ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Sounds like you go with your gut and eschew fact based science. I will take science where people use large datasets and models to measure impacts to try to determine whether hypothesis are correct.

I don't care about any of that...I can't change when my kid was born. They need to stand out or they won't get noticed (and I don't think we need science to prove that). Why would I give them excuses? And one so trivial as when you were born in a year? I have a kid that was born in Q2 and Q4. Never once have we considered what this means to their play on the pitch. Just get on with it.

I do care. No reason to judge others that disagree and make personal attacks on someone who doesn't want others put the head in sand though.

Not PP, but this is DCUM, judging is literally rule 1….where you been?

Also, I didn’t see any personal attacks from PP? I miss something?

Fair point on DCUM, but "Sounds like your kid isn't good enough." is no compliment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Sounds like you go with your gut and eschew fact based science. I will take science where people use large datasets and models to measure impacts to try to determine whether hypothesis are correct.

I don't care about any of that...I can't change when my kid was born. They need to stand out or they won't get noticed (and I don't think we need science to prove that). Why would I give them excuses? And one so trivial as when you were born in a year? I have a kid that was born in Q2 and Q4. Never once have we considered what this means to their play on the pitch. Just get on with it.

I do care. No reason to judge others that disagree and make personal attacks on someone who doesn't want others put the head in sand though.

Not PP, but this is DCUM, judging is literally rule 1….where you been?

Also, I didn’t see any personal attacks from PP? I miss something?

Fair point on DCUM, but "Sounds like your kid isn't good enough." is no compliment.

Most parents need a reality check and not compliments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Sounds like you go with your gut and eschew fact based science. I will take science where people use large datasets and models to measure impacts to try to determine whether hypothesis are correct.

I don't care about any of that...I can't change when my kid was born. They need to stand out or they won't get noticed (and I don't think we need science to prove that). Why would I give them excuses? And one so trivial as when you were born in a year? I have a kid that was born in Q2 and Q4. Never once have we considered what this means to their play on the pitch. Just get on with it.

I do care. No reason to judge others that disagree and make personal attacks on someone who doesn't want others put the head in sand though.

Then care away. It still doesn't matter when a kid was born...they are good enough to get noticed or not. And if you aren't shooting for the academy/D1 college then why would you care about RAE in the first place? Take care.

RAE still in top leagues, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02640414.2012.721929

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

No one raised any bar other than to point out your statement was misleading.

You said "RAE is not an issue for the best players"
The fact several of the world's best players were impacted by late development (rae and biobanding) that proves your statement false.
Pretty simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

Many kids who enter top Cat1 academies at U8 and U9 don't make it to U18

Several get cut because of RAE

Eg, Rodri of Manchester City, considered the best CDM in the world today and ever by some, was cut by Atletico Madrid at 16 because of Physical Insufficiency (too small)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

Many kids who enter top Cat1 academies at U8 and U9 don't make it to U18

Several get cut because of RAE

Eg, Rodri of Manchester City, considered the best CDM in the world today and ever by some, was cut by Atletico Madrid at 16 because of Physical Insufficiency (too small)

Don’t bring Q2 babies into an RAE discussion, they don’t qualify for RAE, only October to December babies qualify for RAE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Sounds like you go with your gut and eschew fact based science. I will take science where people use large datasets and models to measure impacts to try to determine whether hypothesis are correct.

I don't care about any of that...I can't change when my kid was born. They need to stand out or they won't get noticed (and I don't think we need science to prove that). Why would I give them excuses? And one so trivial as when you were born in a year? I have a kid that was born in Q2 and Q4. Never once have we considered what this means to their play on the pitch. Just get on with it.

I do care. No reason to judge others that disagree and make personal attacks on someone who doesn't want others put the head in sand though.

Not PP, but this is DCUM, judging is literally rule 1….where you been?

Also, I didn’t see any personal attacks from PP? I miss something?

Fair point on DCUM, but "Sounds like your kid isn't good enough." is no compliment.

I see. I just didn’t assume it was the same poster. Fair point if correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

Many kids who enter top Cat1 academies at U8 and U9 don't make it to U18

Several get cut because of RAE

Eg, Rodri of Manchester City, considered the best CDM in the world today and ever by some, was cut by Atletico Madrid at 16 because of Physical Insufficiency (too small)

Don’t bring Q2 babies into an RAE discussion, they don’t qualify for RAE, only October to December babies qualify for RAE.

You missed your morning dosage of medication 💊 😏

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

Many kids who enter top Cat1 academies at U8 and U9 don't make it to U18

Several get cut because of RAE

Eg, Rodri of Manchester City, considered the best CDM in the world today and ever by some, was cut by Atletico Madrid at 16 because of Physical Insufficiency (too small)

Cavin Sullivan...best US youth player and already signed for Man City. Been playing up several years and now playing in pro games as a 14 year old. Born in September.
Rodri was cut and still made it to the highest level because...if you are good enough you are good enough.
I'm sure we can find examples all over the place that go in favor of both arguments, but if you are using RAE as an excuse then you aren't good enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

No one raised any bar other than to point out your statement was misleading.

You said "RAE is not an issue for the best players"
The fact several of the world's best players were impacted by late development (rae and biobanding) that proves your statement false.
Pretty simple.

If they are several of "the world's best players" then don't they prove the point that RAE wasn't a factor? They made it...because they are good enough and their mentality was strong enough. RAE is an excuse for those who want to use excuses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

No one raised any bar other than to point out your statement was misleading.

You said "RAE is not an issue for the best players"
The fact several of the world's best players were impacted by late development (rae and biobanding) that proves your statement false.
Pretty simple.

If they are several of "the world's best players" then don't they prove the point that RAE wasn't a factor? They made it...because they are good enough and their mentality was strong enough. RAE is an excuse for those who want to use excuses.

You're an idiot masquerading as knowledgeable.

RAE is only about late developers with skills good enough.
Not about all late developers.

Also, the impact if RAE is not about the players lack of performance, it's about the players not getting selected by coaches/clubs because of current physicality.

If some at Tottenham didn't decide to stick with a small Harry Kane when others wanted him cut, you wouldn't know his name.

Your mentality can be whatever levels. If the club doesn't select you because they say you're too small, it's beyond your control.

You lunatic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

Many kids who enter top Cat1 academies at U8 and U9 don't make it to U18

Several get cut because of RAE

Eg, Rodri of Manchester City, considered the best CDM in the world today and ever by some, was cut by Atletico Madrid at 16 because of Physical Insufficiency (too small)

Cavin Sullivan...best US youth player and already signed for Man City. Been playing up several years and now playing in pro games as a 14 year old. Born in September.
Rodri was cut and still made it to the highest level because...if you are good enough you are good enough.
I'm sure we can find examples all over the place that go in favor of both arguments, but if you are using RAE as an excuse then you aren't good enough.

All you guys must be gunning to raise the next international superstar. I think for most people "good enough" is far below that. RAE shows up in all the datasets from low level pros and below. So congrats to you if your kid transcends that group, and I look forward to cheering them on as they try to win us a World Cup. But you should know that you are the exception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard its gonna happen...does that help?

Probably best we all get on with the fall season and just see what happens!

Oh you mean that actual soccer thing on the field where the kids and parents should be focussed on excelling and not looking for excuses here there and everywhere instead

That is precisely what I mean. If you are good enough then you are good enough...they will find you regardless what month you were born in. Just get on with it!

Unfortunately, can't wave away relative age effects.

Sounds like your kid isn't good enough. If 9 months is the make or break then I think they were never destined to make it my friend. Lots of top players spend years playing up anyway. RAE is not an issue for the top players because they are just better.

Well, the top leagues in Europe are littered with Pro and International players that were biobanded, so your statement needs some modification.
Just a bit

WOW that just took a HUGE jump from possibly getting recruited to a college in the US to the top leagues in Europe. Did you know most kids in Europe that make up these leagues were in academies by U9? If your kid is good enough to make it to an MLS academy by say U13-14 then none of this makes any difference. So, if you want to talk about the best of the best (as you just dramatically raised the bar) and the .01% of players in the US, then if you are already good enough to make an MLS academy then none of this BY vs SY makes any difference.

No one raised any bar other than to point out your statement was misleading.

You said "RAE is not an issue for the best players"
The fact several of the world's best players were impacted by late development (rae and biobanding) that proves your statement false.
Pretty simple.

If they are several of "the world's best players" then don't they prove the point that RAE wasn't a factor? They made it...because they are good enough and their mentality was strong enough. RAE is an excuse for those who want to use excuses.

It 100% proves RAE was a factor, because they were biobanded.