ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a boys side parent so might be a dumb question, is MLSN next that much better than ECNL as far players recruited and college coaches attending showcases that it’s worth it for a Club Director to stay with MLSN and manage two separate age groups?

Would a club lose money playing ECNL for boys and by lose money I mean unable to fill a roster of 18?

Yes

Boys ECNL teams have no problem filling roster spots so no they would not lose money but MLSN badge definitely attracts better talent in the boys side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a boys side parent so might be a dumb question, is MLSN next that much better than ECNL as far players recruited and college coaches attending showcases that it’s worth it for a Club Director to stay with MLSN and manage two separate age groups?

Would a club lose money playing ECNL for boys and by lose money I mean unable to fill a roster of 18?

Yes

Nice try responding to your own post. The last several pages have been mostly one guy posting and answering himself, so obvious. The MLSN guy who needs to see real evidence, or an an announcement written in blood before he concedes is hypocritically the one making all these pretend conspiracy conversations of BY pipelines etc., but we aren’t fooled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a boys side parent so might be a dumb question, is MLSN next that much better than ECNL as far players recruited and college coaches attending showcases that it’s worth it for a Club Director to stay with MLSN and manage two separate age groups?

Would a club lose money playing ECNL for boys and by lose money I mean unable to fill a roster of 18?

Yes

Boys ECNL teams have no problem filling roster spots so no they would not lose money but MLSN badge definitely attracts better talent in the boys side.

MLSN academies attract the best talent. ECNL boys and MLSN P2P are close enough that clubs would pick on another criteria like best spot for the girls team or one that only has the same cutoff as all their other feeder and secondary teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a boys side parent so might be a dumb question, is MLSN next that much better than ECNL as far players recruited and college coaches attending showcases that it’s worth it for a Club Director to stay with MLSN and manage two separate age groups?

Would a club lose money playing ECNL for boys and by lose money I mean unable to fill a roster of 18?

Yes

Nice try responding to your own post. The last several pages have been mostly one guy posting and answering himself, so obvious. The MLSN guy who needs to see real evidence, or an an announcement written in blood before he concedes is hypocritically the one making all these pretend conspiracy conversations of BY pipelines etc., but we aren’t fooled.

Conspiracy brain much? 🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a boys side parent so might be a dumb question, is MLSN next that much better than ECNL as far players recruited and college coaches attending showcases that it’s worth it for a Club Director to stay with MLSN and manage two separate age groups?

Would a club lose money playing ECNL for boys and by lose money I mean unable to fill a roster of 18?

Yes

Nice try responding to your own post. The last several pages have been mostly one guy posting and answering himself, so obvious. The MLSN guy who needs to see real evidence, or an an announcement written in blood before he concedes is hypocritically the one making all these pretend conspiracy conversations of BY pipelines etc., but we aren’t fooled.

Conspiracy brain much? 🤣

The posts all pretend like every team in MLSN is an academy associated with an actual MLS team offering free services rather than most just being regular P2P making it seem like they are from the same rabid parent trying to live through their kids live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a boys side parent so might be a dumb question, is MLSN next that much better than ECNL as far players recruited and college coaches attending showcases that it’s worth it for a Club Director to stay with MLSN and manage two separate age groups?

Would a club lose money playing ECNL for boys and by lose money I mean unable to fill a roster of 18? [/quote
No

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a boys side parent so might be a dumb question, is MLSN next that much better than ECNL as far players recruited and college coaches attending showcases that it’s worth it for a Club Director to stay with MLSN and manage two separate age groups?

Would a club lose money playing ECNL for boys and by lose money I mean unable to fill a roster of 18?

Yes

Nice try responding to your own post. The last several pages have been mostly one guy posting and answering himself, so obvious. The MLSN guy who needs to see real evidence, or an an announcement written in blood before he concedes is hypocritically the one making all these pretend conspiracy conversations of BY pipelines etc., but we aren’t fooled.

Conspiracy brain much? 🤣

The BY boogeyman living rent free in his head.

[Anonymous]

Some weirdo is abusing the anonymity to answer their own questions no doubt. And then accuse others of “astroturfing”…we see you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some weirdo is abusing the anonymity to answer their own questions no doubt. And then accuse others of “astroturfing”…we see you

Whats interesting is the militant SY poster is a boys ECNL parent. Or maybe a boys ECNL coach. You dont run into these types very often. Boys teams are more fluid than girls teams. This is why MLSN works so well. It just recruits talent from all the different leagues around them. Because of this you dont usually see boys parents emotionally tied to a specific club or league. Add in that puberty can completely change what boys are like on the field.

Since we know your kid is a boy playing in boys ECNL. What do you think you'll gain with SY? MLSN already has biobanding and for what its worth most top players are playing up 1-2 years. These are the ones that will play professionally or get college scholarship offers first. Your kid playing down because of ECNL switching from BY to SY wont become a superstar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some weirdo is abusing the anonymity to answer their own questions no doubt. And then accuse others of “astroturfing”…we see you

Whats interesting is the militant SY poster is a boys ECNL parent. Or maybe a boys ECNL coach. You dont run into these types very often. Boys teams are more fluid than girls teams. This is why MLSN works so well. It just recruits talent from all the different leagues around them. Because of this you dont usually see boys parents emotionally tied to a specific club or league. Add in that puberty can completely change what boys are like on the field.

Since we know your kid is a boy playing in boys ECNL. What do you think you'll gain with SY? MLSN already has biobanding and for what its worth most top players are playing up 1-2 years. These are the ones that will play professionally or get college scholarship offers first. Your kid playing down because of ECNL switching from BY to SY wont become a superstar.

Not sure your point. ECNL is already going SY with 90+ percent of the teams in youth soccer. It's over. Everybody recruits talent and cuts kids. Whatever. All the leagues are the same, a place to take your money and to try to convince you that you should be honored. Take pride in a team not a league.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some weirdo is abusing the anonymity to answer their own questions no doubt. And then accuse others of “astroturfing”…we see you

Whats interesting is the militant SY poster is a boys ECNL parent. Or maybe a boys ECNL coach. You dont run into these types very often. Boys teams are more fluid than girls teams. This is why MLSN works so well. It just recruits talent from all the different leagues around them. Because of this you dont usually see boys parents emotionally tied to a specific club or league. Add in that puberty can completely change what boys are like on the field.

Since we know your kid is a boy playing in boys ECNL. What do you think you'll gain with SY? MLSN already has biobanding and for what its worth most top players are playing up 1-2 years. These are the ones that will play professionally or get college scholarship offers first. Your kid playing down because of ECNL switching from BY to SY wont become a superstar.

Not sure your point. ECNL is already going SY with 90+ percent of the teams in youth soccer. It's over. Everybody recruits talent and cuts kids. Whatever. All the leagues are the same, a place to take your money and to try to convince you that you should be honored. Take pride in a team not a league.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some weirdo is abusing the anonymity to answer their own questions no doubt. And then accuse others of “astroturfing”…we see you

Whats interesting is the militant SY poster is a boys ECNL parent. Or maybe a boys ECNL coach. You dont run into these types very often. Boys teams are more fluid than girls teams. This is why MLSN works so well. It just recruits talent from all the different leagues around them. Because of this you dont usually see boys parents emotionally tied to a specific club or league. Add in that puberty can completely change what boys are like on the field.

Since we know your kid is a boy playing in boys ECNL. What do you think you'll gain with SY? MLSN already has biobanding and for what its worth most top players are playing up 1-2 years. These are the ones that will play professionally or get college scholarship offers first. Your kid playing down because of ECNL switching from BY to SY wont become a superstar.

Not sure your point. ECNL is already going SY with 90+ percent of the teams in youth soccer. It's over. Everybody recruits talent and cuts kids. Whatever. All the leagues are the same, a place to take your money and to try to convince you that you should be honored. Take pride in a team not a league.

No dodge, don't have a kid in ECNL, it didn't apply to me.

[Anonymous]

So you irrationally hate BY MLSN and Biobanding but seem to love SY and ECNL.

Yet you dont have a kid playing in boys ECNL?

Just randomly interested in the minutiae of youth soccer league details. While at the same time trying to convince people that clubs and teams matter more than leagues.

[Anonymous]

I dont see bio banding listed anywhere in the MLSN Academy rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a boys side parent so might be a dumb question, is MLSN next that much better than ECNL as far players recruited and college coaches attending showcases that it’s worth it for a Club Director to stay with MLSN and manage two separate age groups?

Would a club lose money playing ECNL for boys and by lose money I mean unable to fill a roster of 18?

Yes

Nice try responding to your own post. The last several pages have been mostly one guy posting and answering himself, so obvious. The MLSN guy who needs to see real evidence, or an an announcement written in blood before he concedes is hypocritically the one making all these pretend conspiracy conversations of BY pipelines etc., but we aren’t fooled.

I was the OG poster just checking back in. I definitely did not write “yes” lol I’m a girl dad who truly doesn’t understand the whole MLSN /ECNL argument.