ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TRAPPED PLAYERS....

My poor sweet small December child 😭😭😭😭 won't you all think of the Christmas babies!!!!

[Anonymous]

HAHA.... People B so crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TRAPPED PLAYERS....

My poor sweet small December child 😭😭😭😭 won't you all think of the Christmas babies!!!!

You might not care about trapped players but youth soccer does and is solving the bulk of trapped players. Sorry if it is at your expense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What ECNL should do is not have A/B teams, but teams that are Q1/Q2-focused and Q3/Q4-focused. The better players in year 12-year window should play with the other grouping. So, the best Q3/Q4 play on the Q1/Q2-focused and the best Q1-Q2, play on the Q3/Q4 focused. Increase participation and help minimize RAE.

Not all clubs have multiple teams or even Regional level teams. There are clubs that have only 1 (ECNL) national team per age.

Right, because the player pool isn't big enough. Maybe it would be if we could minimize RAE better. These solutions could be perhaps achieved by having different leagues focused this way. The challenge, though, is instead of focusing on these type of solutions, we hear too much of the crap (the my kid will crush your kid stuff) about how clubs will be looking for a temporary edge as the teams get jumbled.

For the billionth time switching from BY to SY does NOTHING for addressing RAE.

The RAE affect is the same under both BY and SY. All you're doing is shifting which birthdays are most affected.

Stop using RAE as a reason for SY it makes you look stupid and people think that you're trying to be sneaky. Which you are.

Read more of the previous quotes ... This is about not switching only to SY but encouraging youth soccer to have leagues, teams clubs with both.

I think there's a good chance of this happening either way.

MLSN, GA, and DPL might stay BY.

Why would GA want to stay BY?? The #1 reason ECNL wants to switch is because it it what college coaches are asking for (they want to see players at showcases more by graduation year). I get it for MLSN as they are targeting players on a pre-professional track on the boys side. On the girls side, there is no pre-professional track and staying BY will just put them further behind ECNL on getting players see by college coaches.

[Anonymous]

Parent of a Q4 here. I just don't want my kid to be trapped next year and miss out on a season while her birth year teammates have a fall season. Also don't want her recruiting years to be messed up.

RAE will always be there, yes a SY change helps my kid in that regard. But she is in a top team anyway, if they can create a solution for trapped kids that is meaningful and keep birth year that works too. My daughter is more than happy to stick with the girls she knows .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My daughter’s club team made the semi finals at nationals last year 80% of the team is going to play high school. Our coach doesn’t discourage it. He’s not overall fond of it but many of the girls play on great high school teams with solid competition.

So even at the elite level girls like playing sports with friends from school.

What team.?

Someone else made that a similar claim about the SC Surf boys that was false earlier in the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What ECNL should do is not have A/B teams, but teams that are Q1/Q2-focused and Q3/Q4-focused. The better players in year 12-year window should play with the other grouping. So, the best Q3/Q4 play on the Q1/Q2-focused and the best Q1-Q2, play on the Q3/Q4 focused. Increase participation and help minimize RAE.

Not all clubs have multiple teams or even Regional level teams. There are clubs that have only 1 (ECNL) national team per age.

Right, because the player pool isn't big enough. Maybe it would be if we could minimize RAE better. These solutions could be perhaps achieved by having different leagues focused this way. The challenge, though, is instead of focusing on these type of solutions, we hear too much of the crap (the my kid will crush your kid stuff) about how clubs will be looking for a temporary edge as the teams get jumbled.

For the billionth time switching from BY to SY does NOTHING for addressing RAE.

The RAE affect is the same under both BY and SY. All you're doing is shifting which birthdays are most affected.

Stop using RAE as a reason for SY it makes you look stupid and people think that you're trying to be sneaky. Which you are.

Read more of the previous quotes ... This is about not switching only to SY but encouraging youth soccer to have leagues, teams clubs with both.

I think there's a good chance of this happening either way.

MLSN, GA, and DPL might stay BY.

Why would GA want to stay BY?? The #1 reason ECNL wants to switch is because it it what college coaches are asking for (they want to see players at showcases more by graduation year). I get it for MLSN as they are targeting players on a pre-professional track on the boys side. On the girls side, there is no pre-professional track and staying BY will just put them further behind ECNL on getting players see by college coaches.

College coaches don't care if all players on the field are a certain grad year. All they want is to know is when the player they like will graduate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What ECNL should do is not have A/B teams, but teams that are Q1/Q2-focused and Q3/Q4-focused. The better players in year 12-year window should play with the other grouping. So, the best Q3/Q4 play on the Q1/Q2-focused and the best Q1-Q2, play on the Q3/Q4 focused. Increase participation and help minimize RAE.

Not all clubs have multiple teams or even Regional level teams. There are clubs that have only 1 (ECNL) national team per age.

Right, because the player pool isn't big enough. Maybe it would be if we could minimize RAE better. These solutions could be perhaps achieved by having different leagues focused this way. The challenge, though, is instead of focusing on these type of solutions, we hear too much of the crap (the my kid will crush your kid stuff) about how clubs will be looking for a temporary edge as the teams get jumbled.

For the billionth time switching from BY to SY does NOTHING for addressing RAE.

The RAE affect is the same under both BY and SY. All you're doing is shifting which birthdays are most affected.

Stop using RAE as a reason for SY it makes you look stupid and people think that you're trying to be sneaky. Which you are.

People with Q3/4 want the RAE advantage for their kids that’s why they want SY.

So, to summarize:

Q3/4 people want SY for the RAE advantage.

Q1/2 people want BY for the RAE advantage.

Most leagues want SY to eliminate trapper player problems and club participation.

The only leagues that have expressed that they want SY is ECNL and USYS.

If GA and MLS stay BY + create their own feeder BY rec league, leagues like SOCAL might lose half their players.

That’s a two way street as once parents understand the benefit of being older they would flock to whatever league best represents their kid also the majority of MLSN GA, ECNL clubs have teams that play in play in US Club and USYS. The majority of teams play in US club and UYSY.

But I’d be willing to bet we are not far away from ECNL and MLSN having their own leagues down to the U9 level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What ECNL should do is not have A/B teams, but teams that are Q1/Q2-focused and Q3/Q4-focused. The better players in year 12-year window should play with the other grouping. So, the best Q3/Q4 play on the Q1/Q2-focused and the best Q1-Q2, play on the Q3/Q4 focused. Increase participation and help minimize RAE.

Not all clubs have multiple teams or even Regional level teams. There are clubs that have only 1 (ECNL) national team per age.

Right, because the player pool isn't big enough. Maybe it would be if we could minimize RAE better. These solutions could be perhaps achieved by having different leagues focused this way. The challenge, though, is instead of focusing on these type of solutions, we hear too much of the crap (the my kid will crush your kid stuff) about how clubs will be looking for a temporary edge as the teams get jumbled.

For the billionth time switching from BY to SY does NOTHING for addressing RAE.

The RAE affect is the same under both BY and SY. All you're doing is shifting which birthdays are most affected.

Stop using RAE as a reason for SY it makes you look stupid and people think that you're trying to be sneaky. Which you are.

People with Q3/4 want the RAE advantage for their kids that’s why they want SY.

So, to summarize:

Q3/4 people want SY for the RAE advantage.

Q1/2 people want BY for the RAE advantage.

Most leagues want SY to eliminate trapper player problems and club participation.

The only leagues that have expressed that they want SY is ECNL and USYS.

If GA and MLS stay BY + create their own feeder BY rec league, leagues like SOCAL might lose half their players.

Or MLS and GA rot on the vine. Nobody knows what will happen. Will be an interesting few years of hunger games until the dust settles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter’s club team made the semi finals at nationals last year 80% of the team is going to play high school. Our coach doesn’t discourage it. He’s not overall fond of it but many of the girls play on great high school teams with solid competition.

So even at the elite level girls like playing sports with friends from school.

What team.?

Someone else made that a similar claim about the SC Surf boys that was false earlier in the thread.

We are a NorCal 2008 team I’ll let you do the research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm done with this topic.

Too many wuss B team parents that don't understand how high level sports work.

If you cant hang with the rest of the players on the team because of whatever excuse dejour it won't matter because your kid is going to quit playing soon anyway.

Unfortunate there's a very vocal group of numbnuts that don't matter crying on this thread

Fun to listen to parents call B team parents and kids wusses and bad players and when all we are saying is let my kid compete with yours for a spot. Why you so scared? I can only imagine how scared you are of the A team Q3/4 kids that can also compete with your kids.

The real Q1/2 studs and their parents also want a switch to school year and have the confidence their player can handle competing with older kids.

It’s the Q1/2 parents who can barely make and play that are nervous.

🤦‍♂️ this is a dumb take. The studs don’t give an S if it’s SY or BY. They’re eating everyone else’s breakfast, lunch and dinner in the opportunities game. That isn’t a birth month issue.

The parent or kid, regardless of birth month, who can “barely make and play” also don’t care about BY or SY…because they’re always nervous (they’re also probably not in ECNL).

Only these weird bubble parents and kids care either way about SY or BY on either side of the debate. But news flash! It still doesn’t matter! Nothing replaces doing the hard work. An age cutoff change doesn’t make anyone better or worse, the work still has to be done.

And just a quick point of correction - every single Q4 ECNL top team family I know is pissed about this change.

Weird to get angry and pretend to flex when as you say age cutoffs don't matter. They matter enough to you.

? No, they don’t. They have zero impact on my kid or me. My kid already plays up and starts on her ECNL team, that won’t change. She’s one of the best in the country at her position. And college probably isn’t her play.

Cutoffs don’t matter.

Cutoffs don't matter for a kid like yours, but they do for the large majority, especially when making a huge change that's appears ahead. For the humbled masses, it would be better if we had a system where maybe the better younger players played with the average older ones where both SY and BY still existed. Maybe we need half the country to do school by BY, so the benefits can go beyond sports.

I understand your point. I think it’s a matter of perspective, though, at the higher levels it really only matters for kids on the bubble. No age cut off is good for kids on the bubble either direction. But this is very short term debate, which will change in 2026 makes some people feel like winners, and some people feel like losers if their kid is on the bubble, I suspect in the grand scheme of things it won’t actually matter much there either. It’s just about feelings

So submit that it really doesn’t matter outside of the highest competition levels, but it feels like it does there too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm done with this topic.

Too many wuss B team parents that don't understand how high level sports work.

If you cant hang with the rest of the players on the team because of whatever excuse dejour it won't matter because your kid is going to quit playing soon anyway.

Unfortunate there's a very vocal group of numbnuts that don't matter crying on this thread

Fun to listen to parents call B team parents and kids wusses and bad players and when all we are saying is let my kid compete with yours for a spot. Why you so scared? I can only imagine how scared you are of the A team Q3/4 kids that can also compete with your kids.

The real Q1/2 studs and their parents also want a switch to school year and have the confidence their player can handle competing with older kids.

It’s the Q1/2 parents who can barely make and play that are nervous.

🤦‍♂️ this is a dumb take. The studs don’t give an S if it’s SY or BY. They’re eating everyone else’s breakfast, lunch and dinner in the opportunities game. That isn’t a birth month issue.

The parent or kid, regardless of birth month, who can “barely make and play” also don’t care about BY or SY…because they’re always nervous (they’re also probably not in ECNL).

Only these weird bubble parents and kids care either way about SY or BY on either side of the debate. But news flash! It still doesn’t matter! Nothing replaces doing the hard work. An age cutoff change doesn’t make anyone better or worse, the work still has to be done.

And just a quick point of correction - every single Q4 ECNL top team family I know is pissed about this change.

Weird to get angry and pretend to flex when as you say age cutoffs don't matter. They matter enough to you.

? No, they don’t. They have zero impact on my kid or me. My kid already plays up and starts on her ECNL team, that won’t change. She’s one of the best in the country at her position. And college probably isn’t her play.

Cutoffs don’t matter.

Cutoffs don't matter for a kid like yours, but they do for the large majority, especially when making a huge change that's appears ahead. For the humbled masses, it would be better if we had a system where maybe the better younger players played with the average older ones where both SY and BY still existed. Maybe we need half the country to do school by BY, so the benefits can go beyond sports.

I understand your point. I think it’s a matter of perspective, though, at the higher levels it really only matters for kids on the bubble. No age cut off is good for kids on the bubble either direction. But this is very short term debate, which will change in 2026 makes some people feel like winners, and some people feel like losers if their kid is on the bubble, I suspect in the grand scheme of things it won’t actually matter much there either. It’s just about feelings

So submit that it really doesn’t matter outside of the highest competition levels, but it feels like it does there too.

I’d subjit* - no “so submit”
Sorry, autocorrect is ok meth today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TRAPPED PLAYERS....

BY parents don’t care about trapped players because their kids are trapped so it’s not a problem for them. What is a problem is Q3/4 2010 joining with their Q1/2 2011s they are petrified of that for some reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm done with this topic.

Too many wuss B team parents that don't understand how high level sports work.

If you cant hang with the rest of the players on the team because of whatever excuse dejour it won't matter because your kid is going to quit playing soon anyway.

Unfortunate there's a very vocal group of numbnuts that don't matter crying on this thread

Fun to listen to parents call B team parents and kids wusses and bad players and when all we are saying is let my kid compete with yours for a spot. Why you so scared? I can only imagine how scared you are of the A team Q3/4 kids that can also compete with your kids.

The real Q1/2 studs and their parents also want a switch to school year and have the confidence their player can handle competing with older kids.

It’s the Q1/2 parents who can barely make and play that are nervous.

🤦‍♂️ this is a dumb take. The studs don’t give an S if it’s SY or BY. They’re eating everyone else’s breakfast, lunch and dinner in the opportunities game. That isn’t a birth month issue.

The parent or kid, regardless of birth month, who can “barely make and play” also don’t care about BY or SY…because they’re always nervous (they’re also probably not in ECNL).

Only these weird bubble parents and kids care either way about SY or BY on either side of the debate. But news flash! It still doesn’t matter! Nothing replaces doing the hard work. An age cutoff change doesn’t make anyone better or worse, the work still has to be done.

And just a quick point of correction - every single Q4 ECNL top team family I know is pissed about this change.

Weird to get angry and pretend to flex when as you say age cutoffs don't matter. They matter enough to you.

? No, they don’t. They have zero impact on my kid or me. My kid already plays up and starts on her ECNL team, that won’t change. She’s one of the best in the country at her position. And college probably isn’t her play.

Cutoffs don’t matter.

Cutoffs don't matter for a kid like yours, but they do for the large majority, especially when making a huge change that's appears ahead. For the humbled masses, it would be better if we had a system where maybe the better younger players played with the average older ones where both SY and BY still existed. Maybe we need half the country to do school by BY, so the benefits can go beyond sports.

Most ECNL rosters are packed with early month players so cutoffs did matter for many of them. Worry that college will not be in play for a bunch of them after a few years of SY cutoffs.

My daughter is the only Q4 player on her ECNL team. Everyone else is high school she is the only 8th grader. Our rival clubs in our area also have few if any Q3/4 players on their rosters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm done with this topic.

Too many wuss B team parents that don't understand how high level sports work.

If you cant hang with the rest of the players on the team because of whatever excuse dejour it won't matter because your kid is going to quit playing soon anyway.

Unfortunate there's a very vocal group of numbnuts that don't matter crying on this thread

Fun to listen to parents call B team parents and kids wusses and bad players and when all we are saying is let my kid compete with yours for a spot. Why you so scared? I can only imagine how scared you are of the A team Q3/4 kids that can also compete with your kids.

The real Q1/2 studs and their parents also want a switch to school year and have the confidence their player can handle competing with older kids.

It’s the Q1/2 parents who can barely make and play that are nervous.

🤦‍♂️ this is a dumb take. The studs don’t give an S if it’s SY or BY. They’re eating everyone else’s breakfast, lunch and dinner in the opportunities game. That isn’t a birth month issue.

The parent or kid, regardless of birth month, who can “barely make and play” also don’t care about BY or SY…because they’re always nervous (they’re also probably not in ECNL).

Only these weird bubble parents and kids care either way about SY or BY on either side of the debate. But news flash! It still doesn’t matter! Nothing replaces doing the hard work. An age cutoff change doesn’t make anyone better or worse, the work still has to be done.

And just a quick point of correction - every single Q4 ECNL top team family I know is pissed about this change.

Weird to get angry and pretend to flex when as you say age cutoffs don't matter. They matter enough to you.

? No, they don’t. They have zero impact on my kid or me. My kid already plays up and starts on her ECNL team, that won’t change. She’s one of the best in the country at her position. And college probably isn’t her play.

Cutoffs don’t matter.

Cutoffs don't matter for a kid like yours, but they do for the large majority, especially when making a huge change that's appears ahead. For the humbled masses, it would be better if we had a system where maybe the better younger players played with the average older ones where both SY and BY still existed. Maybe we need half the country to do school by BY, so the benefits can go beyond sports.

Most ECNL rosters are packed with early month players so cutoffs did matter for many of them. Worry that college will not be in play for a bunch of them after a few years of SY cutoffs.

That's why ECNL could be truly innovative if not just switching to SY, they did divisions of both BY and SY.

The ODP league near me is doing that they have Jan to June and July to Dec teams. Not a bad idea keeps more kids involved and helps address RAE. It’s a win win for everyone except the people who hate change.