Spring 2017 soccer club tryouts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.

Except a U19 age group has been added. So no, nobody has lost a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.

Except a U19 age group has been added. So no, nobody has lost a year.

Omg you are crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.

Except a U19 age group has been added. So no, nobody has lost a year.

Omg you are crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.

Except a U19 age group has been added. So no, nobody has lost a year.

Retard, everyone is away at college--except October-December birthdays by U19.

[Anonymous]

It's a matter of perspective. Under the old system my DS (DOB:7/25/04) tried out in the Spring when he was 7 to be on a U9 team. At the first practice, he had been 8 all of 3 weeks when some of the boys were turning 9. As time went on, these older, faster, more developed boys (the current crop of boys who are forced to skip a year of development and go from U12 to U14 with the birth year change) were selected for the A team and got the better coaching and competition where my DS was on a lower team because he could not keep up physically. There were no kids in the last third of the year (April to July) on the A team. The second team, while quite good, was not given the same time and resources, but we supplemented with extra training and he improved and eventually made the A team as the first player off the bench. With the birth year change, my DS is still on the younger end of the age group but he is closer to the middle and not at the very end. The fall 03 birthdays who used to be his teammates were moved to U14 are enormous compared to him -- this change was a positive thing for him. That said, I realize how difficult it is for the fall birthdays who were moved form the front of the timeline to the end. The relative age effect is real -- but it can be mitigated with extra training or a coaching staff that is aware and takes age into account in their coaching. US Soccer at he higher levels has programs specifically for July to December birthdays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where did this 'missed year' go? Did they teleport your kid forward a year? Did he jump into a Delorean? Your player was born in a specific year (04, 05, whatever). If in the age group change the designation of that year changed, he cannot have 'missed' a year. You are making an awful lot out of a label.

God- you idiot.

If you are an 11 or 12+ Fall Birthday when the change was made you are skipping an entire year and moving up to be with a group that has played a year of travel longer--jumping to a bigger field/more players earlier. Yes--the older kids on the team will graduate a year earlier from HS and then your last year you are stuck with hardly any club teammates because they have already left for college. So the year you didn't lose is the shitty year where it doesn't matter and everyone would have already applied to colleges.

It was irrelevant for most 2008s last year and every birth year thereafter.

Our club put the older kids with the young birth dates on the lower teams at the initial merge. Yes--my Fall U12 (shoukd ha e been U11) was better than the majority of early birth dates by the end of the year. However, missing/jumping a year in the middle part of your travel experience was a bigger disadvantage than just being a younger birth year always. This was different.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.

Except a U19 age group has been added. So no, nobody has lost a year.

Omg you are crazy.

Omg quit soccer then. This topic has been beaten to death last year. Get your kid into camps and play some Super Y over the summer and catch up on the technical side. This you could have always done regardless of birthdate and club soccer.

Your kid has missed roughly 75 practices and 35 games for a total of about 140 hours of soccer. That is the "giant" hole you're in. Or in adult time frame your kid is 3.5 work weeks behind. This is not insurmountable lost experience. Take that $2000 you saved by not paying for your missed year of travel and find some camps and quit bitching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.

Except a U19 age group has been added. So no, nobody has lost a year.

Omg you are crazy.

Omg quit soccer then. This topic has been beaten to death last year. Get your kid into camps and play some Super Y over the summer and catch up on the technical side. This you could have always done regardless of birthdate and club soccer.

Your kid has missed roughly 75 practices and 35 games for a total of about 140 hours of soccer. That is the "giant" hole you're in. Or in adult time frame your kid is 3.5 work weeks behind. This is not insurmountable lost experience. Take that $2000 you saved by not paying for your missed year of travel and find some camps and quit bitching.

Who is bitching? My kid was born in July. The change was great for him. This is just about your weird problem admitting that some kids missed a year. It's annoying to see what is clearly a fact being debated. But whatever--there are many way more important facts under threat to worry about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.

Except a U19 age group has been added. So no, nobody has lost a year.

Omg you are crazy.

Omg quit soccer then. This topic has been beaten to death last year. Get your kid into camps and play some Super Y over the summer and catch up on the technical side. This you could have always done regardless of birthdate and club soccer.

Your kid has missed roughly 75 practices and 35 games for a total of about 140 hours of soccer. That is the "giant" hole you're in. Or in adult time frame your kid is 3.5 work weeks behind. This is not insurmountable lost experience. Take that $2000 you saved by not paying for your missed year of travel and find some camps and quit bitching.

Who is bitching? My kid was born in July. The change was great for him. This is just about your weird problem admitting that some kids missed a year. It's annoying to see what is clearly a fact being debated. But whatever--there are many way more important facts under threat to worry about.

I'm tempted to continue the debate just to see if this guy can come up with anything more ludicrous than "it's like 3.5 work weeks" as he ties himself in knots to avoid seeing the point. But yeah, I think I'll move on. Point's been made to any reasonable reader. The birth-year change sucked. But changing back wouldn't solve anything. Onward.

[Anonymous]

I see the point, I simply don't think it matters as much as you do. I don't think in the long run it will truly affect your kid's development. I think you are simply complaining about a short term adjustment that you still have time to adjust to.

Your kid was not the only first time U10 player this year. Your kid played with and against other kids affected in the very same way.

All you need to worry about are the following:

Did your kid have fun?

Did your kid improve?

Will your kid continue to play soccer?

[Anonymous]

I'm glad some of you are obsessed with soccer because your logic and calculation skills clearly aren't where they should be.

Whether you agree with PP or not, you can't logically argue that someone who has a November birthday and went from being a U12 to a U14 did not "lose a year" or , to put it another way, have one less year of travel training than the kids with earlier birthdays who went from U13 to U14. How much you value that year is up to you, but you can't say it doesn't exist.

I personally think it matters more for the younger groups (where they have had fewer overall years of training), and for the older boys. For instance, a boy with a December 2001 birthday went from being a U14 8th grader to a U16 9th grader and likely has mostly U16 10 graders on his team (anyone born Jan-Sept for kids in their "correct" grade (unredshirted, etc)). There can be a big growth spurt at that age, so if you have a smaller freshman and a bigger sophomore, it will be magnified. And, as stated, those kids will have had more training. It might not matter, but it exists.

All that being said - it's done. Time to move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see the point, I simply don't think it matters as much as you do. I don't think in the long run it will truly affect your kid's development. I think you are simply complaining about a short term adjustment that you still have time to adjust to.

Your kid was not the only first time U10 player this year. Your kid played with and against other kids affected in the very same way.

All you need to worry about are the following:

Did your kid have fun?

Did your kid improve?

Will your kid continue to play soccer?

By the time they're 16, it might be forgotten. Hopefully, most families will be patient and work through it rather than quitting.

That's how we approach it as parents. But it was still unnecessary, doing far more damage than good.

[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:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.

Except a U19 age group has been added. So no, nobody has lost a year.

Omg you are crazy.

Omg quit soccer then. This topic has been beaten to death last year. Get your kid into camps and play some Super Y over the summer and catch up on the technical side. This you could have always done regardless of birthdate and club soccer.

Your kid has missed roughly 75 practices and 35 games for a total of about 140 hours of soccer. That is the "giant" hole you're in. Or in adult time frame your kid is 3.5 work weeks behind. This is not insurmountable lost experience. Take that $2000 you saved by not paying for your missed year of travel and find some camps and quit bitching.

Who is bitching? My kid was born in July. The change was great for him. This is just about your weird problem admitting that some kids missed a year. It's annoying to see what is clearly a fact being debated. But whatever--there are many way more important facts under threat to worry about.

I'm tempted to continue the debate just to see if this guy can come up with anything more ludicrous than "it's like 3.5 work weeks" as he ties himself in knots to avoid seeing the point. But yeah, I think I'll move on. Point's been made to any reasonable reader. The birth-year change sucked. But changing back wouldn't solve anything. Onward.

I'm missing a year from colllege. Mostly my junior year. Too many shots and nickel drafts. I felt so left behind when I came to my senior year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^irinically, for HS and college ball the kids f@cked over with the birth change have the advantage there because they are essentially playing down with their classmates a U-younger.

? Not really. The kids that got screwed in the birth year change are those at the end of the calendar year. October-Dec kids mostly - at least in VA where the school cutoff is Sept. 30. So if your child is a high school freshman with a November birthday, she/he got screwed in travel, but nothing changed in high school. (S)He's still playing against other freshman/soph/juniors/seniors. They might be older, but they would have been that regardless. Those kids were playing with those kids on travel prior to the change.

[Anonymous]

This conversation reminds me so much of the bodybuilders that argued over how many days were in a week. All-time classic.

https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=107926751