ECNL moving to school year part 2

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

The reason USSF didn’t mandate SY for all was because MLS people were very much against it and hold a lot of power so USSF said fine everyone do what you want within reason.

I don’t understand why people think MLSN has to do anything. In my mind they should go SY because it’s easier but is that enough of a reason for mls/MLSN leadership who are ran by narcissists who didn’t want SY to also cave? Maybe…

USSF is closer with US Club, than many want to believe.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

The reason USSF didn’t mandate SY for all was because MLS people were very much against it and hold a lot of power so USSF said fine everyone do what you want within reason.

I don’t understand why people think MLSN has to do anything. In my mind they should go SY because it’s easier but is that enough of a reason for mls/MLSN leadership who are ran by narcissists who didn’t want SY to also cave? Maybe…

USSF is closer with US Club, than many want to believe.

Not true, at all.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

This is a two edged sword. The problem with this theory is the advantage of age goes down the older one gets. RAE is most pronounced at the younger ages where if you fracture the systems there are fewer local teams to play. What you suggest would mean even more not needed travel at younger ages because we will half the local available teams to play against.

Seems like a lot of reasons for MLS Next to switch to SY then, huh?

Nope, but keep tryjng.

Personally would prefer MLS Next stay BY and US Club and USYS go SY. It's fine.

If this was to occur what would happen is both MLSN + GA and ECNL (boys and girls) would just ignore each other and not participate in each other's tournaments. This would also create an incentive for MLSN + GA to create their own littles leagues.

For Boys MLSN saying BY guarantees ECNLs 2nd tier status.

For girls nothing really changes. However if MLSN starts forcing clubs to be MLSN + GA and not allowing MLSN + ECNL (girls). Its just a matter of time before clubs start switching over.

This is why the "ECNL hat" is freaking out and posting every 30 seconds.

I agree and I think this is why both are dragging their feet on announcing. If BY is the decision they'll need to go all in quickly. Might not happen until after clubs changing league announcements next spring so people cant change clubs based on BY or SY.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

I agree on the suspicious part.

The SY guy has made up correspondence with GA leadership and SOCAL leadership. Posted it on other soccer forums. Then referenced it here to try and make it seem official.

The BY guy is saying wait for an official statement from the league before assuming MLSN + GA will change from BY to SY.

Which one do you think is getting paid by the post to astroturf DCUM?

Both?

Paid to say "wait until an official statement"?

Doesnt make sesne.

I’m one of those people saying wait for an official statement, and calling out “thatonedad”s fakery, and I’m a SY lady!

I don’t know why it’s so hard to be normal on this thread.

You call him out on a forum that has nothing to do with his posts? Stop being a coward and if you think they are making it up call them out.

Also what they posted isn’t really anything lie about? ECNL saying no changes for this year isn’t anything to make up? That’s just common knowledge at this point.

Nice try…. 🙄

Looks like you’re the same person posting on both. You know which post everyone is calling a fake, because as someone pointed out on both forums, the email exchange used two different fonts and font sizes.

Just stop.

lol Cant wait for when you find out it’s all real… GA going SY it’s over it done and it’s been decided.

Also im not that guy just to show you you’re arguing with ghosts on here.

It is the same MLSN guy over and over. Sometimes he is having stroke and his posts are filled with grammar issues and other times he just attacks everyone.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

I agree on the suspicious part.

The SY guy has made up correspondence with GA leadership and SOCAL leadership. Posted it on other soccer forums. Then referenced it here to try and make it seem official.

The BY guy is saying wait for an official statement from the league before assuming MLSN + GA will change from BY to SY.

Which one do you think is getting paid by the post to astroturf DCUM?

Both?

Paid to say "wait until an official statement"?

Doesnt make sesne.

I’m one of those people saying wait for an official statement, and calling out “thatonedad”s fakery, and I’m a SY lady!

I don’t know why it’s so hard to be normal on this thread.

You call him out on a forum that has nothing to do with his posts? Stop being a coward and if you think they are making it up call them out.

Also what they posted isn’t really anything lie about? ECNL saying no changes for this year isn’t anything to make up? That’s just common knowledge at this point.

Nice try…. 🙄

Looks like you’re the same person posting on both. You know which post everyone is calling a fake, because as someone pointed out on both forums, the email exchange used two different fonts and font sizes.

Just stop.

lol Cant wait for when you find out it’s all real… GA going SY it’s over it done and it’s been decided.

Also im not that guy just to show you you’re arguing with ghosts on here.

It is the same MLSN guy over and over. Sometimes he is having stroke and his posts are filled with grammar issues and other times he just attacks everyone.

Most of the time I see them responding to your posts. So.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

Everyone knows that the Q4 birthdays have had a tough time making it on top teams since 2016. It was well-documented on the locked thread. That being a fact, I can honestly argue that having a SY system is better for Q4s.

But of course if all leagues switch to SY, the late spring birthdays may not have the opportunity to play on top teams for the same reason. More "top teams" where more kids get opportunities is better for all those kids.

Your argument about "diluting" and "siloed" is frankly just baloney. It's not that serious.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

It would be better if MLSN + GA stayed BY and "ate ECNLs lunch". This way they not only address ECNL they also take half of US Clubs customers.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

Everyone knows that the Q4 birthdays have had a tough time making it on top teams since 2016. It was well-documented on the locked thread. That being a fact, I can honestly argue that having a SY system is better for Q4s.

But of course if all leagues switch to SY, the late spring birthdays may not have the opportunity to play on top teams for the same reason. More "top teams" where more kids get opportunities is better for all those kids.

Your argument about "diluting" and "siloed" is frankly just baloney. It's not that serious.

Well yeah. I think most people would agree that switching to SY would benefit Q4s. I agree with that.

"Your argument about "diluting" and "siloed" is frankly just baloney. It's not that serious." Well I guess we'll agree to disagree. I think further dividing youth soccer and making it more confusing would not help the sport. If you think it would help the sport, please elaborate on why. Maybe having two exlusive systems where Q1s are favored and another where Q4s are favored would be beneficial? Maybe we should just throw in a third cutoff date (where is SY +30 guy?) into the mix and have 3 systems. Or, better yet, we can have 12! That way everyone's kid gets a system that favors their birthday! I like where this is going...

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

It would be better if MLSN + GA stayed BY and "ate ECNLs lunch". This way they not only address ECNL they also take half of US Clubs customers.

I think either way, whether they stay BY or go to SY, MLSN/GA eventually will win out and relegate ECNL to a much lower level or just to running local(ish) leagues. I think it would be better, less chaotic and less confusing if they switched to SY and then did that.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

Everyone knows that the Q4 birthdays have had a tough time making it on top teams since 2016. It was well-documented on the locked thread. That being a fact, I can honestly argue that having a SY system is better for Q4s.

But of course if all leagues switch to SY, the late spring birthdays may not have the opportunity to play on top teams for the same reason. More "top teams" where more kids get opportunities is better for all those kids.

Your argument about "diluting" and "siloed" is frankly just baloney. It's not that serious.

Maybe having two exlusive systems where Q1s are favored and another where Q4s are favored would be beneficial? Maybe we should just throw in a third cutoff date (where is SY +30 guy?) into the mix and have 3 systems. Or, better yet, we can have 12! That way everyone's kid gets a system that favors their birthday! I like where this is going...

If the market supports it - and kids want to play soccer - why not have 3 or 4 cutoff systems? Saying youth soccer will fall apart if we "dilute" it is just a scare tactic / overdramatization. The kids will be fine.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

Everyone knows that the Q4 birthdays have had a tough time making it on top teams since 2016. It was well-documented on the locked thread. That being a fact, I can honestly argue that having a SY system is better for Q4s.

But of course if all leagues switch to SY, the late spring birthdays may not have the opportunity to play on top teams for the same reason. More "top teams" where more kids get opportunities is better for all those kids.

Your argument about "diluting" and "siloed" is frankly just baloney. It's not that serious.

Maybe having two exlusive systems where Q1s are favored and another where Q4s are favored would be beneficial? Maybe we should just throw in a third cutoff date (where is SY +30 guy?) into the mix and have 3 systems. Or, better yet, we can have 12! That way everyone's kid gets a system that favors their birthday! I like where this is going...

If the market supports it - and kids want to play soccer - why not have 3 or 4 cutoff systems? Saying youth soccer will fall apart if we "dilute" it is just a scare tactic / overdramatization. The kids will be fine.

Scared of what exactly? It's already dumb that when you are in a lower NCSL division you have to sometimes drive an hour and a half each way for one game. Thinking you are leveling the playing field you will just drive more people away from the sport all together. This is just wishcasting madness.

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

Everyone knows that the Q4 birthdays have had a tough time making it on top teams since 2016. It was well-documented on the locked thread. That being a fact, I can honestly argue that having a SY system is better for Q4s.

But of course if all leagues switch to SY, the late spring birthdays may not have the opportunity to play on top teams for the same reason. More "top teams" where more kids get opportunities is better for all those kids.

Your argument about "diluting" and "siloed" is frankly just baloney. It's not that serious.

Maybe having two exlusive systems where Q1s are favored and another where Q4s are favored would be beneficial? Maybe we should just throw in a third cutoff date (where is SY +30 guy?) into the mix and have 3 systems. Or, better yet, we can have 12! That way everyone's kid gets a system that favors their birthday! I like where this is going...

If the market supports it - and kids want to play soccer - why not have 3 or 4 cutoff systems? Saying youth soccer will fall apart if we "dilute" it is just a scare tactic / overdramatization. The kids will be fine.

Yes, we need more creativity with better solutions for youth sports, especially with development. RAE exists and if some leagues stay BY it would benefit those players and perhaps the ecosystem as a whole. That said, many systems can cause problems/confusion. That's a valid concern. Maybe a better solution would be to have 2 teams within SY divided up by 6 months each, especially until you to older age groups?

[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:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

Everyone knows that the Q4 birthdays have had a tough time making it on top teams since 2016. It was well-documented on the locked thread. That being a fact, I can honestly argue that having a SY system is better for Q4s.

But of course if all leagues switch to SY, the late spring birthdays may not have the opportunity to play on top teams for the same reason. More "top teams" where more kids get opportunities is better for all those kids.

Your argument about "diluting" and "siloed" is frankly just baloney. It's not that serious.

Maybe having two exlusive systems where Q1s are favored and another where Q4s are favored would be beneficial? Maybe we should just throw in a third cutoff date (where is SY +30 guy?) into the mix and have 3 systems. Or, better yet, we can have 12! That way everyone's kid gets a system that favors their birthday! I like where this is going...

If the market supports it - and kids want to play soccer - why not have 3 or 4 cutoff systems? Saying youth soccer will fall apart if we "dilute" it is just a scare tactic / overdramatization. The kids will be fine.

Scared of what exactly? It's already dumb that when you are in a lower NCSL division you have to sometimes drive an hour and a half each way for one game. Thinking you are leveling the playing field you will just drive more people away from the sport all together. This is just wishcasting madness.

You tell me why people are scared of having multiple youth registration systems in the US. As far as we know, it's going to happen in 26/27. If MLS Next decides to go to SY in 26/27 and we only have one system, that's fine too.

"drive more people away" / "diluting" / "silo" / "bad for the sport" - those are scare tactics. The sport will go on, one way or the 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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think many people forget MLSNext is not just MLS Academies.

On the contrary, with tier 2 expansion the MLSN P2P clubs outnumber the academies.

So MLSN can’t ditch P2P clubs’ interests (huge amount of money is coming from P2P clubs to MLSN).

For a MLSN P2P it’s impossible to keep 2 age systems. Organization would be crazy.

U12 and younger, plus the rest of older teams (non MLSN) will be playing SY … so I see unavoidable that MLSN P2P push for moving to SY.

P2P MLSN clubs vastly outnumbered Academies before MLSN2 arrived. It is just, literally, another soccer league in a soup of them. Some of these people on here acting like these kids are all going pro and need to be grouped by BY because ('sans England') other countries group by BY (they do that because BY is also their school year cohorts) is wild. I know certain generations are susceptible to marketing but dang. Nothing would change if MLSN went SY or stayed BY. It would not change an iota. My god...

Why dont you just mind your own business and let people do what they want. Oh ya you know that if MLSN stays BY they will just ignore ECNL even more than they already do. Which will be really bad for boys ECNL.

I' m glad you think I have some sort of 'say' on what happens. Do you think the board of MLSN is here reading our posts and going, "hmmm. Anon#20232 had a really good point there, let's change to SY!"?

Personally, I don't care if they change or not. My kid plays MLSN1 and I love the competition and strength of the league.

What month is your son? Maybe are you afraid that your boy won’t be a starter, or even not make his MLSN1 team, if MLSN1 moves to SY?

Just asking …

I’ve been saying SY is the correct call for MLSN man. I don’t think a fractured system where two silos (BY/SY) have different age cutoffs benefits anyone but the leagues themselves.

Boy, both sides of this debate are hella suspicious.

Can't say I agree with this. If you're the oldest in a particular age group system, you will benefit as a player. So in the SY system, the August - December bdays benefit (a lot) by being the oldest and getting more opportunities. And same for the spring birthdays in the BY system. Having two systems gives more opportunities for more players!

Please explain how further fracturing (an already fractured and confusing youth system) even further "gives more opportunities for more players!"? What is going to happen is we would end up with entire clubs, cities and ecosystems split into BY and SY. How does that benefit anyone except for those at the top?

"gives more opportunities for more players!". Yes. It gives more opportunities for players/famlies to get fleeced. Sounds great.

Happy to explain. The fall bday players will have more opportunities for top teams to get out on the field and play soccer in the SY leagues. Same for spring birthdays in the BY leagues.

You wouldn't necessarily have to travel more. You could just play the same teams more times. So your economic argument doesn't hold water. This is about kids playing soccer - and there will be more of them doing that with two systems. Don't be salty.

If they are split up you have lowered the bar for being on a top team. That hurts everyone.

It's not "if." They will be split up in 26/27 if MLS Next and GA stay BY. US Club and USYS are changing to school year for sure. So are you suggesting MLS Next and GA MUST change to SY for the sake of youth soccer? If so, just say that.

I would suggest that yes. Your solution just makes things more confusing, more diluted, and ultimately does not progress youth soccer for anyone. Creating two completely siloed systems (which ECNL is clearly trying to do, and now MLSN with MLSN2 seems to be also doing) isn't good for the sport. You can't honestly argue that it will be. They should probably have never changed it in 2016, and they should not have then decided to change it again. But it is what it is.

Is that fair for these other two groups to now change if they don't want really to? No, it is not fair. it sucks but it would be better for the sport to change. That's all. I don't give a shit about ECNL or any other league in particular. I hope MSNL/GA changes to SY and then eats ECNL for lunch. One less league would be fantastic.

Everyone knows that the Q4 birthdays have had a tough time making it on top teams since 2016. It was well-documented on the locked thread. That being a fact, I can honestly argue that having a SY system is better for Q4s.

But of course if all leagues switch to SY, the late spring birthdays may not have the opportunity to play on top teams for the same reason. More "top teams" where more kids get opportunities is better for all those kids.

Your argument about "diluting" and "siloed" is frankly just baloney. It's not that serious.

Maybe having two exlusive systems where Q1s are favored and another where Q4s are favored would be beneficial? Maybe we should just throw in a third cutoff date (where is SY +30 guy?) into the mix and have 3 systems. Or, better yet, we can have 12! That way everyone's kid gets a system that favors their birthday! I like where this is going...

If the market supports it - and kids want to play soccer - why not have 3 or 4 cutoff systems? Saying youth soccer will fall apart if we "dilute" it is just a scare tactic / overdramatization. The kids will be fine.

Sure, having multiple age group cutoffs, all siloed into their own universe, wouldn't kill youth soccer. Soccer would go on and be 'fine' for a while.

Would the resulting players be better? Would the product and associated costs be better for families (both in time and money)? I think it would cause more confusion and chaos, driving more players and families (slowly) from the sport. But maybe not. Maybe the more leagues and age cutoffs we add into the system the better it will get!