Reply to Trapped/Re-aging Families, How are you having the conversation?

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "Trapped/Re-aging Families, How are you having the conversation?"

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]The one part I am not sure how it will plan out are kid who are young for their team but a grade older than the other Q4s. For example, a September birthday who is in 6th grade. Do they stay with the 6th graders or have an option to play with 5th graders? If the intent is for school year alignment then it seems that there is two cascading criteria, but I am not sure if this is a hard or soft rule. Birthday and then school year or is really only based on your birthday.[/quote]
Clubs that want to set their players up for being recruited and playing in college will put young Aug/Sept birthday players on the team thats their grade in school.[/quote]So you are saying it is a soft rule (ie at the discretion of each club) vs hard. Does anyone know that for fact? I think this has a big part in the spirit of the conversation you are having with your kid.[/quote]
The way it worked pre 2017 (went clubs switched to BY) was the "better" higher level of competition clubs would always roster younger than the eligibility window players with their grade in school team. Other not as competitive clubs would let players play down a grade but everyone knew that if this player wanted to get recruited and play in college that they'd have to play up with their grade eventually. When this happens its usually easiest to switch clubs. So in the end it just makes more sense to roster young grade up players on the A or B team thats their grade in school.

One other thing, ten years ago there wasnt such a push by parents to redshirt and play down. In fact it was the opposite everyone wanted to play up which is sonehting US Soccer exploited to implement BY.[/quote]Wasn't true for my kids teams. All age based in SY.[/quote]
Were your clubs top teams DA at the time?[/quote]Can you point to a doc or website where DA played on grade instead of age?[/quote]
People weren't interested in playing down back then. It just wasnt something you ran into very often. If anything you'd hear about players playing up a grade and graduating HS early to play at some super college.[/quote]

If this was true, it was a flaw in the system, because it put some kids at a disadvantage, making them the youngest on the team, younger than other states. A very few may have battled through and became tremendous players as a result (known as the underdog effect), but it was at the cost of others who may have been decent prospects but cycled out of the sport as a result. Leaving it up to the clubs and families makes a lot of sense.[/quote]
If all players played on the same team this would be true. But because there's B team it doesn't make sense. You need to look more closely at all the RAE "proof" you cant live without. Almost all of it is geared to National Team selection only. Which means it doesn't consider B teams. [/quote]Not true, nice try.[/quote]
Very true. Go ahead try and find a RAE paper or website that considers B teams as an alternate for youger players that aren't big/good enough for the A team. It doesn't exist because if you bring B teams into the discussion RAE doesnt work.

If players are young and not good enough for the A team playing on the B team will let them get more touches and develop more as a player. When they get older being younger evens out but the B team player has had the opportunity to be the top player on the team for multiple seasons. Once they jump up to the A team they'll be primed to work for a top position on the A team becasue thats what theyre used to.[/quote]RAE doesn't go away when kids get older. Top teams are over indexed on older kids in the age cohort. Period. Has nothing to do with your B team mumbo jumbo. Your Horatio Alger tale of B team to A team is a silly myth.[/quote]
Go ahead try to find a RAE publication that includes B teams in the assessment. It doesnt exist because RAE falls appart if you include B teams. With the assumption that B team players will become A team players when they're older and the same size as everyone else on the team.[/quote]You are arguing that top teams will have a relatively even distribution after puberty presumably as B team players move to the top team. But the data doesn't back this up.  The top teams remain skewed toward the older side of the age cohort. Essentially, the definition of RAE.[/quote]
Do you admit that B team players if they're good will find their way to the A team as they ger older?

My experience has been that this happens with about half the team. Some of the B team players are older and some are younger. It's been about even.

If you think about it the younger aug/sept players that could play on a grade down A team would probabaly be the leaders on a correct grade B team. These are the ones most likely to be moved up to correct grade A team. Keep in mind that just because you want to play on a grade down A team doesnt mean that your kid will make the team.[/quote]2nd team players get labelled 2nd players via coach lock and the fact that clubs want to increase revenue by bringing in players to the first team rather than promoting within. Second team players are younger than first team players in an age cohort, again by RAE definition. Being on the first team is crucial to maximizing one's youth soccer outcome.[/quote]

PP is exactly right. I am a data scientist. RAE is real. It's meant to be interpreted at a population level but you can see it play out on teams in the area, including ours. And coach bias is real too. Once a B team player by HS, it is next to impossible to move up. Your coaching has been worse, your teammates are worse, and the field competition has been worse. You have had fewer practices, games, and showcases. You are trying to play catch-up to kids that have had the top of all of this probably for several years. It can happen, but odds are not in your favor. That's RAE and coach bias in action. [/quote]
As a Molecular Rocket Engineer/Scientist you are wrong. As has been stated multiple times top players will find an A team to play on. It might not be at your club it also might also be at your club. Coaches are always looking for a way to win (believe it or not). What do you think woukd happen if an A team player guested with the B team and tried their hardest at a game. Most likely if they were a forward they would score at will. If they were a mid or defender they would win every 1on1 and control the field. This is why they play on the A team and this is also why B team players play on the B team. By the time players get to HS players have been sorted by physical ability. It has nothing to do with coaching.

if you want to see the reason A team players are on the A team and B team players are on the B team. Watch High School soccer tryouts. They all play each other and Its obvious which players are better and which are worse.[/quote]

This is sorta true, except the part where half the B team has the youngest players in the player pool AND those kids are the ones more likely to play on varsity as freshmen, at least under the BY system. (Also, some A team players skip HS altogether).[/quote]
This is the problem with RAE its a super excuse that can be used to justify anything.

Are there winners / losers in the birthday lottery? Yes

Does complaining about RAE change anything? No

Everyone has natural talent and abilities. For some its going to be playing soccer. Some will get lucky and be the oldest. Some will be natualy talented and the youngest. Either way both of these players will need to work their butts off to maintain their spot on the A team. I think its disingenuous to say that players are only on the A team because of when they were born. Everyone has opportunities its what you make of them that sets players appart.[/quote]RAE isn't being used as an excuse. It is a factor in understanding the development of individual players relative to their status on the age distribution of players in their player pool.

It is like the oldest are starting to ride a bike with a push while the youngest have to start with the brakes continually rubbing the tire. The youngest may get stronger but most find another sport instead.

I am sure that hearing that certain kids got opportunities not available to others can bother you because it undermines your belief that everyone has the same chances in life, unfortunately this simply isn't true.  Shockingly youth sports ignores RAE unless you realize that the system was setup by babyboomers who tend to ignore science so here we are. Those in winning side don't want to change the rules and those on the losing side do but nobody is trying for fairness, they all want an edge.

If RAE didn't exist would anybody care about the age change? Hell, no.[/quote]
I don't care who got an opportunity that my kid didnt. This is what you don't understand.

No matter what my kid was going to make the A team. We did futsal, arena/indoor, rec, latin leagues, etc. They were the one dragging my to sign them up. They were the one getting asked by friends to guest with their team. This was all as a Sept birthday. Which is ironic because now with the BY to SY change they're going to be an absolute beast. I feel sorry for the younger players because they dont have a chance.[/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