Anonymous
10/15/2025 21:03
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Answer the question please.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
They can’t because they know nobody has said GY is a good idea or wants grad year. All while saying kids should be aligned in grade because grade matters for some reason unless that kid is more than 16 months older then it’s cheating lol
They don’t realize forcing Aug-Dec kids up would make a December kid potentially a 16 months younger than the oldest kid, all while calling hold backs who are 1-2 years older cheaters.
16 months is literally between 1-2 years so how is it not cheating to force kids up!?
I don’t understand how someone can be such a not intelligent person.
Yet you want GY in showcases so your kid can play down against players 24 to 36 months younger than your kid.
People, this person is a Cheater though and though.
First hold backs were 1-2 years older, now it’s 2-3 years older? That would mean they were held back 2-3 times?
Literally no one is asking for grad year which you have not been able to cite a source from this thread.
You’re just ridiculous arguing and fighting for you’re own version of grad year all while calling people cheaters who are pointing out that you’re asking for grad year but with your own name for it.
Nice walk-back unfortunately you were the one defending making Showcases GY. Don't worry, I'll wait a day and you'll be back to posting about GY showcases.
Also it appears you can't read a calendar. If a Senior was born in Aug and held back 2 years this would make them potentially 36 months older then the youngest Sophmore.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 20:52
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Answer the question please.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
They can’t because they know nobody has said GY is a good idea or wants grad year. All while saying kids should be aligned in grade because grade matters for some reason unless that kid is more than 16 months older then it’s cheating lol
They don’t realize forcing Aug-Dec kids up would make a December kid potentially a 16 months younger than the oldest kid, all while calling hold backs who are 1-2 years older cheaters.
16 months is literally between 1-2 years so how is it not cheating to force kids up!?
I don’t understand how someone can be such a not intelligent person.
Yet you want GY in showcases so your kid can play down against players 24 to 36 months younger than your kid.
People, this person is a Cheater though and though.
First hold backs were 1-2 years older, now it’s 2-3 years older? That would mean they were held back 2-3 times?
Literally no one is asking for grad year which you have not been able to cite a source from this thread.
You’re just ridiculous arguing and fighting for you’re own version of grad year all while calling people cheaters who are pointing out that you’re asking for grad year but with your own name for it.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 20:37
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:274 posts here and over 1k on the first thread. Can anyone give me a succinct guess on when we'll understand what's happening with ECNL's move to school year. I ready 50 posts and none have anything to do with this thread. No dog in the fight. Don't care which way they go but with a younger 2012 in GA this move opens up lots of decisions for us over the next 6 months and was hoping to find at least some conspiracy theories on when an announcement would be made. If ECNL sticks with BY we'll need to decide if it makes sense to continue playing with girls a year ahead of my daughter in school. Haven't thought much about it but we're she's talented and we're entering her recruiting years so the least we can ask for is clarity ENCL, c'mon! Any theories on upcoming announcements? Everyone else has made their stance clear. Thx!
Every single girls league will be 8/1. ODP will be 1/1. Could not be easier to understand for the girls. Good luck this spring!
Anonymous
10/15/2025 20:29
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:274 posts here and over 1k on the first thread. Can anyone give me a succinct guess on when we'll understand what's happening with ECNL's move to school year. I ready 50 posts and none have anything to do with this thread. No dog in the fight. Don't care which way they go but with a younger 2012 in GA this move opens up lots of decisions for us over the next 6 months and was hoping to find at least some conspiracy theories on when an announcement would be made. If ECNL sticks with BY we'll need to decide if it makes sense to continue playing with girls a year ahead of my daughter in school. Haven't thought much about it but we're she's talented and we're entering her recruiting years so the least we can ask for is clarity ENCL, c'mon! Any theories on upcoming announcements? Everyone else has made their stance clear. Thx!
ECNL announced that they will be SY 8/1-7/31 starting fall in the 2026/2027 season 10 months ago.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 20:27
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
274 posts here and over 1k on the first thread. Can anyone give me a succinct guess on when we'll understand what's happening with ECNL's move to school year. I ready 50 posts and none have anything to do with this thread. No dog in the fight. Don't care which way they go but with a younger 2012 in GA this move opens up lots of decisions for us over the next 6 months and was hoping to find at least some conspiracy theories on when an announcement would be made. If ECNL sticks with BY we'll need to decide if it makes sense to continue playing with girls a year ahead of my daughter in school. Haven't thought much about it but we're she's talented and we're entering her recruiting years so the least we can ask for is clarity ENCL, c'mon! Any theories on upcoming announcements? Everyone else has made their stance clear. Thx!
Anonymous
10/15/2025 20:05
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Answer the question please.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
They can’t because they know nobody has said GY is a good idea or wants grad year. All while saying kids should be aligned in grade because grade matters for some reason unless that kid is more than 16 months older then it’s cheating lol
They don’t realize forcing Aug-Dec kids up would make a December kid potentially a 16 months younger than the oldest kid, all while calling hold backs who are 1-2 years older cheaters.
16 months is literally between 1-2 years so how is it not cheating to force kids up!?
I don’t understand how someone can be such a not intelligent person.
Yet you want GY in showcases so your kid can play down against players 24 to 36 months younger than your kid.
People, this person is a Cheater though and though.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:56
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Answer the question please.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
They can’t because they know nobody has said GY is a good idea or wants grad year. All while saying kids should be aligned in grade because grade matters for some reason unless that kid is more than 16 months older then it’s cheating lol
They don’t realize forcing Aug-Dec kids up would make a December kid potentially a 16 months younger than the oldest kid, all while calling hold backs who are 1-2 years older cheaters.
16 months is literally between 1-2 years so how is it not cheating to force kids up!?
I don’t understand how someone can be such a not intelligent person.
Yet you want GY in showcases so your kid can play down against players 24 to 36 months younger than your kid.
People, this person is a Cheater though and though.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:38
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:Answer the question please.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
They can’t because they know nobody has said GY is a good idea or wants grad year. All while saying kids should be aligned in grade because grade matters for some reason unless that kid is more than 16 months older then it’s cheating lol
They don’t realize forcing Aug-Dec kids up would make a December kid potentially a 16 months younger than the oldest kid, all while calling hold backs who are 1-2 years older cheaters.
16 months is literally between 1-2 years so how is it not cheating to force kids up!?
I don’t understand how someone can be such a not intelligent person.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:31
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Answer the question please.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:30
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:27
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases in the thread? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:21
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
You dont get it. Nobody wants GY in soccer. You might not see it in this thread as much but 99% of parents dont post here.
You keep lighting nudging GY and think that people dont notice. They do notice and they dont want GY in youth club soccer.
People do want SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that says younger players must play on rhe team thats their grade in school. This gives the same end result. All players on field are the same grade in school. Which is what college coaches and recruiters want. But keeps teams seperate (doesnt allow older players to play down) which protects the investment parents make to play club soccer.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:12
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Can you cite someone on this thread? Cite = quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:11
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
I hope people are seeing this. The guy that camps on their thread all day is 100% for GY showcases. He wants older players to play down on your team (the team you pay for) so older players can look good in front of college coaches and get recruited.
He wants to take opportunities from your kid.
He wants to take opportunities from your kid.
Anonymous
10/15/2025 19:05
Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2
Anonymous wrote:Again, can you cite someone?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Ok, so nobody on this thread then.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can you cite someone asking for grades at Showcases? I do not recall anyone. Thanks.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No, you are off here.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Looks like the GA announcment that was initially proven incorrect then later ended up being correct. (but the GA doc was made up) Probabaly the same parent thats over invested making things up to win arguements online about MLS.
You’re a world class tool.Why would someone make up a document with factual information? To try and trick people into knowing truthful information?
They did it before with both a fake "So Cal" announcement then a fake GA document. This looks a lot like both of them.
Just because crazy person happened to be correct on a 50/50 decision doesnt mean the docs were any less fake.
I just don’t see the logic behind what you’re saying? Someone is faking documents with information that is true?
Yes, someone was faking documents last year about "So Cal" (SOCAL league in California) and GA. The documents were proven to be fake. But, 6-8 months later they ended up being partially right. At the tine the fake docs were a 50/50 decision for leagues. Just because whoever created them was partially right doesn't make them any less fake.
Can you provide the link? I’m not understanding how someone can be partially right? They would be wrong or right? Is this MLSN person linked to same account?
First there was misspellings all over the "So Cal" announcement. I believe they also provided a date when it would occur and SY window of 9/1-8/31. Both turned out to be false. I dont remember what was weird about the GA fake doc. Might have been fonts or somehting. Both looked a lot like this one.
Believe whatever you want but be aware that there are people willing to fake documents to win arguements online or maybe try to pressure MLS into what they want to occur.
The misspellings are from the poster HERE, not in the screenshot on Reddit of the message -- which looks more legit.
Im talking about the misspellings on the fake So Cal document from last year.
Right to draw comparisons to the MLSN message -- which doesn't have misspellings (except for the poster who copied it here)!
The brush used to black out something in the MLS doc/pic is/was the same brush used to black out something in the GA fake doc.
When I saw that = Highly suspicious
All sorts of people do that to preserve anonymity. That's not really a red flag. That's someone using their computer.
Its more likely that the same people drafted both the GA and MLS screenshots.
What are you debating that is being said? It provides no information so should be pretty easy to confirm with your DOC. Whether this email is true or not it’s almost a certainty that mlsn has not made a decision and will communicate when they do.
Fake is fake. It casts a heavy shadow on what's attempting to be relayed.
The likely person that wrote the fake So Cal and GA docs used to comment here saying whats the big deal if they ended up being mostly true.
First, they were fake.
Second, they were 50/50 guesses that happened to be partially true
So all posts of photos with the black out of other people’s names and email address is all from one person?
All in the hopes of tricking people to believe the truth before it’s official?
Actually, what I see is the thread troll here looking for something new and dumb to argue about to the point they even perhaps copied it with the spelling errors here to make it seem fake to bolster the case!
I think theres a very good chance that GY Dad is the one that created the fake MLS screenshot. He probabaly did the same with the GA and So Cal docs.
Yes! And all maybe with the goal of trolling THIS thread.
Its pretty simple.
GY Guy wants clubs to switch from BY to SY because its that much closer to letting his kid play in showcases on a team of players 1-2 years younger.
GY Guy fights against SY 8/1-7/31 with a rule that younger players must play on a team with their grade in school. Because he knows that if implemeted GY is 100% never going to happen. Players will all be the same age on the field and calls for implementing GY will be ignored.
The GY guy wants kids forced to play on grade. He can't drop making rules grade based where now grades are irrelevant, hates RAE, wants SY+ BS because it forces GY, etc. Nobody else wants GY but him.
I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. They could replace them all with ID sessions if they wanted. But there have been rumors of changes although I don't think anybody is advocating for changes or against here.
Come on just be honest...
"I don't think anybody cares about showcases and they don't matter to the age group discussion because they should just be exhibitions. "
Well said GY guy. We all know you want GY at showcases so your kid can play down on team with players 1-2 years younger.
Every collge recruiter and coach.
And the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases.
Basically everyone but you
the parents that want their kid to get recruited and not have to worry about players 1-2 years older playing down on the team they paid for at showcases