ECNL moving to school year part 2

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why people get their panties in a wad when grad year, and holding back, enters the conversation. Who cares? It's such a small number that it impacts next to nothing. And plus, if your kid is good enough to play at the next level, they're going to be playing with kids much older than them. Same goes for HS school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people get their panties in a wad when grad year, and holding back, enters the conversation. Who cares? It's such a small number that it impacts next to nothing. And plus, if your kid is good enough to play at the next level, they're going to be playing with kids much older than them. Same goes for HS school.

Grad year is a gigantic can of worms. You don't just have the pre-k hold backs, you get the 8th grade hold backs too and kids several years older at the recruiting years that matter. Scouts *should* be smart enough to differentiate, but they're not so it's a huge advantage. Also, don't discount all the extra benefits the held back kids had from getting the better coaching during development years since they were "good for their AG".

Yes the tippy top kids have nothing to worry about, but for many others it's a ridiculous advantage and I'm glad they realized that when making the age change formally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the Grad Year haters won’t like this take but from listening to different podcast talk about how college recruitment is going to be even more competitive with smaller rosters and 5 years of eligibility. ECNL should incentivize Grad Year and holdbacks.

I just heard a college coach say essentially how do I recruit an 18 year old when I can get a 22 year old adult from outside the states. College is must win now now development.
Sounds like the women’s side is starting to go that route more as well.

I get the stigma of holding back for just athletics but if college coaches stop showing up to showcases and recruiting less American kids that will really hurt the ECNL platform.

Your son is biobanding and playing down against players 20 months younger.

My son is 7 so no and there’s no incentive to hold kids back for soccer.
My point is if ncaa turns into euro league 2.0 ECNL will be dead because the reason players are there are for college recruitment and that’s it.

MLSN at least has the pro pathway option. As unlikely as it is.

Their is no pro path way, merely the perception of a pathway for a minimum wage job. Smart people with kids age 10 and over have run the numbers to see this.

Cavan Sullivan, possibly a generational talent, at $500k per isn't even going to make what the minimum is for the bigger pro sports. And his family knows the game and guided him as best as one could one would imagine.

The path off for these leagues was, is and will be childhood memories. Like Al Bundy. And as long as that's ok for most people, there will always be some top leagues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people get their panties in a wad when grad year, and holding back, enters the conversation. Who cares? It's such a small number that it impacts next to nothing. And plus, if your kid is good enough to play at the next level, they're going to be playing with kids much older than them. Same goes for HS school.

Grad year is a gigantic can of worms. You don't just have the pre-k hold backs, you get the 8th grade hold backs too and kids several years older at the recruiting years that matter. Scouts *should* be smart enough to differentiate, but they're not so it's a huge advantage. Also, don't discount all the extra benefits the held back kids had from getting the better coaching during development years since they were "good for their AG".

Yes the tippy top kids have nothing to worry about, but for many others it's a ridiculous advantage and I'm glad they realized that when making the age change formally.

I hear you, but I don’t think it’s as big a problem as people think. Scout’s definitely know the age of the kids they’re recruiting. I’m sure it can be an advantage in some instances, but if it was as huge an advantage as the saber rattlers say, then you’d see a lot more of it happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people get their panties in a wad when grad year, and holding back, enters the conversation. Who cares? It's such a small number that it impacts next to nothing. And plus, if your kid is good enough to play at the next level, they're going to be playing with kids much older than them. Same goes for HS school.

Grad year is a gigantic can of worms. You don't just have the pre-k hold backs, you get the 8th grade hold backs too and kids several years older at the recruiting years that matter. Scouts *should* be smart enough to differentiate, but they're not so it's a huge advantage. Also, don't discount all the extra benefits the held back kids had from getting the better coaching during development years since they were "good for their AG".

Yes the tippy top kids have nothing to worry about, but for many others it's a ridiculous advantage and I'm glad they realized that when making the age change formally.

I hear you, but I don’t think it’s as big a problem as people think. Scout’s definitely know the age of the kids they’re recruiting. I’m sure it can be an advantage in some instances, but if it was as huge an advantage as the saber rattlers say, then you’d see a lot more of it happening.

That because most kids do not want to be held back.

[Anonymous]

Most kids are held back for kindergarten or, in other sports, like hockey, do an extra senior year. The former don’t even know it is happening, the latter do it to gain an advantage voluntarily. It happens, all the time. But I agree, if I tried to get my U15 to stay back a grade to help with soccer, that would be a disaster. As a matter of fact, she is a September birthday, and could play U14 under the new rules, but would be devastated if forced by the club, even though this would be a huge advantage soccer wise. But she would probably quit if forced to play down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most kids are held back for kindergarten or, in other sports, like hockey, do an extra senior year. The former don’t even know it is happening, the latter do it to gain an advantage voluntarily. It happens, all the time. But I agree, if I tried to get my U15 to stay back a grade to help with soccer, that would be a disaster. As a matter of fact, she is a September birthday, and could play U14 under the new rules, but would be devastated if forced by the club, even though this would be a huge advantage soccer wise. But she would probably quit if forced to play down.

You can hold her back or not, the fact is there is still a 365 day window and there would be no advantage if you did hold her back. It's not the same as what people here are complaining about - the 16 year old freshman who is playing with 14/15 year olds. Or the 19 year old senior, etc. Your daughter is just younger for her grade, but if you held her back, she'd be older for her grade. If she's good enough to play with the new older age group, and her club allows it, good for her. If she's not, and she is playing with kids a grade below her, but still within the same 365 window, good for her too.

[Anonymous]

Now that the season has started, the big question is how clubs will manage the transition.

My kid is late December 2010 and plays on an RL team on one of the top ECNL programs in the country. Both the 2010 and 2011 ECNL teams are among the top teams in the country (on par with the top MLS club academies in MLS Next in the state).

We had a tournament last weekend and were able to watch the 2011 RL team. My son is superior to every player on that 2011 RL team technically, physically, and tactically. It would be a significant step down for him to move to that team.

I understand that the 2010 and 2011 NL teams have had 80%+ of their rosters in place for several years now, meaning very little turnover and not many opportunities for new players to move up or in.

The inertia people naturally gravitate towards could cause a mismatch in terms of placement. It will be interesting to see how they manage this transition in the early part of 2026.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now that the season has started, the big question is how clubs will manage the transition.

My kid is late December 2010 and plays on an RL team on one of the top ECNL programs in the country. Both the 2010 and 2011 ECNL teams are among the top teams in the country (on par with the top MLS club academies in MLS Next in the state).

We had a tournament last weekend and were able to watch the 2011 RL team. My son is superior to every player on that 2011 RL team technically, physically, and tactically. It would be a significant step down for him to move to that team.

I understand that the 2010 and 2011 NL teams have had 80%+ of their rosters in place for several years now, meaning very little turnover and not many opportunities for new players to move up or in.

The inertia people naturally gravitate towards could cause a mismatch in terms of placement. It will be interesting to see how they manage this transition in the early part of 2026.

So my kid is younger, and U-little, so our club went early, kid is already playing on a 15/14 team that is all fall 14s and 15s playing in the U12 division this year, and then they will play U12 again next year. My observation so far has been basically that like my kid wasn't the only young one to drop down age groups and that brought the level of play of what I observed previously from the younger age group up a lot. So it wasn't anywhere near as significant a step down as I thought it might be so it's been fun, and since they are still playing against other top level teams in U12, but now playing at an age disadvantage, its been good competition so far. So I guess we'll see how it goes? It'll be an adventure for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now that the season has started, the big question is how clubs will manage the transition.

My kid is late December 2010 and plays on an RL team on one of the top ECNL programs in the country. Both the 2010 and 2011 ECNL teams are among the top teams in the country (on par with the top MLS club academies in MLS Next in the state).

We had a tournament last weekend and were able to watch the 2011 RL team. My son is superior to every player on that 2011 RL team technically, physically, and tactically. It would be a significant step down for him to move to that team.

I understand that the 2010 and 2011 NL teams have had 80%+ of their rosters in place for several years now, meaning very little turnover and not many opportunities for new players to move up or in.

The inertia people naturally gravitate towards could cause a mismatch in terms of placement. It will be interesting to see how they manage this transition in the early part of 2026.

5 months players are moving down. I would say at least 50% roster change next year, and it will be much more for the top ECNL team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the season has started, the big question is how clubs will manage the transition.

My kid is late December 2010 and plays on an RL team on one of the top ECNL programs in the country. Both the 2010 and 2011 ECNL teams are among the top teams in the country (on par with the top MLS club academies in MLS Next in the state).

We had a tournament last weekend and were able to watch the 2011 RL team. My son is superior to every player on that 2011 RL team technically, physically, and tactically. It would be a significant step down for him to move to that team.

I understand that the 2010 and 2011 NL teams have had 80%+ of their rosters in place for several years now, meaning very little turnover and not many opportunities for new players to move up or in.

The inertia people naturally gravitate towards could cause a mismatch in terms of placement. It will be interesting to see how they manage this transition in the early part of 2026.

5 months players are moving down. I would say at least 50% roster change next year, and it will be much more for the top ECNL team.

Agreed. It’ll be interesting for the clubs that let kids play up who may get pushed back. And then you have the clubs that never let kids play up, so will they risk kids leaving for the other clubs that dont have as hard a rule? They probably have run that risk for quite some time so probably ok with that vs changing their rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the season has started, the big question is how clubs will manage the transition.

My kid is late December 2010 and plays on an RL team on one of the top ECNL programs in the country. Both the 2010 and 2011 ECNL teams are among the top teams in the country (on par with the top MLS club academies in MLS Next in the state).

We had a tournament last weekend and were able to watch the 2011 RL team. My son is superior to every player on that 2011 RL team technically, physically, and tactically. It would be a significant step down for him to move to that team.

I understand that the 2010 and 2011 NL teams have had 80%+ of their rosters in place for several years now, meaning very little turnover and not many opportunities for new players to move up or in.

The inertia people naturally gravitate towards could cause a mismatch in terms of placement. It will be interesting to see how they manage this transition in the early part of 2026.

5 months players are moving down. I would say at least 50% roster change next year, and it will be much more for the top ECNL team.

Agreed. It’ll be interesting for the clubs that let kids play up who may get pushed back. And then you have the clubs that never let kids play up, so will they risk kids leaving for the other clubs that dont have as hard a rule? They probably have run that risk for quite some time so probably ok with that vs changing their rules.

Top ECNL club here, nobody can play up now. I do not think it will change after the SY change. The coach is aiming for the national championship. I expect to see new players every practice next spring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the season has started, the big question is how clubs will manage the transition.

My kid is late December 2010 and plays on an RL team on one of the top ECNL programs in the country. Both the 2010 and 2011 ECNL teams are among the top teams in the country (on par with the top MLS club academies in MLS Next in the state).

We had a tournament last weekend and were able to watch the 2011 RL team. My son is superior to every player on that 2011 RL team technically, physically, and tactically. It would be a significant step down for him to move to that team.

I understand that the 2010 and 2011 NL teams have had 80%+ of their rosters in place for several years now, meaning very little turnover and not many opportunities for new players to move up or in.

The inertia people naturally gravitate towards could cause a mismatch in terms of placement. It will be interesting to see how they manage this transition in the early part of 2026.

5 months players are moving down. I would say at least 50% roster change next year, and it will be much more for the top ECNL team.

Agreed. It’ll be interesting for the clubs that let kids play up who may get pushed back. And then you have the clubs that never let kids play up, so will they risk kids leaving for the other clubs that dont have as hard a rule? They probably have run that risk for quite some time so probably ok with that vs changing their rules.

The idea of all these players playing up is comical. How many January to May birthday kids play up currently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the season has started, the big question is how clubs will manage the transition.

My kid is late December 2010 and plays on an RL team on one of the top ECNL programs in the country. Both the 2010 and 2011 ECNL teams are among the top teams in the country (on par with the top MLS club academies in MLS Next in the state).

We had a tournament last weekend and were able to watch the 2011 RL team. My son is superior to every player on that 2011 RL team technically, physically, and tactically. It would be a significant step down for him to move to that team.

I understand that the 2010 and 2011 NL teams have had 80%+ of their rosters in place for several years now, meaning very little turnover and not many opportunities for new players to move up or in.

The inertia people naturally gravitate towards could cause a mismatch in terms of placement. It will be interesting to see how they manage this transition in the early part of 2026.

5 months players are moving down. I would say at least 50% roster change next year, and it will be much more for the top ECNL team.

That's overstating it a bit. I fully expect a bunch of changes especially since it's a good time to move players who were already on the bubble, but there just aren't that many kids (proportionally) on top level teams. RAE is real and my late Sept. daughter is the youngest on her team. Only 3/18 fall into the new AG.

[Anonymous]

It may be 5 months but its 50% of the population and we know from RAE that the oldest 50% makes up 80% of players on top teams..... Expect crazy days ahead people!