ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+60
-90
-30
9/1
8/1
+100

You've all lost your minds. No wonder this level of kids soccer is mediocre at best

How so? Thinking outside the box at a moment of big change? Taking an approach akin to many other thriving (and growing in popularity!) youth sports? Evolve or fizzle out!

Because it's just seen as trying to game the system. The survey US Soccer shared showed GY wasn't favored at all (maybe that 12 percent other). Want to play with your grade? That's what middle school and HS can do for you (and rec leagues which already do it that way).

All those other youth sports “gaming the system” will happily absorb more players who leave youth soccer and find their fun and competition elsewhere, with their grade peers! Wake up and have an open mind.

If you are playing club soccer and the more you move up, chances are you aren't playing with your classmates, even if it becomes SY. Maybe the same grade, yes, but often from a larger metro area. People already drive 60-90 minutes to be on top level teams. Small leagues already cater to grade level if there's demand for it. Changing to SY won't stop people from switching sports -- there are enough OTHER problems within youth soccer that fuels that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+60
-90
-30
9/1
8/1
+100

You've all lost your minds. No wonder this level of kids soccer is mediocre at best

How so? Thinking outside the box at a moment of big change? Taking an approach akin to many other thriving (and growing in popularity!) youth sports? Evolve or fizzle out!

Because it's just seen as trying to game the system. The survey US Soccer shared showed GY wasn't favored at all (maybe that 12 percent other). Want to play with your grade? That's what middle school and HS can do for you (and rec leagues which already do it that way).

All those other youth sports “gaming the system” will happily absorb more players who leave youth soccer and find their fun and competition elsewhere, with their grade peers! Wake up and have an open mind.

I think you'll be disappointed. The proposed changes discuss putting kids within a 12-month AGE group window that is similar but may not be exact to school year. The flexibility being talked about is between states and leagues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So this is basically what you’re talking about

https://www.usalacrosse.com/sites/default/files/documents/Games/USAL-AgeGroupChart-15mo-24-25.pdf

which makes a lot of sense and captures the most people within their grade and allows the late summer kids to play with their grade if they started school later. If you’re a Sept 2 kid and a grade ahead, you’d be playing with the grade below, but could play up if the team will have you. There is a much smaller group of kids who are past Sept 1 that are a full year ahead, and a much, much larger group of late summer birthdays who started school later (those July/Aug kids).

No, 9/1 +60 is different in that it doesn't allow players born 60 days before 9/1 to play in X grouping unless they're enrolled in that grade in school.

What this does is address ALL trapped players. But at the same time guarantee that all players on a team in a grouping are X grade in school. Which is what all the SY people feel is beneficial for scouts at events and showcases.

Make sense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+60
-90
-30
9/1
8/1
+100

You've all lost your minds. No wonder this level of kids soccer is mediocre at best

How so? Thinking outside the box at a moment of big change? Taking an approach akin to many other thriving (and growing in popularity!) youth sports? Evolve or fizzle out!

Because it's just seen as trying to game the system. The survey US Soccer shared showed GY wasn't favored at all (maybe that 12 percent other). Want to play with your grade? That's what middle school and HS can do for you (and rec leagues which already do it that way).

All those other youth sports “gaming the system” will happily absorb more players who leave youth soccer and find their fun and competition elsewhere, with their grade peers! Wake up and have an open mind.

I think you'll be disappointed. The proposed changes discuss putting kids within a 12-month AGE group window that is similar but may not be exact to school year. The flexibility being talked about is between states and leagues.

Exactly 9/1 +60 makes it so a single league that exists across multiple states (that have different school start dates) can all play against each other.

Some states might have a slight RAE advantage but it will be 60 days at most and most kids won't be born on the exact day that's exactly 60 days before 9/1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+60
-90
-30
9/1
8/1
+100

You've all lost your minds. No wonder this level of kids soccer is mediocre at best

How so? Thinking outside the box at a moment of big change? Taking an approach akin to many other thriving (and growing in popularity!) youth sports? Evolve or fizzle out!

Because it's just seen as trying to game the system. The survey US Soccer shared showed GY wasn't favored at all (maybe that 12 percent other). Want to play with your grade? That's what middle school and HS can do for you (and rec leagues which already do it that way).

All those other youth sports “gaming the system” will happily absorb more players who leave youth soccer and find their fun and competition elsewhere, with their grade peers! Wake up and have an open mind.

🤦‍♂️ that isn’t what is happening.

Soccer exploded in the US over the past 50 years.

Soccer hit a plateau of participation in 1999 and has roughly been stable over the past 25 years. Some up, some down.

US soccer participation peaked in 2010.

US soccer participation has been growing since 2022.

Other team sports have been losing participation over the past 24 years.

This isn’t unique to the US.

There is a youth cultural shift happening, with the access to internet, video games, social media, as well as different parenting priorities, household formation demographics, work life balance changes, etc.

Soccer participation is not in a vacuum.

Age cutoff to SY MIGHT help at the grassroots-roots level. And in theory, a wide base (or fat middle for distribution curve) should move more absolute numbers to the extremes (both awful and exceptional). That holds true if opportunity was dynamic, but it’s not, the top echelon for youth soccer is static.
The top echelon for adult soccer is static at the national team level, and sticky (but more dynamic) at the professional level. So the expanded base is unlikely to produce much marginal gain - it takes roughly 60k your players to find one NT member on the girls side, and even more on the boys side. That ratio will shift to maybe 100k:1 with a wider base - so it will become more competitive, but that doesn’t mean there will be a qualitative increase because the path to qualitative growth is not solely a “feedstock” issue.

Soccer leaking its quality athletes to other sports is an unproven myth and the data suggests it’s actually taking athletes, not losing them. I’ve NEVER seen an anecdotal report of a professional athlete saying “my real passion was soccer, but I just never got the chance because soccer became too expensive compared with elite baseball/basketball/football/anything.” And EVERY youth sport has the same discussion boards moaning about “pay to play” and “it’s too expensive” and “it’s a money grab business.” That said I’ve seen lots of quotes by people in the sport spouting out the “affordable” truthism - but NEVER with data, only in OPINION about explaining some data or in response to a leading question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+60
-90
-30
9/1
8/1
+100

You've all lost your minds. No wonder this level of kids soccer is mediocre at best

How so? Thinking outside the box at a moment of big change? Taking an approach akin to many other thriving (and growing in popularity!) youth sports? Evolve or fizzle out!

Because it's just seen as trying to game the system. The survey US Soccer shared showed GY wasn't favored at all (maybe that 12 percent other). Want to play with your grade? That's what middle school and HS can do for you (and rec leagues which already do it that way).

All those other youth sports “gaming the system” will happily absorb more players who leave youth soccer and find their fun and competition elsewhere, with their grade peers! Wake up and have an open mind.

I think you'll be disappointed. The proposed changes discuss putting kids within a 12-month AGE group window that is similar but may not be exact to school year. The flexibility being talked about is between states and leagues.

Exactly 9/1 +60 makes it so a single league that exists across multiple states (that have different school start dates) can all play against each other.

Some states might have a slight RAE advantage but it will be 60 days at most and most kids won't be born on the exact day that's exactly 60 days before 9/1.

Fast forward 5 years and this thread will still be going hard with all the Q4 parents complaining about the +60 July and August kids “stealing roster spots.”

An ECNL director with a December kid who rode the bench and got recruited to “North Dakota State Teacher’s College” D1 soccer when the director believe he was a Stanford worthy player makes a push to remove +60s because they stole his kids spot.

All the Q4 parents rally and crap on Q3 parents “sorry for your loss you ECNL hat wearers.” And go hundreds of pages telling Q1-3 parents that their Q4 kids will take all of their roster spots now that +60 is being removed.

USSF decides that they’ll review mandates and get back to everyone in 4-6 months.

Q4 parents have full thread meltdown about “why not right now! It’s so unfair”

USSF decides to go back to a mandate.

Everyone is pissed.

US soccer chooses April 15th to go into affect mid season in 3 years, nobody knows why. But there is a PDF published outlining their reason, “too piss off everyone except May kids / parents.”

Nuclear war begins with Spain as ground zero. The US wins the World Cup the following year,

[Anonymous]

Can we give up this topic already

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we give up this topic already

Quitter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we give up this topic already

Sure now that SY is solved with 9/1 +60

[Anonymous]

9/1 + 60 must be the answer!

I bet schools would love having to create letters or forms that show a child is in x grade so that kids can play on a certain club team. The schools are likely overstaffed and underworked, so I am sure they would relish the opportunity to provide documentation for something so important. Surely, they wouldn't have something more pressing to do.

Also, club admin would get to track more paperwork. I don't see a downside to this at all.

Occam's Razor be damned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:9/1 + 60 must be the answer!

I bet schools would love having to create letters or forms that show a child is in x grade so that kids can play on a certain club team. The schools are likely overstaffed and underworked, so I am sure they would relish the opportunity to provide documentation for something so important. Surely, they wouldn't have something more pressing to do.

Also, club admin would get to track more paperwork. I don't see a downside to this at all.

Occam's Razor be damned.

All parents need to provide is proof of enrollment in X grade.

They could literally take a screenshot of their kids online class pages.

School admins won't need to provide anything that isn't already available online.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:9/1 + 60 must be the answer!

I bet schools would love having to create letters or forms that show a child is in x grade so that kids can play on a certain club team. The schools are likely overstaffed and underworked, so I am sure they would relish the opportunity to provide documentation for something so important. Surely, they wouldn't have something more pressing to do.

Also, club admin would get to track more paperwork. I don't see a downside to this at all.

Occam's Razor be damned.

Reguarding the club admin. Clubs just need parents to upload a copy of each players birth cert + if born 60 days before 9/1 proof of the grade enrolled in.

This is 1 more screenshot than is currently requited and only for players born 60 days before 9/1.

The team manager would need to keep this info in a folder for tournaments. But it all also should be uploaded before the event as well.

Seems straightforward to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9/1 + 60 must be the answer!

I bet schools would love having to create letters or forms that show a child is in x grade so that kids can play on a certain club team. The schools are likely overstaffed and underworked, so I am sure they would relish the opportunity to provide documentation for something so important. Surely, they wouldn't have something more pressing to do.

Also, club admin would get to track more paperwork. I don't see a downside to this at all.

Occam's Razor be damned.

All parents need to provide is proof of enrollment in X grade.

They could literally take a screenshot of their kids online class pages.

School admins won't need to provide anything that isn't already available online.

Yeah, and if schools don't have schedules done until a week before school starts, what's your answer? I know my kid doesn't get his schedule before the club season starts.

[Anonymous]

The 9/1 + 60 would capture the July and August birthdays who entered Kindergarten older rather than right at age 5, correct (ie, older side of their grade)? One poster keeps claiming those kids wouldn’t be captured and able to play with their actual grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:9/1 + 60 must be the answer!

I bet schools would love having to create letters or forms that show a child is in x grade so that kids can play on a certain club team. The schools are likely overstaffed and underworked, so I am sure they would relish the opportunity to provide documentation for something so important. Surely, they wouldn't have something more pressing to do.

Also, club admin would get to track more paperwork. I don't see a downside to this at all.

Occam's Razor be damned.

Reguarding the club admin. Clubs just need parents to upload a copy of each players birth cert + if born 60 days before 9/1 proof of the grade enrolled in.

This is 1 more screenshot than is currently requited and only for players born 60 days before 9/1.

The team manager would need to keep this info in a folder for tournaments. But it all also should be uploaded before the event as well.

Seems straightforward to me.

It is straight forward. And already happening as school’s must provide proof of enrollment for all sorts of reasons, sports and otherwise. Not onerous.