Reply to ECNL moving to school year part 2

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "ECNL moving to school year part 2"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Whomever is considered "older" in age groups get an advantage, but it's conferred over years to the point where the younger kids drop out by middle school. That's RAE.

In this switch for soccer -- which should be studied by experts who track these trends -- has a large group of players who have received those RAE benefits to put them %-wise at the top of the sport. Now that those players get to play up against slightly older players where the volume of competitors are currently playing at a lower level. Will 6 months really matter?[/quote]

The Q4 kids that have been playing against players that are almost one year older have been able to play at a high level despite these advantages.  It is well documented that Q4s that are still playing competitively at 14, 15, and 16 years old end up outperforming their peers over the medium to long term.

The Q4s that play at a high level find ways to perform well that compensate for their physical disadvantages.  On average, they’re technically and tactically superior because otherwise they couldn’t cut it.  Even physically, they fight harder to not be so far behind.

Then all of a sudden they’re the oldest players on their team.  They’re physically advanced relative to their younger peers.  They’re already technically and tactically more advanced than their younger peers.

So, on average, they’re now physically, technically, and tactically advanced.  Big advantage.[/quote]

All except those players, especially the better ones, might fight like hell to stay on their current teams, seeing that playing with younger players will stunt their development.[/quote]
If this was true there would currently be a far greater number of January to May birthdays playing up.   I guess by that logic all January to May players are currently stunting their development in a BY system.  [/quote]

That's because clubs limit these opportunities on purpose to reign in overly-ambitious parents. THIS tranistion, however, will be different, one-time where parents/kids will go nuclear because they've been on the same team for several years. Their arguments will win out, at least in the short term.[/quote]
Not true at all,  the players would be on a lower team of they played up an age group.  They don't want to sign up for that.  [/quote]

We shall see. Depends on the club. This will be why they'll have to max out the rosters.[/quote]

If you’re an Aug - Dec kid and your options are to stay on a team with a maxed out roster and maybe play some, or play on the “lower” team and play a lot regardless of roster, I wonder what the choice will be. If you have an Aug - Dec kid, unless you’re a true top player (probably not) or you’re already passed recruiting age, you’re going to be playing on the age appropriate team. Of course, if you’re at a small club that doesn’t have a lot of competition, then your chances of staying on the older team increase. [/quote]

My daughter is on an ecnl-rl team with a q4 bday. I hope she will be on the birth year ecnl team next year.[/quote]
Most olders will choose to do this. Might as well stay of a team with your friends.

Youngers will probabaly play down with no issues.[/quote]

Not true.  My DD is on an ECNL team and is a Sept birthday.  She is in the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids.  She will not play down because she will get lost in the wrong recruiting age for her grade.  Plus, her friends are in her current team.  She will choose to stay with her team.  There are 6 other girls Aug birthdays or later that are is the same grade as the Jan-Aug kids in n her team.  None will choose to play down unless they are in a lower grade.  None.  If you think they would rather have lay with lower grade kids, in a different age from their class recruiting age, or stop playing with the friends they have been playing with for close to a decade…[/quote]

Unfortunately, most of them will not be able to stay in this team when Q3/Q4 from NL, GA, and RL compete. They will either be cut or on the bench side.[/quote]

They are Q3. This is the problem with misalignment (and where SY60 guy chimes in -- but the ruthlessness of top teams means they won't care).[/quote]
Ive decided to call it 8/1 with a rule not allowing playing down a grade. You know the same thing as 9/1+30.

Its funny how the mathematically challenged are just starting to figure out that Aug birthdays playing down a grade in SY is even worse than trapped players in BY playing up a grade. [/quote]
That's why when they announced 9/1 to have the least amount of misalignment they should have stuck with that.   [/quote]
I agree. This was the intention of 9/1 unfortunately too many loudmouth morons started screaming for 8/1.

They should have done 9/1+30 (SY+30) and all of this would have been addressed. You could have even done 9/1+60 to address all trapped players and only field players in a certain grade at all games.

But a rule saying Aug birthdays arent allowed to play down with an 8/1 cutoff will have the same result. Its just more of an honor system about Aug birthdays playing down. Which in the end is all you really need. However at tournaments there will be "cheaters".[/quote]
Since nothing has gone into effect yet there is time for them to fix this..... they probably won't though.  [/quote]
It's an issue that has an easy resolution but sports people arent known for being mathmagicians.

The quick explanation of what's going on is instead of having a single cutoff date theres a cutoff window of X number of days. The cutoff window allows school districts with multiple different school start dates to all work together in the same league and make all players on the field during games the same grade in school. The birthday months affected by the cutoff window range just need to show proof of grade on top of a birth cert.

Ironically if ECNL creats a rule under a single 8/1 cutoff that says Aug birthdays must play with their grade. Guess what players will need to provide if called out as ceating by playing down a grade. Thats right a birth cert and proof of grade in school.

It ends up being the same thing as SY+30 just instead of being proactive about not allowing Aug birthdays to play down you're being reactive not allowing Aug birthdays to play down.[/quote]However that wouldn't work. Carding systems realistically would struggle mightily to track at what age kids entered what school districts and what the age rules where for that specific school district at that time. They don't issue a specific document when they start school like when they are born so this would not be doable. People move, some schools are fluid on grades and then there is homeschooling. Just not a well thought out idea.[/quote]
It's fine

Birth certs come in all kinds of formats.

Proof of grade can be anything. Its only important that a players grade is defined. Once defined you cant go back and switch it without league approval.

Again it doesnt matter because leagues are very likely to implement a rule not allowing Aug birthdays to play down in 8/1 single date cutoff. This is because its in everyone's best interest to have all players in a game the same grade in school. If theres a rule not allowing Aug playing down if a player gets accused of "cheating" they'll need a birth cert and proof of grade. THE SAME THING AS SY+30 [/quote]
Why would a league care what grade a kid is in?  [/quote]
Because college recruiters will know when watching a game that all players they see will be graduating a certain year. Ie available to be recruited.[/quote]
Imagine if you were a college recruiter watching a team that you thought were all Sophomores in HS. There's one player tearing it up with multiple goals. You asked the coach about them and the reveal that the player you thought was amazing is playing down a grade and is actually a Junior in HS. How do you judge this? Are the good because they're just good or are the good because they're just older? How do you justify going after this player when theres other Juniors that are playing with their grade that could also likely tear it up if they were playing down?

This is the issue with playing down + olders.[/quote]
Ohh I agree with this.   That's why 9/1 or 10/1 +x would solve this.   But unless US soccer is going to create a system that addresses this a league isn't going to care.  The only leagues that care will be the ones selling college recruitment.   And even then they wouldn't care  until they oldest ages at which point they would go straight grad year instead of an age band plus grade.   [/quote]
9/1+30 makes it easy for coaches and clubs to group players because only players in a certain grade will be in that group. (Unless they were held back in school. In this case they have to play with their age)

9/1+30 makes things almost as easy as BY is to group players. With the added benefit of no trapped players. [/quote]9/1 or 8/1 which is the winner without exceptions is easiest and does its best to stop cheating by not allowing kids more than a full year older than other players to play down by only having kids in a 365 day cohort.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics