ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What I heard on the recording was that everyone agreed that BY made more sense for the top elite players. Primarily because this is how their peers around the world function. There was a specific call out about Academy systems. The SY proponents primarily said that for lower level teams there is a benefit for kids to be able to play with classmates in school. They extrapolated that SY would bring more players to the game because all kids on the team would be in the same grade at school. One coach said SY is a waste of time because they go through tryouts every year and which school you attend has nothing to do with who gets selected for the team.

My takeaway is that elite soccer likes BY and rec soccer likes SY. There's no one size fits all. This explains why MLSN doesn't want to change to SY. If ECNL switches to SY on the girls side it will allow a BY Academy type league to open up shop.

This new shop could be called, DA. Considering the defunct DA for girls started 10 years after the boys, and MLSN started 2020, a competitor to ECNL for the girls side could arrive around 2030.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No decision is finalized yet but most league admins our leaning towards SY cutoffs for 26/27 but again nothing set in stone or decided.

Some club admins definitely hate the idea of change do not want to deal with it. But it seems like the final comments is the league reps think SY is better long term for the game.

One director did bring up that BY is pushing out Q4 kids and most teams do not have any players which is not good because we are losing a large group of kids that should be playing soccer.

ARRRGGH! Hope they at least acknowledge that they'll be lamenting the loss of Q2 players under SY unless some BY leagues continue and/or something new is done to minimize RAE -- otherwise they just mostly solve for trapped years.

Someone did say something along the lines of their will always be Q4 kids, who are smaller and younger regardless if SY/BY. So the reason to change shouldn’t be to help younger players because there is always going to be younger players. The reason to change is to grow the participation of the game. Which they seem to think SY will keep more kids involved because they will be playing with kids in their same grade.

Many say there will always be Q4 kids, and SY/BY doesn't affect RAE. But it's clearly not the same. Under BY, more Q4 kids quit, or never play club at all. Why? The obvious answer, is the misalignment leading to trapped player issues and a social split particularly at younger ages. So SY Q4 will still be underrepresented, but not by as much as BY Q4. There's so much argument on here about whether this should be labeled an "RAE" problem, a "participation" problem, or a "trapped player" problem. All of these labels could be accurate. It could be labeled an "RAE" problem because it causes further underrepresentation at the younger end of the range, but some reserve that label only for effects due to physical/mental development, whereas this is more of an administration effect. But at its core, everyone is identifying the same problem - misalignment with school year. Glad to see it will likely get fixed in 26.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard on the recording was that everyone agreed that BY made more sense for the top elite players. Primarily because this is how their peers around the world function. There was a specific call out about Academy systems. The SY proponents primarily said that for lower level teams there is a benefit for kids to be able to play with classmates in school. They extrapolated that SY would bring more players to the game because all kids on the team would be in the same grade at school. One coach said SY is a waste of time because they go through tryouts every year and which school you attend has nothing to do with who gets selected for the team.

My takeaway is that elite soccer likes BY and rec soccer likes SY. There's no one size fits all. This explains why MLSN doesn't want to change to SY. If ECNL switches to SY on the girls side it will allow a BY Academy type league to open up shop.

This new shop could be called, DA. Considering the defunct DA for girls started 10 years after the boys, and MLSN started 2020, a competitor to ECNL for the girls side could arrive around 2030.

Yep, "elite" here means pro, not college or anything below.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What I heard on the recording was that everyone agreed that BY made more sense for the top elite players. Primarily because this is how their peers around the world function. There was a specific call out about Academy systems. The SY proponents primarily said that for lower level teams there is a benefit for kids to be able to play with classmates in school. They extrapolated that SY would bring more players to the game because all kids on the team would be in the same grade at school. One coach said SY is a waste of time because they go through tryouts every year and which school you attend has nothing to do with who gets selected for the team.

My takeaway is that elite soccer likes BY and rec soccer likes SY. There's no one size fits all. This explains why MLSN doesn't want to change to SY. If ECNL switches to SY on the girls side it will allow a BY Academy type league to open up shop.

I did hear some of the people say BY was better for elite but I think the last guy who spoke said that our elite teams have statistically done worse since a switch to BY. Also what do they determine as elite it seemed like just national team members and pros? Or is ECNL/MLSN elite?
It was hard to keep track of who was a SOCAL board member or not. But someone else said they considered starting with only the younger ages and that it wouldn’t be a bigger nightmare for clubs and that it would be a full change for all ages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard on the recording was that everyone agreed that BY made more sense for the top elite players. Primarily because this is how their peers around the world function. There was a specific call out about Academy systems. The SY proponents primarily said that for lower level teams there is a benefit for kids to be able to play with classmates in school. They extrapolated that SY would bring more players to the game because all kids on the team would be in the same grade at school. One coach said SY is a waste of time because they go through tryouts every year and which school you attend has nothing to do with who gets selected for the team.

My takeaway is that elite soccer likes BY and rec soccer likes SY. There's no one size fits all. This explains why MLSN doesn't want to change to SY. If ECNL switches to SY on the girls side it will allow a BY Academy type league to open up shop.

This new shop could be called, DA. Considering the defunct DA for girls started 10 years after the boys, and MLSN started 2020, a competitor to ECNL for the girls side could arrive around 2030.

Yep, "elite" here means pro, not college or anything below.

Girls are different than boys when it comes to college.

With boys there's 24yr old Academy washouts and competition for number of roster spots with other sports like football.

With girls there isn't any competition from other countries and because of title 9 colleges need female athletes on the roster.

What this means is for boys college coaches go to MLSN looking for the players that are almost good enough to play pro. (Because theres very few spots to be filled) For girls coaches have the youth clubs they like and the general league showcases/events. (Because there's much more spots to be filled)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard on the recording was that everyone agreed that BY made more sense for the top elite players. Primarily because this is how their peers around the world function. There was a specific call out about Academy systems. The SY proponents primarily said that for lower level teams there is a benefit for kids to be able to play with classmates in school. They extrapolated that SY would bring more players to the game because all kids on the team would be in the same grade at school. One coach said SY is a waste of time because they go through tryouts every year and which school you attend has nothing to do with who gets selected for the team.

My takeaway is that elite soccer likes BY and rec soccer likes SY. There's no one size fits all. This explains why MLSN doesn't want to change to SY. If ECNL switches to SY on the girls side it will allow a BY Academy type league to open up shop.

I did hear some of the people say BY was better for elite but I think the last guy who spoke said that our elite teams have statistically done worse since a switch to BY. Also what do they determine as elite it seemed like just national team members and pros? Or is ECNL/MLSN elite?
It was hard to keep track of who was a SOCAL board member or not. But someone else said they considered starting with only the younger ages and that it wouldn’t be a bigger nightmare for clubs and that it would be a full change for all ages.

This was put on by CalSouth. They run a league that everyone in LA and below used to participate in called Coast Soccer league. Now very few participate in CSL.

SOCAL league was put together mostly by ECNL clubs so they have more control over the littles and rec league pipelines. SOCAL is a competitor to CSL

In California GA ECNL MLSN etc clubs put their top teams into SOCAL until they get to U13/U14 and the gated leagues kick in. After u13/u14 the teams playing in SOCAL are 3rd and 4th teams from the big clubs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No decision is finalized yet but most league admins our leaning towards SY cutoffs for 26/27 but again nothing set in stone or decided.

Some club admins definitely hate the idea of change do not want to deal with it. But it seems like the final comments is the league reps think SY is better long term for the game.

One director did bring up that BY is pushing out Q4 kids and most teams do not have any players which is not good because we are losing a large group of kids that should be playing soccer.

ARRRGGH! Hope they at least acknowledge that they'll be lamenting the loss of Q2 players under SY unless some BY leagues continue and/or something new is done to minimize RAE -- otherwise they just mostly solve for trapped years.

Someone did say something along the lines of their will always be Q4 kids, who are smaller and younger regardless if SY/BY. So the reason to change shouldn’t be to help younger players because there is always going to be younger players. The reason to change is to grow the participation of the game. Which they seem to think SY will keep more kids involved because they will be playing with kids in their same grade.

Many say there will always be Q4 kids, and SY/BY doesn't affect RAE. But it's clearly not the same. Under BY, more Q4 kids quit, or never play club at all. Why? The obvious answer, is the misalignment leading to trapped player issues and a social split particularly at younger ages. So SY Q4 will still be underrepresented, but not by as much as BY Q4. There's so much argument on here about whether this should be labeled an "RAE" problem, a "participation" problem, or a "trapped player" problem. All of these labels could be accurate. It could be labeled an "RAE" problem because it causes further underrepresentation at the younger end of the range, but some reserve that label only for effects due to physical/mental development, whereas this is more of an administration effect. But at its core, everyone is identifying the same problem - misalignment with school year. Glad to see it will likely get fixed in 26.

It's funny how you write multiple paragraphs about nonsense then at the last sentence you slip in that SY will address RAE.

Sorry that's not how it works. You're just shifting who gets affected by RAE from Dec birthdays to July birthdays.

Either get educated or stop trying to manipulate. SY does nothing to address RAE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard on the recording was that everyone agreed that BY made more sense for the top elite players. Primarily because this is how their peers around the world function. There was a specific call out about Academy systems. The SY proponents primarily said that for lower level teams there is a benefit for kids to be able to play with classmates in school. They extrapolated that SY would bring more players to the game because all kids on the team would be in the same grade at school. One coach said SY is a waste of time because they go through tryouts every year and which school you attend has nothing to do with who gets selected for the team.

My takeaway is that elite soccer likes BY and rec soccer likes SY. There's no one size fits all. This explains why MLSN doesn't want to change to SY. If ECNL switches to SY on the girls side it will allow a BY Academy type league to open up shop.

I did hear some of the people say BY was better for elite but I think the last guy who spoke said that our elite teams have statistically done worse since a switch to BY. Also what do they determine as elite it seemed like just national team members and pros? Or is ECNL/MLSN elite?
It was hard to keep track of who was a SOCAL board member or not. But someone else said they considered starting with only the younger ages and that it wouldn’t be a bigger nightmare for clubs and that it would be a full change for all ages.

They mentioned starting SY with U14 and under because this makes things much easier for clubs with existing teams. All the development that clubs have done for the teams as they exist today at the GA ECNL levels stay the same and only the newest GA ECNL teams are SY. Over time (4-5 years) the existing BY teams will age out. From a club perspective this is the least difficult way to change to SY and it keeps older teams together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No decision is finalized yet but most league admins our leaning towards SY cutoffs for 26/27 but again nothing set in stone or decided.

Some club admins definitely hate the idea of change do not want to deal with it. But it seems like the final comments is the league reps think SY is better long term for the game.

One director did bring up that BY is pushing out Q4 kids and most teams do not have any players which is not good because we are losing a large group of kids that should be playing soccer.

ARRRGGH! Hope they at least acknowledge that they'll be lamenting the loss of Q2 players under SY unless some BY leagues continue and/or something new is done to minimize RAE -- otherwise they just mostly solve for trapped years.

Someone did say something along the lines of their will always be Q4 kids, who are smaller and younger regardless if SY/BY. So the reason to change shouldn’t be to help younger players because there is always going to be younger players. The reason to change is to grow the participation of the game. Which they seem to think SY will keep more kids involved because they will be playing with kids in their same grade.

Many say there will always be Q4 kids, and SY/BY doesn't affect RAE. But it's clearly not the same. Under BY, more Q4 kids quit, or never play club at all. Why? The obvious answer, is the misalignment leading to trapped player issues and a social split particularly at younger ages. So SY Q4 will still be underrepresented, but not by as much as BY Q4. There's so much argument on here about whether this should be labeled an "RAE" problem, a "participation" problem, or a "trapped player" problem. All of these labels could be accurate. It could be labeled an "RAE" problem because it causes further underrepresentation at the younger end of the range, but some reserve that label only for effects due to physical/mental development, whereas this is more of an administration effect. But at its core, everyone is identifying the same problem - misalignment with school year. Glad to see it will likely get fixed in 26.

Yes this is a thing I see people miss a lot. Right now there is a population of kids who are disadvantaged in not one but two ways. The first being misaligned with their school age peers (it’s not just friends from school but their developmental peers, it’s a social thing) and two being RAE. So they are the youngest, the smallest, and not with their peers. That’s a lot to fight against and many quit young. Well before MLSN or ECNL or anything else. They just switch to baseball or flag football where they are most impactful and are having more fun with their peers.

So while SY won’t address RAE, it will address the peers problem for nearly everyone (yes yes I know not everyone) and take some of the burden off our November babies. (Yes I have two and yes I know how good they are. This wont materially impact my kids, they are on top teams already but unless you have one of these kids there is almost no chance you understand the social part).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I heard on the recording was that everyone agreed that BY made more sense for the top elite players. Primarily because this is how their peers around the world function. There was a specific call out about Academy systems. The SY proponents primarily said that for lower level teams there is a benefit for kids to be able to play with classmates in school. They extrapolated that SY would bring more players to the game because all kids on the team would be in the same grade at school. One coach said SY is a waste of time because they go through tryouts every year and which school you attend has nothing to do with who gets selected for the team.

My takeaway is that elite soccer likes BY and rec soccer likes SY. There's no one size fits all. This explains why MLSN doesn't want to change to SY. If ECNL switches to SY on the girls side it will allow a BY Academy type league to open up shop.

I did hear some of the people say BY was better for elite but I think the last guy who spoke said that our elite teams have statistically done worse since a switch to BY. Also what do they determine as elite it seemed like just national team members and pros? Or is ECNL/MLSN elite?
It was hard to keep track of who was a SOCAL board member or not. But someone else said they considered starting with only the younger ages and that it wouldn’t be a bigger nightmare for clubs and that it would be a full change for all ages.

They mentioned starting SY with U14 and under because this makes things much easier for clubs with existing teams. All the development that clubs have done for the teams as they exist today at the GA ECNL levels stay the same and only the newest GA ECNL teams are SY. Over time (4-5 years) the existing BY teams will age out. From a club perspective this is the least difficult way to change to SY and it keeps older teams together.

Only wanting to make the change on the younger ages illustrates that the worry isn't on being able to make a quick change to SY for paperwork/computer reasons.

The worry is that the club's teams will become worse if they don't recruit/promote/demote on their older teams to the older end of the age cutoff fast enough to compete, the club will suffer. It's just a fear of change from incumbents.

[Anonymous]

I thought that was an embarassing pod for Cal South. So many people who are uniformed or clearly trying to protect their player vs doing whats best for soccer at large.

Lavers and Crew have a much deeper understanding of the situation. Any rational reasonable person can see the need for a change to SY. All of the excuses are at the Dog ate my homework level.

I cant wait tit hear from US Club and ECNL this week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought that was an embarassing pod for Cal South. So many people who are uniformed or clearly trying to protect their player vs doing whats best for soccer at large.

Lavers and Crew have a much deeper understanding of the situation. Any rational reasonable person can see the need for a change to SY. All of the excuses are at the Dog ate my homework level.

I cant wait tit hear from US Club and ECNL this week.

You didn't like hearing opinions and reality outside of this echo chamber thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No decision is finalized yet but most league admins our leaning towards SY cutoffs for 26/27 but again nothing set in stone or decided.

Some club admins definitely hate the idea of change do not want to deal with it. But it seems like the final comments is the league reps think SY is better long term for the game.

One director did bring up that BY is pushing out Q4 kids and most teams do not have any players which is not good because we are losing a large group of kids that should be playing soccer.

ARRRGGH! Hope they at least acknowledge that they'll be lamenting the loss of Q2 players under SY unless some BY leagues continue and/or something new is done to minimize RAE -- otherwise they just mostly solve for trapped years.

Someone did say something along the lines of their will always be Q4 kids, who are smaller and younger regardless if SY/BY. So the reason to change shouldn’t be to help younger players because there is always going to be younger players. The reason to change is to grow the participation of the game. Which they seem to think SY will keep more kids involved because they will be playing with kids in their same grade.

Many say there will always be Q4 kids, and SY/BY doesn't affect RAE. But it's clearly not the same. Under BY, more Q4 kids quit, or never play club at all. Why? The obvious answer, is the misalignment leading to trapped player issues and a social split particularly at younger ages. So SY Q4 will still be underrepresented, but not by as much as BY Q4. There's so much argument on here about whether this should be labeled an "RAE" problem, a "participation" problem, or a "trapped player" problem. All of these labels could be accurate. It could be labeled an "RAE" problem because it causes further underrepresentation at the younger end of the range, but some reserve that label only for effects due to physical/mental development, whereas this is more of an administration effect. But at its core, everyone is identifying the same problem - misalignment with school year. Glad to see it will likely get fixed in 26.

It's funny how you write multiple paragraphs about nonsense then at the last sentence you slip in that SY will address RAE.

Sorry that's not how it works. You're just shifting who gets affected by RAE from Dec birthdays to July birthdays.

Either get educated or stop trying to manipulate. SY does nothing to address RAE.

You misread the PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No decision is finalized yet but most league admins our leaning towards SY cutoffs for 26/27 but again nothing set in stone or decided.

Some club admins definitely hate the idea of change do not want to deal with it. But it seems like the final comments is the league reps think SY is better long term for the game.

One director did bring up that BY is pushing out Q4 kids and most teams do not have any players which is not good because we are losing a large group of kids that should be playing soccer.

ARRRGGH! Hope they at least acknowledge that they'll be lamenting the loss of Q2 players under SY unless some BY leagues continue and/or something new is done to minimize RAE -- otherwise they just mostly solve for trapped years.

Someone did say something along the lines of their will always be Q4 kids, who are smaller and younger regardless if SY/BY. So the reason to change shouldn’t be to help younger players because there is always going to be younger players. The reason to change is to grow the participation of the game. Which they seem to think SY will keep more kids involved because they will be playing with kids in their same grade.

Many say there will always be Q4 kids, and SY/BY doesn't affect RAE. But it's clearly not the same. Under BY, more Q4 kids quit, or never play club at all. Why? The obvious answer, is the misalignment leading to trapped player issues and a social split particularly at younger ages. So SY Q4 will still be underrepresented, but not by as much as BY Q4. There's so much argument on here about whether this should be labeled an "RAE" problem, a "participation" problem, or a "trapped player" problem. All of these labels could be accurate. It could be labeled an "RAE" problem because it causes further underrepresentation at the younger end of the range, but some reserve that label only for effects due to physical/mental development, whereas this is more of an administration effect. But at its core, everyone is identifying the same problem - misalignment with school year. Glad to see it will likely get fixed in 26.

It's funny how you write multiple paragraphs about nonsense then at the last sentence you slip in that SY will address RAE.

Sorry that's not how it works. You're just shifting who gets affected by RAE from Dec birthdays to July birthdays.

Either get educated or stop trying to manipulate. SY does nothing to address RAE.

You misread the PP.

No I didn't pp tried to say that "many things" including RAE are addressed by changing to SY.

This is not true and RAE is the same under BY and SY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought that was an embarassing pod for Cal South. So many people who are uniformed or clearly trying to protect their player vs doing whats best for soccer at large.

Lavers and Crew have a much deeper understanding of the situation. Any rational reasonable person can see the need for a change to SY. All of the excuses are at the Dog ate my homework level.

I cant wait tit hear from US Club and ECNL this week.

You didn't like hearing opinions and reality outside of this echo chamber thread.

I was hopeful there would be actual well thought out discussion. what I herd was ecxcusses from people trying to protect their monopoly. THe anger is real on the BY side.

C'mon people use facts and logic!!