ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people are missing a well-documented part of RAE - that the overrepresentation of Q1 becomes more extreme as you select a more elite group. Yes, some older kids are late developers, and some younger kids are early developers. But when talking about the absolute best (obviously more so at younger ages), we are talking about the older kids who are *also* early developers. If the team is elite enough, it will be full of the kids with both advantages.

While the driving reason to switch to SY is not to change which kids are Q1, thinking it doesn't matter to who will ultimately be on the best teams is insane.

You're missing the facts that RAE isn't about coaches, scouts, teams picking the best players at early ages.
It's about them picking the most physically mature at early ages.

The truly best players may be late developers who have to struggle against early developers. That's why when those good late developers don't quit, their percentage of representation is high in professional rankings (also in the academic studies on RAE)

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one said trapped players are doomed. The statement was made that BY is systematically dysfunctional for q4 and some q3 players during certain periods of their soccer career.

Don’t waste time arguing with the BY parents who are so blinded by the thought of having to compete with older kids. SY is coming they get one more year and then the party is over for most of those kids.

Isn't someone always older and someone always younger?
Won't SY have a 11 month difference in ages just like BY?

How does this relate to the PP's comment?

We are all BY parents today

Why would people who prefer BY be afraid of competing against older kids, when so many of them want their kids to play up?

Because they are really seeking bragging rights and recognition, not an extra challenge. If you adjust the age group to SY, they are playing with older kids but viewed as "with age." If they play with the same kids across a group divide, that comes with the higher status label of "playing up." Like many of the toxic elements of youth sports, it's all about status-seeking, mostly by the parents.

I love all these assumptions 100% predicated on a false fact that soccer skills, performance, competitiveness are all dictated by birth months

There are many strong q3 and q4 players out there and lots of weak q1 and q2

Also several kids playing up a year.

It all washes out

Are you aware of research showing that it all washes out and birth month has no impact on youth development or are you going with a gut feeling of a random parent of a kid?

The research is what you see on the fields every weekend at ECNL and lower levels of competition.
The differences in average players by birth months isn't that significant when you add decent q3 and q4 to the mix.

RAE at MLS Next and is more pronounced because the best January/February early bloomers are way ahead of November/December late bloomers

Can you point to research showing a relatively even distribution of birth months across top teams at clubs, ECNL, EDP, GA, MLSN, etc.? I am not sure how you can watch a youth soccer game and know everyone's birth month. That is a superpower. Useless, but a superpower nonetheless. And watch the games of "average" teams and ultimately make the assumption that drop out rates are not correlated with birth month.

Your first mistake is including MLSN in this madness
Your second mistake is not knowing I'm not saying I know the birth months

I'm saying the overall mediocre level of competition isn't impacted much at ECNL levels by a few months separation

Nobody is making the argument that going from BY to SY will increase the level of play in any league as ECNL and MLSN non-academies will still be what they are. Places for pay to play clubs where politics rule the day to call home.

It will change who are on the teams, who is starting, who plays what position, who is motivated to work harder to reach another level and who is lined up to play college/pro. And all of this will be a big deal at the younger ages and much less of a big deal at the older ages.

You should write for the Hallmark Channel

The USSF made the change from SY to BY so the best players would be different. It worked.

SY or BY
The best players with the talent, discipline, skills and put in the hard work consistently will still be the best.

And they are the ones that are the oldest in an age group.

Talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic isn't tied to birth month or the oldest.

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Some coaches and teams may choose the biggest and fastest, doesn't mean they're the best.

It just needs a light edit:

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Coaches and teams choose the biggest and fastest.

Over time talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic is tied to birth month or being the oldest.

admittedly anecdotal, but I hope everyone realizes that there are plenty of Q1/Q2 kids under current system who are small in size/stature AND immature. There are plenty of teams that have Q1/Q2 kids who are the smallest in size/stature on their teams (I was team manager, so I saw ages of all teams we played, so this isn't some Nostradamus nonsense). Being born in January or whatever doesn't mean you are bigger or faster or more mature; it depends on the "luck of the DNA draw." It will even out for the most part when many of the leagues switch to SY, with some outliers getting "screwed" of course, so not sure why there needs to be so much discussion about something that is nothing for most players. It worked pre-2016 or whenever and it will work again and not to the detriment of the majority of players. Everyone will end up where they should be and everyone can move on to complaining about something else.

Your use of plenty here is hyperbole and goes against what we all see and experience
It also goes against the statistics, studies and data which shows there is a bias in the selection process by coaches to pick the biggest most mature kids, who mainly fall in Q1 and Q2

like I said, it will all even out for the leagues who switch to SY. I don't care either way bc I know my kids will be okay regardless. you just want to argue and attempt to look smart, failing at both.

What evens out?
How does the q3 and q4 representation go back up to even when they have dropped out of the sport?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one said trapped players are doomed. The statement was made that BY is systematically dysfunctional for q4 and some q3 players during certain periods of their soccer career.

Don’t waste time arguing with the BY parents who are so blinded by the thought of having to compete with older kids. SY is coming they get one more year and then the party is over for most of those kids.

Isn't someone always older and someone always younger?
Won't SY have a 11 month difference in ages just like BY?

How does this relate to the PP's comment?

We are all BY parents today

Why would people who prefer BY be afraid of competing against older kids, when so many of them want their kids to play up?

Because they are really seeking bragging rights and recognition, not an extra challenge. If you adjust the age group to SY, they are playing with older kids but viewed as "with age." If they play with the same kids across a group divide, that comes with the higher status label of "playing up." Like many of the toxic elements of youth sports, it's all about status-seeking, mostly by the parents.

I love all these assumptions 100% predicated on a false fact that soccer skills, performance, competitiveness are all dictated by birth months

There are many strong q3 and q4 players out there and lots of weak q1 and q2

Also several kids playing up a year.

It all washes out

Are you aware of research showing that it all washes out and birth month has no impact on youth development or are you going with a gut feeling of a random parent of a kid?

The research is what you see on the fields every weekend at ECNL and lower levels of competition.
The differences in average players by birth months isn't that significant when you add decent q3 and q4 to the mix.

RAE at MLS Next and is more pronounced because the best January/February early bloomers are way ahead of November/December late bloomers

Can you point to research showing a relatively even distribution of birth months across top teams at clubs, ECNL, EDP, GA, MLSN, etc.? I am not sure how you can watch a youth soccer game and know everyone's birth month. That is a superpower. Useless, but a superpower nonetheless. And watch the games of "average" teams and ultimately make the assumption that drop out rates are not correlated with birth month.

Your first mistake is including MLSN in this madness
Your second mistake is not knowing I'm not saying I know the birth months

I'm saying the overall mediocre level of competition isn't impacted much at ECNL levels by a few months separation

Nobody is making the argument that going from BY to SY will increase the level of play in any league as ECNL and MLSN non-academies will still be what they are. Places for pay to play clubs where politics rule the day to call home.

It will change who are on the teams, who is starting, who plays what position, who is motivated to work harder to reach another level and who is lined up to play college/pro. And all of this will be a big deal at the younger ages and much less of a big deal at the older ages.

You should write for the Hallmark Channel

The USSF made the change from SY to BY so the best players would be different. It worked.

SY or BY
The best players with the talent, discipline, skills and put in the hard work consistently will still be the best.

And they are the ones that are the oldest in an age group.

Talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic isn't tied to birth month or the oldest.

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Some coaches and teams may choose the biggest and fastest, doesn't mean they're the best.

It just needs a light edit:

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Coaches and teams choose the biggest and fastest.

Over time talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic is tied to birth month or being the oldest.

admittedly anecdotal, but I hope everyone realizes that there are plenty of Q1/Q2 kids under current system who are small in size/stature AND immature. There are plenty of teams that have Q1/Q2 kids who are the smallest in size/stature on their teams (I was team manager, so I saw ages of all teams we played, so this isn't some Nostradamus nonsense). Being born in January or whatever doesn't mean you are bigger or faster or more mature; it depends on the "luck of the DNA draw." It will even out for the most part when many of the leagues switch to SY, with some outliers getting "screwed" of course, so not sure why there needs to be so much discussion about something that is nothing for most players. It worked pre-2016 or whenever and it will work again and not to the detriment of the majority of players. Everyone will end up where they should be and everyone can move on to complaining about something else.

Your use of plenty here is hyperbole and goes against what we all see and experience
It also goes against the statistics, studies and data which shows there is a bias in the selection process by coaches to pick the biggest most mature kids, who mainly fall in Q1 and Q2

like I said, it will all even out for the leagues who switch to SY. I don't care either way bc I know my kids will be okay regardless. you just want to argue and attempt to look smart, failing at both.

What evens out?
How does the q3 and q4 representation go back up to even when they have dropped out of the sport?

Great point!

[Anonymous]

Let's remember folks, most of the RAE studies are done looking at truly elite levels of youth sports.
Top level academies and youth national teams.

We're trying to put our subpar pay-to-play, in same bucket.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one said trapped players are doomed. The statement was made that BY is systematically dysfunctional for q4 and some q3 players during certain periods of their soccer career.

Don’t waste time arguing with the BY parents who are so blinded by the thought of having to compete with older kids. SY is coming they get one more year and then the party is over for most of those kids.

Isn't someone always older and someone always younger?
Won't SY have a 11 month difference in ages just like BY?

How does this relate to the PP's comment?

We are all BY parents today

Why would people who prefer BY be afraid of competing against older kids, when so many of them want their kids to play up?

Because they are really seeking bragging rights and recognition, not an extra challenge. If you adjust the age group to SY, they are playing with older kids but viewed as "with age." If they play with the same kids across a group divide, that comes with the higher status label of "playing up." Like many of the toxic elements of youth sports, it's all about status-seeking, mostly by the parents.

I love all these assumptions 100% predicated on a false fact that soccer skills, performance, competitiveness are all dictated by birth months

There are many strong q3 and q4 players out there and lots of weak q1 and q2

Also several kids playing up a year.

It all washes out

Are you aware of research showing that it all washes out and birth month has no impact on youth development or are you going with a gut feeling of a random parent of a kid?

The research is what you see on the fields every weekend at ECNL and lower levels of competition.
The differences in average players by birth months isn't that significant when you add decent q3 and q4 to the mix.

RAE at MLS Next and is more pronounced because the best January/February early bloomers are way ahead of November/December late bloomers

Can you point to research showing a relatively even distribution of birth months across top teams at clubs, ECNL, EDP, GA, MLSN, etc.? I am not sure how you can watch a youth soccer game and know everyone's birth month. That is a superpower. Useless, but a superpower nonetheless. And watch the games of "average" teams and ultimately make the assumption that drop out rates are not correlated with birth month.

Your first mistake is including MLSN in this madness
Your second mistake is not knowing I'm not saying I know the birth months

I'm saying the overall mediocre level of competition isn't impacted much at ECNL levels by a few months separation

Nobody is making the argument that going from BY to SY will increase the level of play in any league as ECNL and MLSN non-academies will still be what they are. Places for pay to play clubs where politics rule the day to call home.

It will change who are on the teams, who is starting, who plays what position, who is motivated to work harder to reach another level and who is lined up to play college/pro. And all of this will be a big deal at the younger ages and much less of a big deal at the older ages.

You should write for the Hallmark Channel

The USSF made the change from SY to BY so the best players would be different. It worked.

SY or BY
The best players with the talent, discipline, skills and put in the hard work consistently will still be the best.

And they are the ones that are the oldest in an age group.

Talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic isn't tied to birth month or the oldest.

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Some coaches and teams may choose the biggest and fastest, doesn't mean they're the best.

It just needs a light edit:

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Coaches and teams choose the biggest and fastest.

Over time talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic is tied to birth month or being the oldest.

admittedly anecdotal, but I hope everyone realizes that there are plenty of Q1/Q2 kids under current system who are small in size/stature AND immature. There are plenty of teams that have Q1/Q2 kids who are the smallest in size/stature on their teams (I was team manager, so I saw ages of all teams we played, so this isn't some Nostradamus nonsense). Being born in January or whatever doesn't mean you are bigger or faster or more mature; it depends on the "luck of the DNA draw." It will even out for the most part when many of the leagues switch to SY, with some outliers getting "screwed" of course, so not sure why there needs to be so much discussion about something that is nothing for most players. It worked pre-2016 or whenever and it will work again and not to the detriment of the majority of players. Everyone will end up where they should be and everyone can move on to complaining about something else.

Your use of plenty here is hyperbole and goes against what we all see and experience
It also goes against the statistics, studies and data which shows there is a bias in the selection process by coaches to pick the biggest most mature kids, who mainly fall in Q1 and Q2

like I said, it will all even out for the leagues who switch to SY. I don't care either way bc I know my kids will be okay regardless. you just want to argue and attempt to look smart, failing at both.

What evens out?
How does the q3 and q4 representation go back up to even when they have dropped out of the sport?

Obvs can’t go back in time and make them not quit. And this isn’t anything about RAE. I don’t know anything about it so I can’t opine on it. This is simply my opinion based on being around both when we were SY back and the day and having kids also playing in BY system. So obvs talking about players that are on the teams now. Even out meaning the current q3/q4 who don’t stay with their current team once the switch is made to SY, will move to their new (“younger”) team that will have some or most of the current q1/q2 on it. More or less. Some of each may not make the cut on the new SY team and will have decisions to make, same as always (bc people regardless of dob get the boot). All I am saying is I think this switch to SY won’t be that big of a deal to anyone so don’t know why anyone would be worried either way. I’m not pro BY. I’m not pro SY. I’m pro just decide already do everyone can shut up and move on to the next fake crisis in with soccer.

[Anonymous]

Captain Obvious here.

Approx. 2,150,000 kids play youth soccer at an annual cost of $1,188 a year. The disparity in cost from tax supported rec soccer to competitive travel soccer is obviously significant.

If those numbers are anywhere close to accurate, then Americans spend over
$2,500,000,000 on this game.

Just my opinion, but neither trapped players, nor college coaches recruiting preferences, nor national team development matter that much in the decision-making process. Getting a bigger slice of that $pie or growing the size of that $pie is far and away the primary determining factor in what ECNL, or any other league elects to do regarding SY vs BY.

How the leagues choose to spin their decisions may not reflect that $ is behind each decision.

Sources
https://www.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022_SoP_National_CostsPlay.pdf

https://projectplay.org/youth-sports/facts/participation-rates

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one said trapped players are doomed. The statement was made that BY is systematically dysfunctional for q4 and some q3 players during certain periods of their soccer career.

Don’t waste time arguing with the BY parents who are so blinded by the thought of having to compete with older kids. SY is coming they get one more year and then the party is over for most of those kids.

Isn't someone always older and someone always younger?
Won't SY have a 11 month difference in ages just like BY?

How does this relate to the PP's comment?

We are all BY parents today

Why would people who prefer BY be afraid of competing against older kids, when so many of them want their kids to play up?

Because they are really seeking bragging rights and recognition, not an extra challenge. If you adjust the age group to SY, they are playing with older kids but viewed as "with age." If they play with the same kids across a group divide, that comes with the higher status label of "playing up." Like many of the toxic elements of youth sports, it's all about status-seeking, mostly by the parents.

I love all these assumptions 100% predicated on a false fact that soccer skills, performance, competitiveness are all dictated by birth months

There are many strong q3 and q4 players out there and lots of weak q1 and q2

Also several kids playing up a year.

It all washes out

Are you aware of research showing that it all washes out and birth month has no impact on youth development or are you going with a gut feeling of a random parent of a kid?

The research is what you see on the fields every weekend at ECNL and lower levels of competition.
The differences in average players by birth months isn't that significant when you add decent q3 and q4 to the mix.

RAE at MLS Next and is more pronounced because the best January/February early bloomers are way ahead of November/December late bloomers

Can you point to research showing a relatively even distribution of birth months across top teams at clubs, ECNL, EDP, GA, MLSN, etc.? I am not sure how you can watch a youth soccer game and know everyone's birth month. That is a superpower. Useless, but a superpower nonetheless. And watch the games of "average" teams and ultimately make the assumption that drop out rates are not correlated with birth month.

Your first mistake is including MLSN in this madness
Your second mistake is not knowing I'm not saying I know the birth months

I'm saying the overall mediocre level of competition isn't impacted much at ECNL levels by a few months separation

Nobody is making the argument that going from BY to SY will increase the level of play in any league as ECNL and MLSN non-academies will still be what they are. Places for pay to play clubs where politics rule the day to call home.

It will change who are on the teams, who is starting, who plays what position, who is motivated to work harder to reach another level and who is lined up to play college/pro. And all of this will be a big deal at the younger ages and much less of a big deal at the older ages.

You should write for the Hallmark Channel

The USSF made the change from SY to BY so the best players would be different. It worked.

SY or BY
The best players with the talent, discipline, skills and put in the hard work consistently will still be the best.

And they are the ones that are the oldest in an age group.

Talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic isn't tied to birth month or the oldest.

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Some coaches and teams may choose the biggest and fastest, doesn't mean they're the best.

It just needs a light edit:

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Coaches and teams choose the biggest and fastest.

Over time talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic is tied to birth month or being the oldest.

admittedly anecdotal, but I hope everyone realizes that there are plenty of Q1/Q2 kids under current system who are small in size/stature AND immature. There are plenty of teams that have Q1/Q2 kids who are the smallest in size/stature on their teams (I was team manager, so I saw ages of all teams we played, so this isn't some Nostradamus nonsense). Being born in January or whatever doesn't mean you are bigger or faster or more mature; it depends on the "luck of the DNA draw." It will even out for the most part when many of the leagues switch to SY, with some outliers getting "screwed" of course, so not sure why there needs to be so much discussion about something that is nothing for most players. It worked pre-2016 or whenever and it will work again and not to the detriment of the majority of players. Everyone will end up where they should be and everyone can move on to complaining about something else.

Your use of plenty here is hyperbole and goes against what we all see and experience
It also goes against the statistics, studies and data which shows there is a bias in the selection process by coaches to pick the biggest most mature kids, who mainly fall in Q1 and Q2

like I said, it will all even out for the leagues who switch to SY. I don't care either way bc I know my kids will be okay regardless. you just want to argue and attempt to look smart, failing at both.

What evens out?
How does the q3 and q4 representation go back up to even when they have dropped out of the sport?

Obvs can’t go back in time and make them not quit. And this isn’t anything about RAE. I don’t know anything about it so I can’t opine on it. This is simply my opinion based on being around both when we were SY back and the day and having kids also playing in BY system. So obvs talking about players that are on the teams now. Even out meaning the current q3/q4 who don’t stay with their current team once the switch is made to SY, will move to their new (“younger”) team that will have some or most of the current q1/q2 on it. More or less. Some of each may not make the cut on the new SY team and will have decisions to make, same as always (bc people regardless of dob get the boot). All I am saying is I think this switch to SY won’t be that big of a deal to anyone so don’t know why anyone would be worried either way. I’m not pro BY. I’m not pro SY. I’m pro just decide already do everyone can shut up and move on to the next fake crisis in with soccer.

It's just a shifting and shuffling, no?
Every team is going to gain and lose players based on birth months, not talent and skills.
Some will be better for it, some worse, most will be a wash.

Since only your kid's individual development should truly be your concern, none of it really matters.

[Anonymous]

Oops
MLS Next just made a collaboration announcement for tournaments and development and coaching education etc with other leagues, but not ECNL

[Anonymous]

Ok so is our take away that USYS, AYSO, and US Club are going to go to school year in 2026?

So in my case it means my Q4 2014 won't actually play U13 in 2026, and instead will likely play U12 again? I read the transcript of the podcast and it seems like it basically it a done deal but they always stop just short of saying "we are definitely changing"

[Anonymous]

It’s a done deal. 2026. The lame duck gap year is stupid though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok so is our take away that USYS, AYSO, and US Club are going to go to school year in 2026?

So in my case it means my Q4 2014 won't actually play U13 in 2026, and instead will likely play U12 again? I read the transcript of the podcast and it seems like it basically it a done deal but they always stop just short of saying "we are definitely changing"

That was also my takeaway from the podcast. And that in late February or early March much of the information for the new plan for each (USYS, AYSO, and US Club) will be posted online. Seems USYS, AYSO, and US Club are in agreement and aligned together, and some of the final items for each of them to iron out are the cut off date for SY teams (8/1 vs 9/1) and how to handle crossover events (events where BY teams play against SY teams).

This is not my commentary on whether the change is good or bad. Just a perception of the state of things based on the podcast (for those who did not listen to it).

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one said trapped players are doomed. The statement was made that BY is systematically dysfunctional for q4 and some q3 players during certain periods of their soccer career.

Don’t waste time arguing with the BY parents who are so blinded by the thought of having to compete with older kids. SY is coming they get one more year and then the party is over for most of those kids.

Isn't someone always older and someone always younger?
Won't SY have a 11 month difference in ages just like BY?

How does this relate to the PP's comment?

We are all BY parents today

Why would people who prefer BY be afraid of competing against older kids, when so many of them want their kids to play up?

Because they are really seeking bragging rights and recognition, not an extra challenge. If you adjust the age group to SY, they are playing with older kids but viewed as "with age." If they play with the same kids across a group divide, that comes with the higher status label of "playing up." Like many of the toxic elements of youth sports, it's all about status-seeking, mostly by the parents.

I love all these assumptions 100% predicated on a false fact that soccer skills, performance, competitiveness are all dictated by birth months

There are many strong q3 and q4 players out there and lots of weak q1 and q2

Also several kids playing up a year.

It all washes out

Are you aware of research showing that it all washes out and birth month has no impact on youth development or are you going with a gut feeling of a random parent of a kid?

The research is what you see on the fields every weekend at ECNL and lower levels of competition.
The differences in average players by birth months isn't that significant when you add decent q3 and q4 to the mix.

RAE at MLS Next and is more pronounced because the best January/February early bloomers are way ahead of November/December late bloomers

Can you point to research showing a relatively even distribution of birth months across top teams at clubs, ECNL, EDP, GA, MLSN, etc.? I am not sure how you can watch a youth soccer game and know everyone's birth month. That is a superpower. Useless, but a superpower nonetheless. And watch the games of "average" teams and ultimately make the assumption that drop out rates are not correlated with birth month.

Your first mistake is including MLSN in this madness
Your second mistake is not knowing I'm not saying I know the birth months

I'm saying the overall mediocre level of competition isn't impacted much at ECNL levels by a few months separation

Nobody is making the argument that going from BY to SY will increase the level of play in any league as ECNL and MLSN non-academies will still be what they are. Places for pay to play clubs where politics rule the day to call home.

It will change who are on the teams, who is starting, who plays what position, who is motivated to work harder to reach another level and who is lined up to play college/pro. And all of this will be a big deal at the younger ages and much less of a big deal at the older ages.

You should write for the Hallmark Channel

The USSF made the change from SY to BY so the best players would be different. It worked.

SY or BY
The best players with the talent, discipline, skills and put in the hard work consistently will still be the best.

And they are the ones that are the oldest in an age group.

Talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic isn't tied to birth month or the oldest.

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Some coaches and teams may choose the biggest and fastest, doesn't mean they're the best.

It just needs a light edit:

Physicality and maturity is the advantage to the oldest.

Coaches and teams choose the biggest and fastest.

Over time talent, skills, discipline, soccer intelligence and work ethic is tied to birth month or being the oldest.

admittedly anecdotal, but I hope everyone realizes that there are plenty of Q1/Q2 kids under current system who are small in size/stature AND immature. There are plenty of teams that have Q1/Q2 kids who are the smallest in size/stature on their teams (I was team manager, so I saw ages of all teams we played, so this isn't some Nostradamus nonsense). Being born in January or whatever doesn't mean you are bigger or faster or more mature; it depends on the "luck of the DNA draw." It will even out for the most part when many of the leagues switch to SY, with some outliers getting "screwed" of course, so not sure why there needs to be so much discussion about something that is nothing for most players. It worked pre-2016 or whenever and it will work again and not to the detriment of the majority of players. Everyone will end up where they should be and everyone can move on to complaining about something else.

Your use of plenty here is hyperbole and goes against what we all see and experience
It also goes against the statistics, studies and data which shows there is a bias in the selection process by coaches to pick the biggest most mature kids, who mainly fall in Q1 and Q2

like I said, it will all even out for the leagues who switch to SY. I don't care either way bc I know my kids will be okay regardless. you just want to argue and attempt to look smart, failing at both.

What evens out?
How does the q3 and q4 representation go back up to even when they have dropped out of the sport?

Obvs can’t go back in time and make them not quit. And this isn’t anything about RAE. I don’t know anything about it so I can’t opine on it. This is simply my opinion based on being around both when we were SY back and the day and having kids also playing in BY system. So obvs talking about players that are on the teams now. Even out meaning the current q3/q4 who don’t stay with their current team once the switch is made to SY, will move to their new (“younger”) team that will have some or most of the current q1/q2 on it. More or less. Some of each may not make the cut on the new SY team and will have decisions to make, same as always (bc people regardless of dob get the boot). All I am saying is I think this switch to SY won’t be that big of a deal to anyone so don’t know why anyone would be worried either way. I’m not pro BY. I’m not pro SY. I’m pro just decide already do everyone can shut up and move on to the next fake crisis in with soccer.

It's just a shifting and shuffling, no?
Every team is going to gain and lose players based on birth months, not talent and skills.
Some will be better for it, some worse, most will be a wash.

Since only your kid's individual development should truly be your concern, none of it really matters.

exactly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oops
MLS Next just made a collaboration announcement for tournaments and development and coaching education etc with other leagues, but not ECNL

MLSN needs to establish themselves in every state to compete with ECNL, this looks like a path towards that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oops
MLS Next just made a collaboration announcement for tournaments and development and coaching education etc with other leagues, but not ECNL

MLSN needs to establish themselves in every state to compete with ECNL, this looks like a path towards that.

The top league MLSN needs to compete with a secondary league?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s a done deal. 2026. The lame duck gap year is stupid though.

In the podcast they said they pushed the age change back until 2026 because several member organizations (leagues? Clubs? or whatever) who were for the change to SY said they needed the change pushed back to Fall 2026.

I actually thought the podcast was helpful. The first topic they discuss is the age change, and you can listen to it at 1.25 speed, so it doesn’t take much time to hear their discussion on the topic.