Reply to MLS Next Announcement

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "MLS Next Announcement "

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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I think the main issue isn’t the particular age cutoff, some players will always be on the less physically mature side and eventually that will even out with hard work and athletic talent. But it’s the fact that this announcement makes it so it’s not apples to apples anymore.  If you have Aug-Dec birthdays who are on MLSN2, say 2011 for example, and very close to MLSN1 2011s, and better than most of the MLSN12012s, if the age group change was consistent, many of these kids would make MLSN1.  Now they are stuck being stronger players than the MLSN1 team at their grade level but unable to make the team because they were born in late 2011, but not quite mature enough for the MLSN1 the grade above with the other 2011s, and this gap may likely only increase since they now they will need to play down an age group on the second team, which will be a decreased level of competition, not the ideal way to get better.

It would be fine if everyone had the same age cutoff, but having a 5-month difference is ridiculous imo, especially if your club has both levels.  It’s kind of like creating a new category of trapped players.[/quote]

You're copying and pasting the same convoluted false equivalency nonsense from thread to thread

If your kid is good enough for MLS Next the coach/club is going to take him
They don't care what month he's born as long as he meets the cutoff criteria.

If he's not good enough for the team/club, he'll stay MLSN2

Gerrymandering works in Texas, not youth soccer. Give it up[/quote]

You are all over the place.  What the PP is talking about is the different cutoffs within MLSN create vastly different tracks for good Aug-Dec players and will be quite easy for them to get stuck on unless the selection process this spring has a crystal ball.[/quote]

Good Players aren't worried about getting stuck anywhere [/quote]

Again, you are too focused on thumping your chest for some strange reason.  only 18 or so kids on MLSN1 team.  If there are two players of equal talent, one born in October, the other born in March, nearly all coaches would pick the March kid.  So the October kid is forced to move down an age category AND on a lower tier team, that is terminally bad for development and cannot be denied.[/quote]

My kid's coach has no idea what month the kids are born until the parents bring cupcakes after a practice or game[/quote]That's the problem. Coaches have no idea the birth months so they inadvertently favor the older kids. You hit the nail on the head. We have a huge coach problem in the US.[/quote]

No, they give the spaces to the quality kids they want who earned it [/quote]

and who earns it? mostly the Q1 and Q2 players. Go ask any parent from an MLSN1 HG and ECNL-N team and they confirm guarantee [/quote]

Which coach is picking the March kid who has bad touch, low IQ over the October kid superior in those areas?

Do you really want your kid with such a coach anyway?[/quote]
Those touches and soccer iq are all because of rae. So is everything else.[/quote]

The adults are speaking [/quote]
Its rae's fault the adults are talking [/quote]

We understand you don't believe RAE exists and there is no difference between calendar age and biological age and every kid are at the same maturation rate if they're born in the same year.
Even if they're 11 months apart

We understand you don't believe in any of that factual hocus-pocus [/quote]
Oh god, its raes fault that I dont belive rae exists.[/quote]

It's an infection in this country that people like this are so confident not only in their ill-informed opinions but proud of their lack of thought and nuance.  People who refuse to listen to science or reason because it's either too hard for them to grasp, or contrary to their world view, or think toughness is all we need, are a significant problem.  There is an aversion to understanding and fixing problems.  They'd rather ignore or just let those affected deal with problems, whether it's the climate, or income inequality, or evidently, RAE.  RAE is relatively easy to understand (you would think), but also hard to fix.  I posited above that changing the cutoff from 1/1 to 8/1 doesn't change RAE because it's still a year but I liked the explanation of RAE+ because of school groupings. [/quote]
You are the only one that sounds closed minded. Others understand what RAE is and dont agree with it. You dont understand why people dont agree with rae. Or you discount it because you dont agree with them.[/quote]

Here it is.  Exactly.  You don't agree with it?  [b]Explain why you don't agree with it in the face of the overwhelming majority of research showing that it exists.[/b][/quote]

It exists.  I just don’t give it credence in my life as it amounts to an excuse.  If I succumb to it, should me and my child accept less results based on a birthday?  Throw away all plans and aspirations to the fact my child will not succeed in MLS Next because he is a Q4?

Are you aware every advantage has an equal and opposite disadvantage?

Yes, a popular 2013 kid is born in April and boasts about “playing up”.  Great marketing and he will be in DCUA.  He is closer to some of those 2012’s than my December kid is to his own age group.  Nobody really cares.

Your kids screen time, video game usage have way more of an impact than RAE these days.

I acknowledge RAS exists but really don’t give a s—-[/quote]

Your entire crusade against RAE, that you admit is real, is a personal beef you have about a specific 2013 April kid that's outperforming your December kid?

At least you confessed your irrational comments come from an emotional place [/quote]
You dont even realize that multiple people are telling you that rae is BS and a super excuse.[/quote]

Yes Sir
I will ignore all the academic and scientific studies data
I will instead listen to the uneducated opinions of a few amateurs on an anonymous blog [/quote]
There are NO rae studies that include B teams and specifically the multi-year affects of B to A team players.[/quote]

Every RAE study shows the effect of the late developers who didn't quit that learned to enhance skills not requiring a big size and how they often end up top players after they have caught up in physical maturation

The examples of famous B team players are well known like Harry Kane, Declan Rice, Kevin De Bruyne and many others

One again, this is too intellectual for the Neanderthal mind[/quote]As an adult if you don't understand the terms increased probability and decreased probability, it is too late for you to understand research. I'm sorry your education didn't take. Unfortunately it's too late for you just like it is too late for antivaxers.[/quote]

You're either responding to the wrong comment or you're off the rails [/quote] Congratulations, you win! The comment was only meant for those that thought the comment didn't apply to the Pp.[/quote]

Then you're saying someone doesn't understand research in response to them posting conclusions of the research?

Or you're saying the research conclusions are wrong that the late developers who focus on technical skills and IQ don't become desired players after they catch-up physically?[/quote]

I think you just win.  No matter what research you believe in, you are smarter than us and have more data points to provide superior guidance to your child.

What do you advise your child?  We will hang up and listen intently?[/quote]

You're defensive and lashing out because the PP posted the RAE conclusions that proved the poster wrong who said B team players aren't part of RAE studies?[/quote]

I have no clue about any RAE studies.  I just know this you win the RAE argument.

Now, what do you advise your child now that you information is validated as correct?[/quote]

I can jump in here to say, one advice doesn't fit all

Except copy the development parts of the best players that fit your individual style and personality [/quote]

Okay.  In copying the development parts of the best players that fit my individual style and personality, are there any factors I should consider such as my child’s current age or current grade?[/quote]

Are you angrily and aggressively asking for help or an argument?

Grade is 100% irrelevant 
So is age

Focus on being disciplined and consistent in developing individual technical skills and improving IQ while maximizing what you can do physically with what nature plus hard work is giving you.

Focus on the process, not the results

It's simple, slow and repetitive slow growth with ups and downs

No magic pills[/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