Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs aren't as far along as those with the FAQs. At mine, we just had a coach (HS level) acknowledge the issue but said he didn't have any good info yet, other than he personally thought the club probably wouldn't want to break up older teams, especially if the group does well and gets along right now. He also promised more info from the club upcoming soon. So a big stay-tuned for us.

This is the logical approach. Clubs have spent years grooming older teams into playing together with little drama from players and parents. Throw in that older players are likely communicating with college coaches who expect to see them with a certain number and on a specific team. Breaking these teams and players up for wins (nobody cares) when everyone is playing to get recruited doesn't make sense.

Clubs are all playing musical chairs with players every season
No longterm grooming happening anywhere

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs aren't as far along as those with the FAQs. At mine, we just had a coach (HS level) acknowledge the issue but said he didn't have any good info yet, other than he personally thought the club probably wouldn't want to break up older teams, especially if the group does well and gets along right now. He also promised more info from the club upcoming soon. So a big stay-tuned for us.

This is the logical approach. Clubs have spent years grooming older teams into playing together with little drama from players and parents. Throw in that older players are likely communicating with college coaches who expect to see them with a certain number and on a specific team. Breaking these teams and players up for wins (nobody cares) when everyone is playing to get recruited doesn't make sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voluntarily trapped….


Hahahah

It's more than "voluntarily trapped" think about it.

What 8th grade team coach wants to deal with losing 9th grade (playing down Aug/Sept birthdays) that leave the team for 2-4 months during the high school season?

Coachrs wont roster the play downs because having a winning season is how they keep their job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs aren't as far along as those with the FAQs. At mine, we just had a coach (HS level) acknowledge the issue but said he didn't have any good info yet, other than he personally thought the club probably wouldn't want to break up older teams, especially if the group does well and gets along right now. He also promised more info from the club upcoming soon. So a big stay-tuned for us.

This is the logical approach. Clubs have spent years grooming older teams into playing together with little drama from players and parents. Throw in that older players are likely communicating with college coaches who expect to see them with a certain number and on a specific team. Breaking these teams and players up for wins (nobody cares) when everyone is playing to get recruited doesn't make sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our club sent an email this week. New age group ID sessions for our 11v11 A/B girls teams next month and that you should go based on your age just to see what it might be like for players and coaches. No chatter all about playing up, except to contact them if you have any questions. It will be mandatory for current club A/B players and open anyone from outside. (Also, nothing on boys yet -- because email said they are awaiting clarity for MLSN).

And away we go!

Why does your club need to do "group ID sessions" for the players they have rostered on teams that likely play year round in some form or fashion? I get that as a formality you hold yearly tryouts in case theres a new coach or players need to be swapped. But overall clubs should already know what they expect SY teams to look like. This is because over the next 6 months there will likely be all kinds of players from other clubs jumping in on sessions looking for a roster spot. Clubs need to understand where all players stand in the mix.

I think they do on paper but now they want to see players on the field in action. They've already been doing some joint practices AND/OR inviting players in certain situations. Additionally, our club has been doing ID sessions every December for as long as I remember, but they're being much more explicit about the mandatory part this time around, especially for the B teams. Previously, the sessions were for those interested (including current players) in playing for our top level.

That makes senae.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our club sent an email this week. New age group ID sessions for our 11v11 A/B girls teams next month and that you should go based on your age just to see what it might be like for players and coaches. No chatter all about playing up, except to contact them if you have any questions. It will be mandatory for current club A/B players and open anyone from outside. (Also, nothing on boys yet -- because email said they are awaiting clarity for MLSN).

And away we go!

Why does your club need to do "group ID sessions" for the players they have rostered on teams that likely play year round in some form or fashion? I get that as a formality you hold yearly tryouts in case theres a new coach or players need to be swapped. But overall clubs should already know what they expect SY teams to look like. This is because over the next 6 months there will likely be all kinds of players from other clubs jumping in on sessions looking for a roster spot. Clubs need to understand where all players stand in the mix.

I think they do on paper but now they want to see players on the field in action. They've already been doing some joint practices AND/OR inviting players in certain situations. Additionally, our club has been doing ID sessions every December for as long as I remember, but they're being much more explicit about the mandatory part this time around, especially for the B teams. Previously, the sessions were for those interested (including current players) in playing for our top level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our club sent an email this week. New age group ID sessions for our 11v11 A/B girls teams next month and that you should go based on your age just to see what it might be like for players and coaches. No chatter all about playing up, except to contact them if you have any questions. It will be mandatory for current club A/B players and open anyone from outside. (Also, nothing on boys yet -- because email said they are awaiting clarity for MLSN).

And away we go!

Why does your club need to do "group ID sessions" for the players they have rostered on teams that likely play year round in some form or fashion? I get that as a formality you hold yearly tryouts in case theres a new coach or players need to be swapped. But overall clubs should already know what they expect SY teams to look like. This is because over the next 6 months there will likely be all kinds of players from other clubs jumping in on sessions looking for a roster spot. Clubs need to understand where all players stand in the mix.

Anonymous wrote:Our club sent an email this week. New age group ID sessions for our 11v11 A/B girls teams next month and that you should go based on your age just to see what it might be like for players and coaches. No chatter all about playing up, except to contact them if you have any questions. It will be mandatory for current club A/B players and open anyone from outside. (Also, nothing on boys yet -- because email said they are awaiting clarity for MLSN).

And away we go!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs aren't as far along as those with the FAQs. At mine, we just had a coach (HS level) acknowledge the issue but said he didn't have any good info yet, other than he personally thought the club probably wouldn't want to break up older teams, especially if the group does well and gets along right now. He also promised more info from the club upcoming soon. So a big stay-tuned for us.

This is the logical approach. Clubs have spent years grooming older teams into playing together with little drama from players and parents. Throw in that older players are likely communicating with college coaches who expect to see them with a certain number and on a specific team. Breaking these teams and players up for wins (nobody cares) when everyone is playing to get recruited doesn't make sense.

I think it depends on the team and player. Some kids are just playing because they love to play and to stay sharp for HS. Others have college dreams. We have a group of Q4ers, with a few who might be able to join a higher team that's younger with a bigger recruiting platform. Wouldn't blame them for going if they can make it either at our club or elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs aren't as far along as those with the FAQs. At mine, we just had a coach (HS level) acknowledge the issue but said he didn't have any good info yet, other than he personally thought the club probably wouldn't want to break up older teams, especially if the group does well and gets along right now. He also promised more info from the club upcoming soon. So a big stay-tuned for us.

This is the logical approach. Clubs have spent years grooming older teams into playing together with little drama from players and parents. Throw in that older players are likely communicating with college coaches who expect to see them with a certain number and on a specific team. Breaking these teams and players up for wins (nobody cares) when everyone is playing to get recruited doesn't make sense.

Anonymous wrote:Some clubs aren't as far along as those with the FAQs. At mine, we just had a coach (HS level) acknowledge the issue but said he didn't have any good info yet, other than he personally thought the club probably wouldn't want to break up older teams, especially if the group does well and gets along right now. He also promised more info from the club upcoming soon. So a big stay-tuned for us.

Anonymous wrote:Voluntarily trapped….


Hahahah

Anonymous wrote:Look we need to say it. August guy is right on one level: Playing on grade makes sense for recruiting. Where he's wrong is he thinks it's simpler just to force Aug-Sept kids to play by grade. Remember, it's a very small % of players that go on to play in college and we shouldn't have a policy based solely on that population. Besides, RAE shows us it's actually helps development to be the oldest and that to force kids to be the youngest actually would mean more of those kids would be among the first to quit, although a few would become really good players and be the exceptions.

In terms of top teams, top misaligned players -- and there'd be more of them if they stay misaligned at first, again thanks to RAE -- would in the end be among those who be good enough play up anyway once they get to HS for recruiting. I think that's why 9 out of 10 clubs we've found plans for have language that sets that up: You play up if you are good enough. Full stop.

Speaking of which, I think the best way to stop the focus on this part of the discussion is to stop engaging on this aspect of the topic period, so unless something new from a top soccer person/org comes out that's more definitive, I'm done adding anything here (so about third of the arguing by my reckoning will end -- my apologies for adding to the dumpster fire). Hopefully, that'll help lead to more productive sharing about what's actually happening at clubs.

In the meantime, good luck to all, especially if you have a kid in this world right now, that while sometimes is amazing to be apart of is all too often a toxic stew that resembles many an anonymous thread.