ECNL moving to school year not calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Regrades”? These are kids! How about some humanity and remembering that these are kids we are focused on. I guess parents should tell their Kindergarten child who was born in late August and wants to join their school soccer team that they can’t because they are a “regrade” because their preschool teachers and pediatrician recommended they do a Pre-K year before starting Kindergarten. 🙄

Whatever excuse you can think of to justify making your kid the biggest strongest fastest in their class.

I think regrades / hold back parents are pathetic.

lol. Almost as pathetic as coming on an anonymous forum and bashing people? Good for you, keyboard warrior. 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Regrades”? These are kids! How about some humanity and remembering that these are kids we are focused on. I guess parents should tell their Kindergarten child who was born in late August and wants to join their school soccer team that they can’t because they are a “regrade” because their preschool teachers and pediatrician recommended they do a Pre-K year before starting Kindergarten. 🙄

Good point. .... Still, if it's a school soccer team, there is no problem whatsoever.

That’s not true. Most local leagues that school teams play in are under the umbrella of SFYS/AYSO/US Club. They aren’t run by the school they are just formed by parents and filled with kids in the grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cases of lying with falsified documents are outliers. That can occur with birth year, too. Those who will cheat will cheat under model. But if moving to SY system it really needs to capture (within reason) all trapped players to align with their grade which can be achieved with the 9/1 + 60 with proof of grade for the July and August kids. To trap thousands of kids across the nation with the wrong grade because of one additional piece of paperwork for those kids and a fear of some cheaters is ridiculous.

You know playing with different grades isn't necessarily a negative -- as long as it's within the same 12-month window. There's no need to go crazy over making it be the same grade for a private, club-based system that rewards the most talented/best players anyway.

Once they move to school year it certainly will be a negative to be the only (or one of very few) on a team that is a grade behind plus the very youngest on the team. In birth year it’s normal to have some split in grades but that won’t be the case in school year, and it will be isolating for those stray kids a grade behind.

What schools don't have multiple grades in them or even don't have split classes? It really isn't that isolating. It's pretty normal. In fact, it could be kinda cool unless the team is full of mean girls OR jerk boys. Then, being in the same grade really doesn't matter as the team dynamic will be pretty toxic.

What a ridiculous response. Of course schools have multiple grades. But you now have an August kid who is the only one who can’t play on their grade’s school team. This becomes super amplified under a SY soccer registration. I don’t think young kids will be excited to be excluded from the team with their classmates or think it is cool to have to try and get a spot on the team a grade above that may just say no dice we already filled our team when they were all in Kindergarten so no room for you new Kindergartner on our first grade team. Also kids can be quite insular about their grade superiority even at young ages. Even on my kids’ birth year teams there are a lot of comments made about the “baby players” who are a grade below.

But most rec/school leagues use grade as a way to form teams now. With higher leagues/teams, people don't care as much about grade, only whether you can play. In-between, is the so-called trapped player problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They already know what they are going to do at this point about age spans. They haven’t gotten this far and don’t know. So no amount of emailing them to allow this or that is going to matter.

I don't think they do. The US Youth Soccer guy hinted that they would be creating different rules to accommodate different districts/states. This will never work because districts change start dates all the time. Also it would be impossible to keep track of all the different states and school start dates to maintain up to date rules.

That is for local league. For national league, it can only have one cutoff date with no waivers. And ECNL CEO already hinted 9/1. I will bet my money on it.

We'll see, 9/1 + 60 gets rid of ALL complaints from parents + trapped players.

9/1 by itself still has trapped players depending on the state/district. Which means they'll still have a group of complaining parents.

ECNL will not give a f**k on those parents whose kids are marginal and can only play down to join NL. They will not bring value to ECNL.

Just reread your comment and I don't think you understand how 9/1 + 60 would work.

With 9/1 + 60 players born from 9/1 to 9/1 that year only need to show a birth cert to register to play.

If you were born 60 days before 9/1 you can play with your grade by providing a birth cert and proof of school enrollment at X grade.

All others that are a year older in school but are born 60 days before 9/1 won't be able to play down. (Because they're not in the correct grade in school)

Make sense? Nobody is playing down + all trapped players are addressed.

Scouts would only see one grade playing on the field during showcases.

They will go to a hard cutoff date if 9/1. If I remember right during the last podcast (I know, I know) they brought up percentage of players effected by saying 9/1 will be effect the least amount of players as opposed to 8/1. I would say they have thought it through and are going with a hard date. They don’t want to mess with +30-60 when they can just set the date.

The reason why I know 9/1 + 60 will happen is because it addresses all kinds of issues + makes things easier for clubs to implement SY.

Go listen to it then
They are just trying to minimize the trap player and never said eliminate the trap player. If you do the + 60 might as well go to a 14 month span….they are not going to do that.

You don't want to do this because it allows players to play down a grade in school.

9/1 + 60 doesn't allow (aug july) players who started school early and are a grade ahead to play down with the grade they should be in school.

+ 60 picks up kids born 60 days BEFORE the cutofff (9/1), right? Doesn’t that address kids who started school late (or have a school cutoff (8/1) that is earlier than the soccer cutoff (9/1))? I’m asking about players who are born AFTER the soccer cutoff. 9/1 cutoff for school and soccer says a Sept 2012 kid is u12 and 6th grade (the oldest in her class). But if that kid started school one year early, she’s actually in 7th grade (the youngest in her class) and her teammates are in 6th grade. +60 doesn’t address that, right?

Correct, 9/1 + 60 does not allow kids that are older (traditionally) than their grade in school to "play down" with their grade in school.

Put more bluntly if your kid is a "hold back / regrade" 9/1 + 60 won't let them play with the grade they're in at school.They"ll have to play with the grade up.

So the 9/1 + 60 is basically what USA Lacrosse has done, but limits it to two months as oppose to 3? You have a 9/1 soccer cutoff, but if you’re within 60 days of the cutoff (July and August months) then you can play with your graduation year. So if you’re born Aug 3, 2012, but a 2031 grad as opposed to a 2030 grad since you started late, then you’d play with your grad year since you’re within 60 days from the cutoff, right?

Kind of..

It also makes sure players who are of age but not in the correct grade can't play down.

Different opinion. 9/1+60 is stupid.

Everyone except you knows that you're embarrassing yourself.

Or it’s stupid and makes things more complicated than they need to be.

Anytime you give one subset an option you don’t give the others, it just screws up the system and lends itself to abuse.

Would 1/1+60 make sense? No.

9/1+60 only makes marginal sense because SY isn’t a clean date. But it’s not workable nationally, and it’s not workable competitively.

But it takes a stupid issue, age cutoffs, and just ups the complication, which makes it dumber than the underlying issue.

Welcome to a gigantic duh...

As I've said before I prefer BY because it's easier for clubs to implement + makes more sense.

I've only included 9/1 + 60 detail because it's the only way to implement SY + make it work for everyone involved.

Having a mid July kid and suggesting SY+60 is saying I want to be at the front of the line. Preferring BY over SY in this instance is saying I prefer to be in the middle of the line rather than the back. Just generic selfishness cloaked in pretend empathy.

Believe it or not but my kid is a trapped player and I still prefer BY. From a personal perspective this allows them to "play up" at a more challenging level.

But I would consider switching to a SY+60 league. SY+60 isn't that bad if it completely addressesed all trapped players. It would be nice to go to a tournament and everyone on the field was one grade.

It would be annoying switching to SY to address trapped players and there were still trapped players.

I think you give too much credit to "grades". They can vary especially by district and even more so, between public and private. That's why soccer really should stick to AGE.

SY+60 has an age window and grade requirements.

On paper, perhaps -- although it's not really been documented as an option in this youth soccer discussion anywhere, except as examples from other sports -- where they STRUGGLE with implementation/cheating.

SY+60 eligibility window is 14 months

Only players born between 7/1 and 9/1 would need to provide an additional proof of grade enrolled in school.

You might get a couple of players lieing about their grade in school. But they would still need to be in the 14 month eligibility window. Which means even though they're cheating they're also the same age as other players from different states. Annoying but not the end of the world + would be easy to address. Definitely not GY though.

Going with July 1 to June 30 could work for states but USYS and US Club have been hinting they are going September 1. The constant waiver suggestions make it very clear why they are smarter than us in saying no waivers, no Pandora's box.

I agree with no waivers. Individual waivers are a nightmare and create additional nightmares.

Yes. And no need for individual waivers when you can pair dates with proof of enrollment and get all kids in a grade playing together.

That is waivers.

No it's not. It's 2 requirements for eligibility

Better known as a waiver to play down a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Regrades”? These are kids! How about some humanity and remembering that these are kids we are focused on. I guess parents should tell their Kindergarten child who was born in late August and wants to join their school soccer team that they can’t because they are a “regrade” because their preschool teachers and pediatrician recommended they do a Pre-K year before starting Kindergarten. 🙄

Good point. .... Still, if it's a school soccer team, there is no problem whatsoever.

That’s not true. Most local leagues that school teams play in are under the umbrella of SFYS/AYSO/US Club. They aren’t run by the school they are just formed by parents and filled with kids in the grade.

The folks at soccerparenting.com who've written about the change disagree (The argue for a switch to SY, btw). They report many rec leagues never changed because they preferred grades. Then, school systems themselves, of course, at middle and high school play by grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ASTROTURF......

So, who's behind the SY+60 poster? ECNL? Russian bots? The cabal of BY Q1 parents? The association of parents with summer bdays? Who?

From the bits they gave us, they are a parent of a trapped kid in August or July who wants to throw sand in the gears on school year because they want birth year.

Birth year would have their kid(s) playing on the slightly younger side and going against older/bigger kids in practice but get an advantage when they move to play at school.

But they are willing to take school year if it starts in July for kids who were held back a year but not for kids who were not held back a year so their kid can be the oldest.

Nothing like looking out for yourself under the guise of compassion for kids off grade. True humanitarian.

Side note, they also trying real hard to seem like the smartest person in the room which unfortunately has the opposite effect.

This type of selfish behavior is so transparent that youth soccer in changing age cutoffs rules ruled out carve outs beyond the 12 month period like minute of the debate starting in early 2024.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

SY+60 crazy person is the flat out reason we can't have nice things.

Given an inch, it will start the lobbying for the agrived parties and those that feel they should get theirs. Allowing only 2 2011's to play down the full year jams up the 2012 teams so you would need to do it for all ages. Then is 2 enough? What about the other 3?

Don't get me wrong, I am all for 3-5 Q4 kids playing down next year in ECNL for each age group. It being only for one year and as a step towards 2026, maybe it happens but the only suggestions that I have seen are on this forum which basically means as an idea it doesn't exist.

SY+60 guy shows that leagues are have a valid point to say no to any special exceptions for parents that scream the loudest and most often.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

SY+60 crazy person is the flat out reason we can't have nice things.

Given an inch, it will start the lobbying for the agrived parties and those that feel they should get theirs. Allowing only 2 2011's to play down the full year jams up the 2012 teams so you would need to do it for all ages. Then is 2 enough? What about the other 3?

Don't get me wrong, I am all for 3-5 Q4 kids playing down next year in ECNL for each age group. It being only for one year and as a step towards 2026, maybe it happens but the only suggestions that I have seen are on this forum which basically means as an idea it doesn't exist.

SY+60 guy shows that leagues are have a valid point to say no to any special exceptions for parents that scream the loudest and most often.

The status quo (that doesn't work) are the reason you can't have nice things.

The SY+60 guys solution addresses all trapped players and doesn't allow playing down which means on the field during games every player would be in the same grade.

And it works when different states play each other.

SY by itself continues to have trapped players and not everyone one the field is the same grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Regrades”? These are kids! How about some humanity and remembering that these are kids we are focused on. I guess parents should tell their Kindergarten child who was born in late August and wants to join their school soccer team that they can’t because they are a “regrade” because their preschool teachers and pediatrician recommended they do a Pre-K year before starting Kindergarten. 🙄

Good point. .... Still, if it's a school soccer team, there is no problem whatsoever.

That’s not true. Most local leagues that school teams play in are under the umbrella of SFYS/AYSO/US Club. They aren’t run by the school they are just formed by parents and filled with kids in the grade.

The folks at soccerparenting.com who've written about the change disagree (The argue for a switch to SY, btw). They report many rec leagues never changed because they preferred grades. Then, school systems themselves, of course, at middle and high school play by grade.

School systems do not play by grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Think about kids potentially entering the sport in younger years. Your classmates form a school team and you are the only kid who can’t play on it. What about that kid?

You are arguing for grade years. Grade years is not being considered.

No I am not. I am arguing for kids born in August to be able to play with their classmates.

You are correct.

I think MANY people just don't really understand how trapped players and league groupings work. So they default to trying to define a single cutoff date. (Which won't work across multiple states)

BY worked just fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Regrades”? These are kids! How about some humanity and remembering that these are kids we are focused on. I guess parents should tell their Kindergarten child who was born in late August and wants to join their school soccer team that they can’t because they are a “regrade” because their preschool teachers and pediatrician recommended they do a Pre-K year before starting Kindergarten. 🙄

Good point. .... Still, if it's a school soccer team, there is no problem whatsoever.

That’s not true. Most local leagues that school teams play in are under the umbrella of SFYS/AYSO/US Club. They aren’t run by the school they are just formed by parents and filled with kids in the grade.

The folks at soccerparenting.com who've written about the change disagree (The argue for a switch to SY, btw). They report many rec leagues never changed because they preferred grades. Then, school systems themselves, of course, at middle and high school play by grade.

So assuming the folks at soccerparenting.com aren’t biased and opinionated (they are), isn’t that sort of undermining their whole “SY is better for participation” argument? If SY was already common at the grassroots…

I’m really confused as to how we got here now that SY 9/1 doesn’t seem to make everyone happy! It’s seems like many of the arguments for SY were based on a bunch of smoke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

SY+60 crazy person is the flat out reason we can't have nice things.

Given an inch, it will start the lobbying for the agrived parties and those that feel they should get theirs. Allowing only 2 2011's to play down the full year jams up the 2012 teams so you would need to do it for all ages. Then is 2 enough? What about the other 3?

Don't get me wrong, I am all for 3-5 Q4 kids playing down next year in ECNL for each age group. It being only for one year and as a step towards 2026, maybe it happens but the only suggestions that I have seen are on this forum which basically means as an idea it doesn't exist.

SY+60 guy shows that leagues are have a valid point to say no to any special exceptions for parents that scream the loudest and most often.

The status quo (that doesn't work) are the reason you can't have nice things.

The SY+60 guys solution addresses all trapped players and doesn't allow playing down which means on the field during games every player would be in the same grade.

And it works when different states play each other.

SY by itself continues to have trapped players and not everyone one the field is the same grade.

The plus 60 part is by definition playing down. If getting rid of all trapped players is the goal, then soccer will go grade year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Regrades”? These are kids! How about some humanity and remembering that these are kids we are focused on. I guess parents should tell their Kindergarten child who was born in late August and wants to join their school soccer team that they can’t because they are a “regrade” because their preschool teachers and pediatrician recommended they do a Pre-K year before starting Kindergarten. 🙄

Good point. .... Still, if it's a school soccer team, there is no problem whatsoever.

That’s not true. Most local leagues that school teams play in are under the umbrella of SFYS/AYSO/US Club. They aren’t run by the school they are just formed by parents and filled with kids in the grade.

The folks at soccerparenting.com who've written about the change disagree (The argue for a switch to SY, btw). They report many rec leagues never changed because they preferred grades. Then, school systems themselves, of course, at middle and high school play by grade.

School systems do not play by grade

They do ... 7-8 and 9-12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

SY+60 crazy person is the flat out reason we can't have nice things.

Given an inch, it will start the lobbying for the agrived parties and those that feel they should get theirs. Allowing only 2 2011's to play down the full year jams up the 2012 teams so you would need to do it for all ages. Then is 2 enough? What about the other 3?

Don't get me wrong, I am all for 3-5 Q4 kids playing down next year in ECNL for each age group. It being only for one year and as a step towards 2026, maybe it happens but the only suggestions that I have seen are on this forum which basically means as an idea it doesn't exist.

SY+60 guy shows that leagues are have a valid point to say no to any special exceptions for parents that scream the loudest and most often.

Yes here we are with a “choose one of three” option because of them…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Regrades”? These are kids! How about some humanity and remembering that these are kids we are focused on. I guess parents should tell their Kindergarten child who was born in late August and wants to join their school soccer team that they can’t because they are a “regrade” because their preschool teachers and pediatrician recommended they do a Pre-K year before starting Kindergarten. 🙄

Good point. .... Still, if it's a school soccer team, there is no problem whatsoever.

That’s not true. Most local leagues that school teams play in are under the umbrella of SFYS/AYSO/US Club. They aren’t run by the school they are just formed by parents and filled with kids in the grade.

The folks at soccerparenting.com who've written about the change disagree (The argue for a switch to SY, btw). They report many rec leagues never changed because they preferred grades. Then, school systems themselves, of course, at middle and high school play by grade.

School systems do not play by grade

They do ... 7-8 and 9-12.

😒 that’s is “gradeS” at best.

There is not play by grade in school, it is play by school level.