ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of an August player who is misaligned on grade, my biggest takeaway from this thread is to look into HGH

On a serious note, the question is what benefits an August misaligned player more:

- playing on age and being one of the oldest and top players on A team
- playing on grade with kids up to 12 months older and being mid-low A team or mid-top B team

I can definitely see how RAE plays a role here.

Don't forget being ignored by recruiters when your kid gets older if they play down.

Also dont buy into the rae nonsense that just because your kid was born a certain month that their entire future is predetermined. Even right now in BY there's all kinds of 3rd and 4th quarter birthdays that are playing up a grade and start.

Are there idiots on here who don't realize RAE ONLY APPLIES TO LATE (skilled) AND EARLY DEVELOPERS

RAE is about the proven obvious Bias in the Selection process of picking the big kids over the smaller kids.
It's not about skills.

I dont even know what to say rae is dumb but selective rae is dumber.

Moron, it's selective because a Q3 or Q4 can be an early developer

Every Q3 or Q4 isn't tiny. Neither is every Q2 or Q1 a giant

Understand now or should I type slower?

Better yet, why don't you show us a scientific academic study that disproves and contradicts all the RAE studies?

like this one?

https://medium.com/@giacorada/the-fascinating-birth-trend-among-professional-soccer-players-b2a48d015e7d

He wasn't very transparent in whether the players played in the US as kids, and over half of MLS is foreign players. He said US professional soccer players, he didn't say US born professional soccer players.

"Interestingly, the distribution of the number of US professional soccer players by birth month does not show a decreasing linear trend like the other countries we investigated."

The US distribution seems to be a combo of various European and South and Central American players.

No study of RAE focuses on Professional rosters only
Because RAE is about the selection of early developers over late developers, in KIDS

I know one that did.

https://medium.com/@giacorada/the-fascinating-birth-trend-among-professional-soccer-players-b2a48d015e7d

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of an August player who is misaligned on grade, my biggest takeaway from this thread is to look into HGH

On a serious note, the question is what benefits an August misaligned player more:

- playing on age and being one of the oldest and top players on A team
- playing on grade with kids up to 12 months older and being mid-low A team or mid-top B team

I can definitely see how RAE plays a role here.

Don't forget being ignored by recruiters when your kid gets older if they play down.

Also dont buy into the rae nonsense that just because your kid was born a certain month that their entire future is predetermined. Even right now in BY there's all kinds of 3rd and 4th quarter birthdays that are playing up a grade and start.

Are there idiots on here who don't realize RAE ONLY APPLIES TO LATE (skilled) AND EARLY DEVELOPERS

RAE is about the proven obvious Bias in the Selection process of picking the big kids over the smaller kids.
It's not about skills.

I dont even know what to say rae is dumb but selective rae is dumber.

Moron, it's selective because a Q3 or Q4 can be an early developer

Every Q3 or Q4 isn't tiny. Neither is every Q2 or Q1 a giant

Understand now or should I type slower?

Better yet, why don't you show us a scientific academic study that disproves and contradicts all the RAE studies?

like this one?

https://medium.com/@giacorada/the-fascinating-birth-trend-among-professional-soccer-players-b2a48d015e7d

Nothing here with this outlier non-academic 'study' disproves the proven existence of RAE

Any semi intelligent person would know Q1 kids in England (SY) are different cutoffs from Q1 in BY countries, so yes, Jan - Mar in England aren't the biggest youth soccer kids. Duh

Don't care what England does.

I live in America and thats the only data that matters

$100,000 wager

If every parent on dcum with a DS playing MLS Next or ECNL boys looked at their kid's team roster birth months right now, Q1 and Q2 would be the majority and end this anti-rae crap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a parent of an August player who is misaligned on grade, my biggest takeaway from this thread is to look into HGH

On a serious note, the question is what benefits an August misaligned player more:

- playing on age and being one of the oldest and top players on A team
- playing on grade with kids up to 12 months older and being mid-low A team or mid-top B team

I can definitely see how RAE plays a role here.

Don't forget being ignored by recruiters when your kid gets older if they play down.

Also dont buy into the rae nonsense that just because your kid was born a certain month that their entire future is predetermined. Even right now in BY there's all kinds of 3rd and 4th quarter birthdays that are playing up a grade and start.

Are there idiots on here who don't realize RAE ONLY APPLIES TO LATE (skilled) AND EARLY DEVELOPERS

RAE is about the proven obvious Bias in the Selection process of picking the big kids over the smaller kids.
It's not about skills.

I dont even know what to say rae is dumb but selective rae is dumber.

Moron, it's selective because a Q3 or Q4 can be an early developer

Every Q3 or Q4 isn't tiny. Neither is every Q2 or Q1 a giant

Understand now or should I type slower?

Better yet, why don't you show us a scientific academic study that disproves and contradicts all the RAE studies?

like this one?

https://medium.com/@giacorada/the-fascinating-birth-trend-among-professional-soccer-players-b2a48d015e7d

He wasn't very transparent in whether the players played in the US as kids, and over half of MLS is foreign players. He said US professional soccer players, he didn't say US born professional soccer players.

"Interestingly, the distribution of the number of US professional soccer players by birth month does not show a decreasing linear trend like the other countries we investigated."

The US distribution seems to be a combo of various European and South and Central American players.

No study of RAE focuses on Professional rosters only
Because RAE is about the selection of early developers over late developers, in KIDS

I know one that did.

https://medium.com/@giacorada/the-fascinating-birth-trend-among-professional-soccer-players-b2a48d015e7d

That's why this fake so-called study is nonsense

[Anonymous]

You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

Where is it?
RAE is about Yourh Selection

https://www.fifatrainingcentre.com/en/environment/fifa-research/high-performance/talent-pathways/fifa-u-17-world-cup-player-analysis.php

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

Where is it?
RAE is about Yourh Selection

https://www.fifatrainingcentre.com/en/environment/fifa-research/high-performance/talent-pathways/fifa-u-17-world-cup-player-analysis.php

Whatever you want rae to be guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

Where is it?
RAE is about Yourh Selection

https://www.fifatrainingcentre.com/en/environment/fifa-research/high-performance/talent-pathways/fifa-u-17-world-cup-player-analysis.php

Whatever you want rae to be guess.

Whatever you want rae to be I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

That's a great chart in showing that a change in the 12 month age range can mitigate RAE but it might be the result of just layering SY and BY RAE on top of each other in the cumulative data. He should do a Fischer's transformation based on birth year on the two populations to test this. Considering he thought SY in 2023 was birthdate cutoff for these players who were up to what 40 years old, he didn't even think of it. It's why you do research on the subject you know with data you know.

[Anonymous]

It's useless arguing with him. He's trolling you all. This study has been hashed out already several times with pretty much the exact different point already. Only thing left is discuss how the author speculated the American chart COULD BE because Pay2Play (which August guy likes because he thinks money and training would then be the great American equalizer) BUT the author said he wasn't 100% and hoped more research could be done. THe author also only notes the American system was BY (so it's possible he didn't realize the whle SY to BY switch) -- a huge potential flaw not explored in the paper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

Where is it?
RAE is about Yourh Selection

https://www.fifatrainingcentre.com/en/environment/fifa-research/high-performance/talent-pathways/fifa-u-17-world-cup-player-analysis.php

Whatever you want rae to be guess.

Whatever you want rae to be I guess.

Whatever you want rae to be you guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

That's a great chart in showing that a change in the 12 month age range can mitigate RAE but it might be the result of just layering SY and BY RAE on top of each other in the cumulative data. He should do a Fischer's transformation based on birth year on the two populations to test this. Considering he thought SY in 2023 was birthdate cutoff for these players who were up to what 40 years old, he didn't even think of it. It's why you do research on the subject you know with data you know.

Ahhh, but the author said nothing about that. Sounds more like your reinterpretation of the data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

That's a great chart in showing that a change in the 12 month age range can mitigate RAE but it might be the result of just layering SY and BY RAE on top of each other in the cumulative data. He should do a Fischer's transformation based on birth year on the two populations to test this. Considering he thought SY in 2023 was birthdate cutoff for these players who were up to what 40 years old, he didn't even think of it. It's why you do research on the subject you know with data you know.

Have him find a chart of the USYNT rosters.
Because this is what US Soccer says

**The Relative Age Effect (RAE) in US Youth National Team (USYNT) rosters means players born earlier in the cutoff period (e.g., Jan-Mar) get selected due to being physically more mature (bigger/stronger), creating a developmental advantage over later-born players (Aug-Oct) who are often more skilled but overlooked. U.S. Soccer has tried different cutoffs (August 1st to January 1st and back) to lessen RAE and align with school years, but RAE persists, though studies show it's less pronounced in elite YNTs, with later-born, late-maturing players sometimes appearing more in those rosters.

How RAE Affects USYNTs
Selection Bias: Early-born players often seem more talented at younger ages because they are physically bigger and faster, leading coaches to favor them.
Disadvantage for Late Developers: Skilled players born later in the year (e.g., Oct-Dec) get overlooked because they aren't as physically developed as their older peers, potentially losing out on crucial early identification**

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

Where is it?
RAE is about Yourh Selection

https://www.fifatrainingcentre.com/en/environment/fifa-research/high-performance/talent-pathways/fifa-u-17-world-cup-player-analysis.php

Whatever you want rae to be guess.

Whatever you want rae to be I guess.

Whatever you want rae to be you guess.

This reminds me of anti-vaxxers 🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's useless arguing with him. He's trolling you all. This study has been hashed out already several times with pretty much the exact different point already. Only thing left is discuss how the author speculated the American chart COULD BE because Pay2Play (which August guy likes because he thinks money and training would then be the great American equalizer) BUT the author said he wasn't 100% and hoped more research could be done. THe author also only notes the American system was BY (so it's possible he didn't realize the whle SY to BY switch) -- a huge potential flaw not explored in the paper.

Dear DCUM parents,
Please look at your kids rosters and report back that August has the most representation lol haha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You ask for a study and one is provided with American defined data.

Just accept reality.

That's a great chart in showing that a change in the 12 month age range can mitigate RAE but it might be the result of just layering SY and BY RAE on top of each other in the cumulative data. He should do a Fischer's transformation based on birth year on the two populations to test this. Considering he thought SY in 2023 was birthdate cutoff for these players who were up to what 40 years old, he didn't even think of it. It's why you do research on the subject you know with data you know.

Have him find a chart of the USYNT rosters.
Because this is what US Soccer says

**The Relative Age Effect (RAE) in US Youth National Team (USYNT) rosters means players born earlier in the cutoff period (e.g., Jan-Mar) get selected due to being physically more mature (bigger/stronger), creating a developmental advantage over later-born players (Aug-Oct) who are often more skilled but overlooked. U.S. Soccer has tried different cutoffs (August 1st to January 1st and back) to lessen RAE and align with school years, but RAE persists, though studies show it's less pronounced in elite YNTs, with later-born, late-maturing players sometimes appearing more in those rosters.

How RAE Affects USYNTs
Selection Bias: Early-born players often seem more talented at younger ages because they are physically bigger and faster, leading coaches to favor them.
Disadvantage for Late Developers: Skilled players born later in the year (e.g., Oct-Dec) get overlooked because they aren't as physically developed as their older peers, potentially losing out on crucial early identification**

That's all well and true but Aug guy only likes the study that benefits his anti-rae argument.