Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its been the same person bringing up the rae super excuse for over a year. They'll just keep posing the same nonsense that the world is bad and they're always a victim.

The irony about rae is that clubs try their best to address it with B and C teams. The documented rae studies dont include B snd C teams because if you do suddently rae falls appart. When you point this out the excuse changes to B and C team coaches not being as good or not being able to play against as high of a level of competition. Theres never talk about getting additional touches in futsal or a Mexican league. Which often the A team players are doing which is why they're on the A team.

Another one of your misinformed lies

Every proper RAE study mentions 'B' and 'C' teams extensively (tells us you don't actually read)

They reference the fact that lots of talented late developers get placed on B teams which have lesser training and competition. So when they do finally catch up biologically, they are usually behind the kids who were continuously getting 1st team training and competition
If they didn't drop out.

But that's too intellectual for you

Every rea document ive seen relates to USYNT selection which is one team.

Ive never seen a rea study take B and C teams into account.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its been the same person bringing up the rae super excuse for over a year. They'll just keep posing the same nonsense that the world is bad and they're always a victim.

The irony about rae is that clubs try their best to address it with B and C teams. The documented rae studies dont include B snd C teams because if you do suddently rae falls appart. When you point this out the excuse changes to B and C team coaches not being as good or not being able to play against as high of a level of competition. Theres never talk about getting additional touches in futsal or a Mexican league. Which often the A team players are doing which is why they're on the A team.

RAE impact is about kids not getting selected to the A teams because of delayed physical maturation

It's not about skills and talent or effort

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its been the same person bringing up the rae super excuse for over a year. They'll just keep posing the same nonsense that the world is bad and they're always a victim.

The irony about rae is that clubs try their best to address it with B and C teams. The documented rae studies dont include B snd C teams because if you do suddently rae falls appart. When you point this out the excuse changes to B and C team coaches not being as good or not being able to play against as high of a level of competition. Theres never talk about getting additional touches in futsal or a Mexican league. Which often the A team players are doing which is why they're on the A team.

Another one of your misinformed lies

Every proper RAE study mentions 'B' and 'C' teams extensively (tells us you don't actually read)

They reference the fact that lots of talented late developers get placed on B teams which have lesser training and competition. So when they do finally catch up biologically, they are usually behind the kids who were continuously getting 1st team training and competition
If they didn't drop out.

But that's too intellectual for you

Anonymous wrote:Its been the same person bringing up the rae super excuse for over a year. They'll just keep posing the same nonsense that the world is bad and they're always a victim.

The irony about rae is that clubs try their best to address it with B and C teams. The documented rae studies dont include B snd C teams because if you do suddently rae falls appart. When you point this out the excuse changes to B and C team coaches not being as good or not being able to play against as high of a level of competition. Theres never talk about getting additional touches in futsal or a Mexican league. Which often the A team players are doing which is why they're on the A team.

Anonymous wrote:Its been the same person bringing up the rae super excuse for over a year. They'll just keep posing the same nonsense that the world is bad and they're always a victim.

The irony about rae is that clubs try their best to address it with B and C teams. The documented rae studies dont include B snd C teams because if you do suddently rae falls appart. When you point this out the excuse changes to B and C team coaches not being as good or not being able to play against as high of a level of competition. Theres never talk about getting additional touches in futsal or a Mexican league. Which often the A team players are doing which is why they're on the A team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

We’re not God and kids grow at all rates and sizes. Philly Union has a U13 kid who can probably leg press like 500 lbs. The kid is built like a NFL running back. He has not been beat by any local DMV player yet. I am willing to bet he will not grow at the same rate later. But it is beneficial for my kid to go up against him and lose as my kid will problem solve, decide he wants to get stronger and make himself the best version of himself. That’s the point at this age imho.

Getting hurt is part of the game. Every kid is going to hurt. We just pray that it is not career ending when it happens. Jaxson Dart recently referenced soccer as soft and we need to change this perception. Put your kid in martial arts. You don’t have to be from the hood or trailer park.

If your kid leaves the sport by leaving MLS Next, that is a parent teaching and mindset issue. My kid knows at any point, he can drop down a level and be a superstar and I will still support him. He thrives on the challenge and competition so he chooses to compete.

FYI, I have two Q4 players.

Seriously have to wonder if some of these are real people making real posts

No, it just shows that none of you are playing MLS Next I and actually have a kid playing.

Real parent. Real kid. You just are proving why America is not great. Trying to educate but you actually justify mediocrity and excuses which is simply sad as an American.

It is actually not hard to make MLS Next I or ECNL. If you are struggling, you and your kid are probably not proactive. We have about dozen coaches in the area that will give you the blueprint to go pro and make it to D1.

90% chance the shutdown impacted you significantly as well. You don’t have a 1% mentality. Don’t criticize or be defensive. Recognize you have an inferior mindset to those kids and families who really don’t give a s—— what age the age brackets are.

You can view this as insight to change your weak a— mentality and improve or stay here complaining for the rest of your life. You’re welcome!

Uninformed, unintelligent, fake toughness is why America is not great. You seem to have made a large contribution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

We’re not God and kids grow at all rates and sizes. Philly Union has a U13 kid who can probably leg press like 500 lbs. The kid is built like a NFL running back. He has not been beat by any local DMV player yet. I am willing to bet he will not grow at the same rate later. But it is beneficial for my kid to go up against him and lose as my kid will problem solve, decide he wants to get stronger and make himself the best version of himself. That’s the point at this age imho.

Getting hurt is part of the game. Every kid is going to hurt. We just pray that it is not career ending when it happens. Jaxson Dart recently referenced soccer as soft and we need to change this perception. Put your kid in martial arts. You don’t have to be from the hood or trailer park.

If your kid leaves the sport by leaving MLS Next, that is a parent teaching and mindset issue. My kid knows at any point, he can drop down a level and be a superstar and I will still support him. He thrives on the challenge and competition so he chooses to compete.

FYI, I have two Q4 players.

Seriously have to wonder if some of these are real people making real posts

No, it just shows that none of you are playing MLS Next I and actually have a kid playing.

Real parent. Real kid. You just are proving why America is not great. Trying to educate but you actually justify mediocrity and excuses which is simply sad as an American.

It is actually not hard to make MLS Next I or ECNL. If you are struggling, you and your kid are probably not proactive. We have about dozen coaches in the area that will give you the blueprint to go pro and make it to D1.

90% chance the shutdown impacted you significantly as well. You don’t have a 1% mentality. Don’t criticize or be defensive. Recognize you have an inferior mindset to those kids and families who really don’t give a s—— what age the age brackets are.

You can view this as insight to change your weak a— mentality and improve or stay here complaining for the rest of your life. You’re welcome!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

We’re not God and kids grow at all rates and sizes. Philly Union has a U13 kid who can probably leg press like 500 lbs. The kid is built like a NFL running back. He has not been beat by any local DMV player yet. I am willing to bet he will not grow at the same rate later. But it is beneficial for my kid to go up against him and lose as my kid will problem solve, decide he wants to get stronger and make himself the best version of himself. That’s the point at this age imho.

Getting hurt is part of the game. Every kid is going to hurt. We just pray that it is not career ending when it happens. Jaxson Dart recently referenced soccer as soft and we need to change this perception. Put your kid in martial arts. You don’t have to be from the hood or trailer park.

If your kid leaves the sport by leaving MLS Next, that is a parent teaching and mindset issue. My kid knows at any point, he can drop down a level and be a superstar and I will still support him. He thrives on the challenge and competition so he chooses to compete.

FYI, I have two Q4 players.

Seriously have to wonder if some of these are real people making real posts

No, it just shows that none of you are playing MLS Next I and actually have a kid playing.

Real parent. Real kid. You just are proving why America is not great. Trying to educate but you actually justify mediocrity and excuses which is simply sad as an American.

It is actually not hard to make MLS Next I or ECNL. If you are struggling, you and your kid are probably not proactive. We have about dozen coaches in the area that will give you the blueprint to go pro and make it to D1.

90% chance the shutdown impacted you significantly as well. You don’t have a 1% mentality. Don’t criticize or be defensive. Recognize you have an inferior mindset to those kids and families who really don’t give a s—— what age the age brackets are.

You can view this as insight to change your weak a— mentality and improve or stay here complaining for the rest of your life. You’re welcome!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

We’re not God and kids grow at all rates and sizes. Philly Union has a U13 kid who can probably leg press like 500 lbs. The kid is built like a NFL running back. He has not been beat by any local DMV player yet. I am willing to bet he will not grow at the same rate later. But it is beneficial for my kid to go up against him and lose as my kid will problem solve, decide he wants to get stronger and make himself the best version of himself. That’s the point at this age imho.

Getting hurt is part of the game. Every kid is going to hurt. We just pray that it is not career ending when it happens. Jaxson Dart recently referenced soccer as soft and we need to change this perception. Put your kid in martial arts. You don’t have to be from the hood or trailer park.

If your kid leaves the sport by leaving MLS Next, that is a parent teaching and mindset issue. My kid knows at any point, he can drop down a level and be a superstar and I will still support him. He thrives on the challenge and competition so he chooses to compete.

FYI, I have two Q4 players.

Seriously have to wonder if some of these are real people making real posts

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

We’re not God and kids grow at all rates and sizes. Philly Union has a U13 kid who can probably leg press like 500 lbs. The kid is built like a NFL running back. He has not been beat by any local DMV player yet. I am willing to bet he will not grow at the same rate later. But it is beneficial for my kid to go up against him and lose as my kid will problem solve, decide he wants to get stronger and make himself the best version of himself. That’s the point at this age imho.

Getting hurt is part of the game. Every kid is going to hurt. We just pray that it is not career ending when it happens. Jaxson Dart recently referenced soccer as soft and we need to change this perception. Put your kid in martial arts. You don’t have to be from the hood or trailer park.

If your kid leaves the sport by leaving MLS Next, that is a parent teaching and mindset issue. My kid knows at any point, he can drop down a level and be a superstar and I will still support him. He thrives on the challenge and competition so he chooses to compete.

FYI, I have two Q4 players.

Seriously have to wonder if some of these are real people making real posts

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

We’re not God and kids grow at all rates and sizes. Philly Union has a U13 kid who can probably leg press like 500 lbs. The kid is built like a NFL running back. He has not been beat by any local DMV player yet. I am willing to bet he will not grow at the same rate later. But it is beneficial for my kid to go up against him and lose as my kid will problem solve, decide he wants to get stronger and make himself the best version of himself. That’s the point at this age imho.

Getting hurt is part of the game. Every kid is going to hurt. We just pray that it is not career ending when it happens. Jaxson Dart recently referenced soccer as soft and we need to change this perception. Put your kid in martial arts. You don’t have to be from the hood or trailer park.

If your kid leaves the sport by leaving MLS Next, that is a parent teaching and mindset issue. My kid knows at any point, he can drop down a level and be a superstar and I will still support him. He thrives on the challenge and competition so he chooses to compete.

FYI, I have two Q4 players.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.

We’re not God and kids grow at all rates and sizes. Philly Union has a U13 kid who can probably leg press like 500 lbs. The kid is built like a NFL running back. He has not been beat by any local DMV player yet. I am willing to bet he will not grow at the same rate later. But it is beneficial for my kid to go up against him and lose as my kid will problem solve, decide he wants to get stronger and make himself the best version of himself. That’s the point at this age imho.

Getting hurt is part of the game. Every kid is going to hurt. We just pray that it is not career ending when it happens. Jaxson Dart recently referenced soccer as soft and we need to change this perception. Put your kid in martial arts. You don’t have to be from the hood or trailer park.

If your kid leaves the sport by leaving MLS Next, that is a parent teaching and mindset issue. My kid knows at any point, he can drop down a level and be a superstar and I will still support him. He thrives on the challenge and competition so he chooses to compete.

FYI, I have two Q4 players.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love for all the experts in here to explain what supposed benefits this change is supposed to have, because I don't see it.

Sure.

Before this change the vast majority of August-December birthdays WERE REQUIRED to 1.) play with kids a grade above 2.) be on the low end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be smaller in size, and 4.) deal with trapped player issues in high school There was no chance for flexibility to play down.

With the new change a much smaller amount of August-September birthdays (the ones that would be considered young for their grade) MAY have to play with 1.) kids a grade below, 2.) be on the upper end of the age spectrum for RAE, 3.) more likely to be bigger in size, and 4.) deal with less severe "reverse" trapped player issues in high school. Lastly, there is flexibility to continue "playing up" with their grade level depending on the club.

I'm sorry your kid will fit into that small group that potentially gets hurt by this change (if your club doesn't let them play up). But multiply that by 3 or 4 times and you can see how bad it was for the vast majority of Aug-Dec kids before the change, who didn't even have flexibility.

The benefits of this are only the trapped player issue. This has zero effect on RAE except that it now gives the advantage to Q4 players vs. Q1 players. it's still a one year age group. In reality, it's a disadvantageous change for 3/4 of players that now have older kids coming into their age group.

I agree that “pure” RAE hasn’t really changed. However, I’d argue that the birth-year system created an RAE+ effect. Beyond the usual age-related differences, Q4 kids were often less socially and emotionally mature because they were a grade lower, they typically started organized soccer a year later (since many rec leagues use grade-based entry), and they were less likely to play with friends. That combination reduced enjoyment and hurt retention.

With birth-year grouping, Q4 kids faced a compounding set of disadvantages rather than just RAE alone. With the switch to the seasonal-year system, we’re essentially back to a “pure” RAE without those added factors—and in my view, that’s an improvement.

Stop with the nonsense "Pure" is something you made up and are trying to propagate. Rae affects littles and goes away as players get older. No matter how you slice an eligibility window someone is going to be oldest and someone else is going to be youngest 12 months is 12 months.

If you want to play at the highest level you need to drop the excuses and play with the hand your delt.

When one kid is two heads taller and has a mustache and the body of a body boulder already vs a skinny kid, who is fast and has good foot skills. Who do you think will win a physical battle?
You’re asking for someone to get seriously injured and possibly leave the sport after.
Soccer is not for everyone but at least give the Q4 players a chance.