ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

until leagues break away from US Soccer, youth soccer will continue to be poorly managed.

[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.

100%!


I would bet that of the 15,000 responses US soccer received, a good portion of them came from a very small minority of parents sending multiple messages

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

100%!


I would bet that of the 15,000 responses US soccer received, a good portion of them came from a very small minority of parents sending multiple messages

The parent form and no information to click on it was just leaving comments so I doubt they read and counted all of them or any of them.

[Anonymous]

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.

“Playing up is not a choice automatically available to a player especially at older ages. The few that do play up on competitive ECNL teams are invited to do so by coaches if they’re strong enough. It is not an option available to all players, and in fact only to a select few.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think they put more faith in clubs having strong trapped leagues that would help those in that situation feel served. Instead those experiences have varied to the extent that many see them as a negative (not all do).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

MLSN already allows 3 biobanding to play down a year under the BY mandate. I am not surprised if ECNL allows 3 Q4 players to play in their grade in 25/26. It will surely smooth the 26/27 hard transition.

[Anonymous]

I’ve posted this before but after this last podcast it’s worth mentioning again.

My friend (yes I have one) is an ECNL director is Southern California. After the information came out last week he emailed his typical point of contact at ECNL and US Club.

Just wanting confirmation there was no plan for any changes for Fall 25. As California has tryouts very soon. ECNL contact said US club soccer was going to come out with additional information soon but didn’t say NO we are not changing anything for Fall 25 and us club soccer still has not emailed him back.

He thinks they have something in the works for addressing these issues without going against the mandate. But he’s just guessing and is also frustrated they are not just telling him yes or no.

So even ECNL directors are in the dark on this as well. They don’t know anymore than they are told.

[Anonymous]

Why doesn’t ECNL just come out and say it then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

MLSN already allows 3 biobanding to play down a year under the BY mandate. I am not surprised if ECNL allows 3 Q4 players to play in their grade in 25/26. It will surely smooth the 26/27 hard transition.

Why will the transition be hard in 26/27 if it’s planned for and well thought out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

MLSN already allows 3 biobanding to play down a year under the BY mandate. I am not surprised if ECNL allows 3 Q4 players to play in their grade in 25/26. It will surely smooth the 26/27 hard transition.

Why will the transition be hard in 26/27 if it’s planned for and well thought out?

I think they are saying the it would be easier to phase in, rather than go full tilt in fall of 26'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why doesn’t ECNL just come out and say it then?

They’re waiting for direct confirmation from a friend’s aunt married to the cousin of a neighbor who will be having dinner tomorrow with the key person in the know. Then it will be communicated, but only if discussed on a podcast first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

MLSN already allows 3 biobanding to play down a year under the BY mandate. I am not surprised if ECNL allows 3 Q4 players to play in their grade in 25/26. It will surely smooth the 26/27 hard transition.

Why will the transition be hard in 26/27 if it’s planned for and well thought out?

I think they are saying the it would be easier to phase in, rather than go full tilt in fall of 26'.

Who is ‘they’?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

MLSN already allows 3 biobanding to play down a year under the BY mandate. I am not surprised if ECNL allows 3 Q4 players to play in their grade in 25/26. It will surely smooth the 26/27 hard transition.

Why will the transition be hard in 26/27 if it’s planned for and well thought out?

By introducing trapped player one year earlier will reduce team change and keep chemistry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why doesn’t ECNL just come out and say it then?

US Club Soccer is ECNL sanction boday. The final words have to come from US Club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

MLSN already allows 3 biobanding to play down a year under the BY mandate. I am not surprised if ECNL allows 3 Q4 players to play in their grade in 25/26. It will surely smooth the 26/27 hard transition.

The person that the questioned was asked of.

Why will the transition be hard in 26/27 if it’s planned for and well thought out?

I think they are saying the it would be easier to phase in, rather than go full tilt in fall of 26'.

Who is ‘they’?