Forum Index
»
Soccer
ECNL moving to school year not calendar
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Looks like summer parents have entered the chat! |
Anonymous
It's one thing to stack the oldest in a 12-month window, it's quite another to allow more of a 15-month window with wiggle room to go even higher. |
Anonymous
I think most of the discussion has revolved around 2 months, at most. Where is the wiggle room to go higher? |
Anonymous
If what you've described is how things end up SY+60 is implemented without people even knowing it. Also different states defining different start dates is a waste of time and it wouldn't accommodate players that move from state to state. In the end no matter how you group players if your primary goal is switching to SY so kids in the same grade can play on the same team some states are just going to have a RAE advantage when playing other states depending on the school start date. (Assuming no trapped players) You can either define a hard cutoff date and have some trapped players. Or you can implement SY+60 which allows for a date range cutoff and have no trapped players. (But some states would have a 2 month RAE advantage against other states. But not when they play their own state.) |
Anonymous
That's why I keep calling it SY+60. If you put the 2 month accommodation into the name it makes it hard to slippery slope it into SY+120. Especially after its written down and used in literature/documentation. This also keeps the GY holdback/regrades out. 
|
Anonymous
|
Just wondering, because I really have no clue, but would it be possible for ECNL to allow a waiver for up to two Q4 players to play down next year?
For example, two 2011's born Oct, Nov, or Dec rostered on the 2012's. The rationale would be to ease in the transition of the 2026 BY --> SY change. Would it even be sensible? I ask because I my son's age group has 5 of 16 that are SEP-DEC birth dates. That is a lot of roster changing. |
Anonymous
ECNL could make a rule that 18 Q4 players can play down per team and essentially have SY teams tomorrow. |
Anonymous
Age verfication is harder than you think -- just ask lacrosse. |
Anonymous
Because your carve out will lead to essentially GY (also people point to lacrosse which does the 15-month thing) -- which leads to lots of shenanigans. Your going to make people actually want to return OR stay with BY! |
Anonymous
Well, I think you’re making a lot of leaps to give the impression of a doom and gloom scenario. I think 99.9% of the people agree that we do not want a true grad year scenario. I also think most reasonable people understand the benefit of what is being discussed, which is grouping kids with their grade as much as possible. Of course, that does not mean you have a January 2011 playing with sixth graders regardless of why that kid was held back. |
Anonymous
I agree but it only matters for the top teams. And everyone knows everyone else on the top teams so it would be hard to cheat. |
Anonymous
You'd only need grade verification for 9/1 to 7/1 birthdays. Everyone else would only need a birthcert. |
Anonymous
They may go with waivers for Q4 to play down or not. Will know next month. ECNL did say they were against exceptions to the age dates. Not sure if this would overlook this for the lame duck year. |
Anonymous
|
I'm well aware of how sneaky and annoying the regraders/homeschoolers can be in their efforts to let their kid cheat and play down.
With SY+60 -Players born 7/1-9/1 need to provide a birthcert and proof of grade enrolled. - Players born 9/1-71 only need a birthcert. It would be really hard to play down with above in place. The only situation where you might hear about playing down a grade is if a player started in a district whos school started early. Then they moved to a district that started late. Then the parents held them back in the new district. But even in this crazy edge case the player would be no more than 2 months older than other players and still technically within the official eligibility window. |
Anonymous
The U.S. does not have a system for grade verification, clubs wouldn't want to be part of verification, they (and parents) wouldn't want other clubs cheating the system, a 14 month age range will be lobbied to become a 15 month age range and finally, it's not happening, never was happening and hasn't been suggested by anyone in the to skirt age rules that don't even exist yet. This is why they came up with 3 primary options, By, Sept 1 and Aug 1. They don't want a wild west of random waivers to try to jam as many older players in an age range as possible. In fact, in effort to avoid having unnecessary older players in an age range, Sept 1 is getting more buzz than Aug 1. SY while allowing 2 months of extra kids if they are in the grade below them is a nonstarter no matter what confusing label is used to describe it. Honestly, if you feel this strong about it, you need to volunteer to help clubs/leagues more. They will accept free labor not random unsolicited advice from uninformed people off the street. |