ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the last few posts just highlight the fact that there is no perfect system, and someone is going to be, or feel, disadvantaged. We will see what happens soon enough.

With SY+60 you eliminate all trapped players + would not allow playing down. Which according to what I've read from SY people is a good thing.

Where you would see complaints is from states or school districts that started 9/1 about states or districts that started 8/1. This is because nobody on a 9/1 team would be born before 9/1. (Unless someone moved into the district from an 8/1 district). While on the 8/1 team you'd likely have several close to 8/1 players rostered. Basically SY+60 gives up 2 months of RAE to makes everything work to accommodate different district start dates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

In general you want to do 9/1+60 or 9/1+90 to completely get rid of trapped players.

It's important to choose +60 or +90 so there's a cutoff to not allow hold backs / regrades or homeschoolers from gaming the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

In general you want to do 9/1+60 or 9/1+90 to completely get rid of trapped players.

It's important to choose +60 or +90 so there's a cutoff to not allow hold backs / regrades or homeschoolers from gaming the system.

Is apparently happening anyway in Lacrosse (older players playing down) because they can't implement a strong enough age verification system. People who look older just say "I'm grad" year (basically +60/+90).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

In general you want to do 9/1+60 or 9/1+90 to completely get rid of trapped players.

It's important to choose +60 or +90 so there's a cutoff to not allow hold backs / regrades or homeschoolers from gaming the system.

Technically a small number of hold backs / regrades could still get in. Say you were in a school district that starts on 9/1 but were born on 8/1 and because of this were forced to start school a year early.

In this very limited case a player could regrade down in school and be eligable to play with that grade. This is bacuase their birthday is in the +60.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

In general you want to do 9/1+60 or 9/1+90 to completely get rid of trapped players.

It's important to choose +60 or +90 so there's a cutoff to not allow hold backs / regrades or homeschoolers from gaming the system.

Is apparently happening anyway in Lacrosse (older players playing down) because they can't implement a strong enough age verification system. People who look older just say "I'm grad" year (basically +60/+90).

If a league or event was confirming proof of birth cert and proof of enrolled grade in school what you're describing can't happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

In general you want to do 9/1+60 or 9/1+90 to completely get rid of trapped players.

It's important to choose +60 or +90 so there's a cutoff to not allow hold backs / regrades or homeschoolers from gaming the system.

Is apparently happening anyway in Lacrosse (older players playing down) because they can't implement a strong enough age verification system. People who look older just say "I'm grad" year (basically +60/+90).

If a league or event was confirming proof of birth cert and proof of enrolled grade in school what you're describing can't happen.

Well, bad age verification what they're complaining about on the lacrosse boards (and what USA lacrosse is saying they're fixing!). But maybe it's just unhinged parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

In general you want to do 9/1+60 or 9/1+90 to completely get rid of trapped players.

It's important to choose +60 or +90 so there's a cutoff to not allow hold backs / regrades or homeschoolers from gaming the system.

Technically a small number of hold backs / regrades could still get in. Say you were in a school district that starts on 9/1 but were born on 8/1 and because of this were forced to start school a year early.

In this very limited case a player could regrade down in school and be eligable to play with that grade. This is bacuase their birthday is in the +60.

Just remember all these "fixes" basically mean that May or June become the youngest players on a team AND instead of just 12 months older players, they'll be dealing with 14 to month older, sooooo we'll see the end of Q2 birthdays playing at elite levels of youth soccer!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

In general you want to do 9/1+60 or 9/1+90 to completely get rid of trapped players.

It's important to choose +60 or +90 so there's a cutoff to not allow hold backs / regrades or homeschoolers from gaming the system.

Is apparently happening anyway in Lacrosse (older players playing down) because they can't implement a strong enough age verification system. People who look older just say "I'm grad" year (basically +60/+90).

If a league or event was confirming proof of birth cert and proof of enrolled grade in school what you're describing can't happen.

Well, bad age verification what they're complaining about on the lacrosse boards (and what USA lacrosse is saying they're fixing!). But maybe it's just unhinged parents.

As a former Lacrosse player I can explain what's happening.

Soccer is closely associated with Clubs and clubs group players by age and at as many levels as possible to maximize profit.

Lacrosse is closely associated with Private Schools. Private schools don't really believe in making everything fair. They want to win and will bend rules or pay players (scholorships) to make it happen.

The result is Lacrosse aligns more with GY mentalities. Lacrosse clubs aren't the leaders. Soccer is the opposite clubs have all the power and private schools aren't the leaders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the last few posts just highlight the fact that there is no perfect system, and someone is going to be, or feel, disadvantaged. We will see what happens soon enough.

With SY+60 you eliminate all trapped players + would not allow playing down. Which according to what I've read from SY people is a good thing.

Where you would see complaints is from states or school districts that started 9/1 about states or districts that started 8/1. This is because nobody on a 9/1 team would be born before 9/1. (Unless someone moved into the district from an 8/1 district). While on the 8/1 team you'd likely have several close to 8/1 players rostered. Basically SY+60 gives up 2 months of RAE to makes everything work to accommodate different district start dates.

Still not under consideration and still weaker than just going with 7/1.

9/1 is getting more air play than 8/1, so even 10/1 more likely than 8/1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SY + 60? Still don’t know what that means.

Sy+60 means for most players there's a hard cutoff of 9/1 + 12 months and all you need is an eligable birthcert to play.

However if you were born 60 days before 9/1 and can provide birthcert and evidence that you're enrolled in that grade in school even if you're technically up to 60 days older you can play with that age group.

What this does is create one rule that works in all geographies that completely addresses all trapped players. Also because you need to provide proof of enrollment in xyz grade players can't play down a grade.

End result is no trapped players and all players at events and showcases are one grade in school.

So in this system, if you’re looking at September 1, 2012 - August 31, 2013 group, if you are born in Aug or July of 2012, but can prove you’re in the same grade as the Sept 1 - Aug 31 grouping, you’re playing with that group even though you’re a little bit older?

Parents are always working an angle. I don't blame them ... Otherwise they'd be the youngest. Now they'd be the oldest. Sounds like June or May parents need to come up with their "fix" next!

9/1+364

This doesn't really change anything other than allowing hold back / regrade players.

9/1+700 still requires a valid birth cert (which they'd almost certainly have because of +700) and proof that they're enrolled in that grade at school.

The proof that you're enrolled in X grade at school is what prohibits players from playing down + keeps all players on a team a certain grade which has value for scouts.

In general you want to do 9/1+60 or 9/1+90 to completely get rid of trapped players.

It's important to choose +60 or +90 so there's a cutoff to not allow hold backs / regrades or homeschoolers from gaming the system.

Technically a small number of hold backs / regrades could still get in. Say you were in a school district that starts on 9/1 but were born on 8/1 and because of this were forced to start school a year early.

In this very limited case a player could regrade down in school and be eligable to play with that grade. This is bacuase their birthday is in the +60.

Just remember all these "fixes" basically mean that May or June become the youngest players on a team AND instead of just 12 months older players, they'll be dealing with 14 to month older, sooooo we'll see the end of Q2 birthdays playing at elite levels of youth soccer!

Yep, and these players will flock to BY leagues.

But this will always happen to the players at the lower end of the eligibility window.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the last few posts just highlight the fact that there is no perfect system, and someone is going to be, or feel, disadvantaged. We will see what happens soon enough.

With SY+60 you eliminate all trapped players + would not allow playing down. Which according to what I've read from SY people is a good thing.

Where you would see complaints is from states or school districts that started 9/1 about states or districts that started 8/1. This is because nobody on a 9/1 team would be born before 9/1. (Unless someone moved into the district from an 8/1 district). While on the 8/1 team you'd likely have several close to 8/1 players rostered. Basically SY+60 gives up 2 months of RAE to makes everything work to accommodate different district start dates.

Still not under consideration and still weaker than just going with 7/1.

9/1 is getting more air play than 8/1, so even 10/1 more likely than 8/1.

A 7/1 hard cutoff allows players a grade up in school to play down with a lower grade team.

This is bad for scouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the last few posts just highlight the fact that there is no perfect system, and someone is going to be, or feel, disadvantaged. We will see what happens soon enough.

With SY+60 you eliminate all trapped players + would not allow playing down. Which according to what I've read from SY people is a good thing.

Where you would see complaints is from states or school districts that started 9/1 about states or districts that started 8/1. This is because nobody on a 9/1 team would be born before 9/1. (Unless someone moved into the district from an 8/1 district). While on the 8/1 team you'd likely have several close to 8/1 players rostered. Basically SY+60 gives up 2 months of RAE to makes everything work to accommodate different district start dates.

Still not under consideration and still weaker than just going with 7/1.

9/1 is getting more air play than 8/1, so even 10/1 more likely than 8/1.

Instead if digging your heels in on a specific date cutoff. At least think about why SY+60 makes a lot of sense.

Try to poke holes in it. (You won't be able to. Ive tried)

With a single date cutoff someone is always going to be upset.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the last few posts just highlight the fact that there is no perfect system, and someone is going to be, or feel, disadvantaged. We will see what happens soon enough.

With SY+60 you eliminate all trapped players + would not allow playing down. Which according to what I've read from SY people is a good thing.

Where you would see complaints is from states or school districts that started 9/1 about states or districts that started 8/1. This is because nobody on a 9/1 team would be born before 9/1. (Unless someone moved into the district from an 8/1 district). While on the 8/1 team you'd likely have several close to 8/1 players rostered. Basically SY+60 gives up 2 months of RAE to makes everything work to accommodate different district start dates.

Still not under consideration and still weaker than just going with 7/1.

9/1 is getting more air play than 8/1, so even 10/1 more likely than 8/1.

Instead if digging your heels in on a specific date cutoff. At least think about why SY+60 makes a lot of sense.

Try to poke holes in it. (You won't be able to. Ive tried)

With a single date cutoff someone is always going to be upset.

It makes sense if the intention to have GY (and give the MOST RAE advantage to summer birthdays -- even more than the 12-month version, since you'll have some kids more than 14 months older than the youngest player now. Yes, they MAY be in the same grade but I can't wait for the parents to complain about the size/growth differences! Also, you basically MOST disadvantage all the Q2 kids).