this is done, this will cost ecnl a couple of million dollars. They need to budget that and know where it is coming from. Costs will include legal, communications, consultants who do research, training and materials.

This is not a speedboat it is a super tanker. It turns slowly and can't take the chance that it starts leaking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8/31, 9/1, 9/30. Or later. Just saying if it is 8/1 chosen because of those 8 states. There is at least a month of mismatched created that would not be if 9/1 was selected.

That month of mismatched kids could opt to play up to be aligned with their grade (or not). They would have options. But with a 9/1 cutoff the August kids don’t have an option. They remain trapped with the grade above their own grade, and even worse than in birth year because their 9/1 to 12/31 classmates are no longer trapped with them.

This this this!! It’s not a misalignment for August kids with 8/1 start dates. They are trapped. August kids with 9/1 start dates are misaligned. That’s nbd

You all act like every soccer parent is as invested as you are. Most people sign their kids up, they won't know that little sally is actually playing with kids a grade lower than her. They are just going to be like look how good my kid is.

Do you think a single month makes that much of a developmental difference? And it sounds like Little Sally’s parents won’t care if she’s misaligned when it’s time for recruiters. See it works perfectly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
August kids with 9/1 start dates are misaligned. That’s nbd

How are they misaligned?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all just silly. Next week will be like this week. Well it could look like this or maybe we will go in this direction. Real answers are deep into 2025.

Didn't US Soccer say that we would know more by the end of the year and have a directive by March of 25'?

Did they say directive or say guidance? I think they will publish some parameters not mandates and then let everyone go from there -- so on that timetable ecnl would get it in March and it will take a fair amount of time to come up with what they want to do. Tryouts start in April (really earlier like January where kids start practicing with ecnl clubs) so that is not enough time to do anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone catch how he was mocking people my guess is MLSN people… We are getting the script early for directors of MLSN clubs recruiting your kids to stay grad year.

“the reason I say that is because you still have so many of these people who say, well, if you're, if you're aspiring to be a top level pro or a national team player, you have to play birth year. It's just complete garbage. Um, it has actually nothing to do with that. That's just an attempt to weaponize age groups.”

I did, my take is that MLSN didn't want to give up their advantage with their bio-banding program.

bio-banding is not used properly in most MLSN clubs, and players generally do not like bio-banding in their team. They are not game changers, and only play down to steal game time.

I do not doubt that it is improperly used but let's not act like the premier league doesn't have top players that benefited from bio-banding.

MLSN is Not Premier League Academy. They are pay to play clubs and majority players there will not even be able to play college. To allow biobanding, so a mediocre player can play down and legally beat down 18 months younger player is not what sports should teach kids.

Sounds like MLSN isn't a place where I would want my kid to play. They might become the big losers in all of this.

Most of the kids on the MLS Next team are not December birthdays.
So taking a late birthday, say November, is only 1-2 months older than some of the players. Of my kids roster (22 kids...2 have birthdays after May) So its really a 2-7 month difference. If your kid cant compete with a mediocre player 7 months older...maybe shouldn't be playing competitive soccer. Right now...you expect December birthdays to compete with January birthdays...which is almost 12 months difference. (and from what I have seen....its always the smaller or not athletic kids that are bio-banded...not the 6'0 200lbs monster).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Throughout this thread, and I have been here from the start, I have had the sense that people have no idea how decisions are made and yes implemented in large organizations. It is stunning to me as I assume a level of experience for the people in DCUM. Nothing is done quickly or without an exceptional level of planning. That takes time. And even then it does not work the way you think it will. But for all the people saying this is easy and not rocket science, you are wrong. It is very complicated. One decision impacts dozens of other related and unrelated issues.

Take the whole ECNL can do whatever it wants. Sure/maybe. But why would they. They will need US Soccer for something down the line. It is just not the way organizations act They have to act cooperatively or nothing would ever get done.

The amount of planning for this change is massive. They are not going to do something and just see how it works and adjust later for things they did not think of. They will march through this and consider all possible outcomes and things that might mess up other things later. They will get broad input from others to make sure they have not missed anything. This is a project that if it started today would just be completed in time for 26/27 with no time to spare.

And there is the cost. Before this is done, this will cost ecnl a couple of million dollars. They need to budget that and know where it is coming from. Costs will include legal, communications, consultants who do research, training and materials.

This is not a speedboat it is a super tanker. It turns slowly and can't take the chance that it starts leaking.

Well let's hope that is the case, it doesn't sound like they did the math when they changed in 2017.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all just silly. Next week will be like this week. Well it could look like this or maybe we will go in this direction. Real answers are deep into 2025.

Didn't US Soccer say that we would know more by the end of the year and have a directive by March of 25'?

Did they say directive or say guidance? I think they will publish some parameters not mandates and then let everyone go from there -- so on that timetable ecnl would get it in March and it will take a fair amount of time to come up with what they want to do. Tryouts start in April (really earlier like January where kids start practicing with ecnl clubs) so that is not enough time to do anything.

You definitely could be right, assuming US Club had no foresight if this would pass/fail. The debate has been argued ad nauseum for 7 yrs, surely someone, somewhere has thought about what it would look like if they changed registration and also how they would go about it, before presenting. I don't think US Club will go full SY in 25'/26' but I have to think they have a plan in place to start the process. ECNL was arguing if BY was even a mandate...that does not sound like they are on the same page.