DCUM Forum

Anonymous

08/23/2025 16:23 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

It's GY without admitting it or SY with opening the floodgates for exceptions. There is a reason that a 365 day age grouping works. It's also pre-DOA. Pre because it was never a consideration.

Nope SY+30 specifically protects against playing down which is the specific problem with both GY and 8/1.

Anything outside the 365 day period is playing down and is the first exception floodgate that parents will try to constantly expand.

If the end goal of switching from BY to SY is to only field players in a game that are a specific graduating year the 365 8/1 grouping that you're advocating doesnt work. This is because depending on the school disteict Aug birthdays (and sometimes July birthdays) would be able to play down.

Hence why people are saying SY+30

It's foreign level cheating is what it is. Like fake foreign birth certificate cheating.

You are dumb.

The same level of cheating will occur no matter what grouping is implemented.

Trying to create a system for you to cheat for your daughter weakens the integrity of the game and is dumb.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 16:15 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

We are really back arguing with SY+one lunar cycle guy?

Between the two threads he is responsible for 500 posts all thinking he will get an advantage for his kid.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 15:59 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

It's GY without admitting it or SY with opening the floodgates for exceptions. There is a reason that a 365 day age grouping works. It's also pre-DOA. Pre because it was never a consideration.

Nope SY+30 specifically protects against playing down which is the specific problem with both GY and 8/1.

Anything outside the 365 day period is playing down and is the first exception floodgate that parents will try to constantly expand.

If the end goal of switching from BY to SY is to only field players in a game that are a specific graduating year the 365 8/1 grouping that you're advocating doesnt work. This is because depending on the school disteict Aug birthdays (and sometimes July birthdays) would be able to play down.

Hence why people are saying SY+30

From all that I've read by the decision-makers, the goal was to improve this issue -- to minimize trap situations and better align grades for college recruiting -- but in the end maintain a more strict 365-day window.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 15:57 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

It's GY without admitting it or SY with opening the floodgates for exceptions. There is a reason that a 365 day age grouping works. It's also pre-DOA. Pre because it was never a consideration.

Nope SY+30 specifically protects against playing down which is the specific problem with both GY and 8/1.

Anything outside the 365 day period is playing down and is the first exception floodgate that parents will try to constantly expand.

If the end goal of switching from BY to SY is to only field players in a game that are a specific graduating year the 365 8/1 grouping that you're advocating doesnt work. This is because depending on the school disteict Aug birthdays (and sometimes July birthdays) would be able to play down.

Hence why people are saying SY+30

It's foreign level cheating is what it is. Like fake foreign birth certificate cheating.

You are dumb.

The same level of cheating will occur no matter what grouping is implemented.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 15:21 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

It's GY without admitting it or SY with opening the floodgates for exceptions. There is a reason that a 365 day age grouping works. It's also pre-DOA. Pre because it was never a consideration.

Nope SY+30 specifically protects against playing down which is the specific problem with both GY and 8/1.

Anything outside the 365 day period is playing down and is the first exception floodgate that parents will try to constantly expand.

If the end goal of switching from BY to SY is to only field players in a game that are a specific graduating year the 365 8/1 grouping that you're advocating doesnt work. This is because depending on the school disteict Aug birthdays (and sometimes July birthdays) would be able to play down.

Hence why people are saying SY+30

It's foreign level cheating is what it is. Like fake foreign birth certificate cheating.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 14:43 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

It's GY without admitting it or SY with opening the floodgates for exceptions. There is a reason that a 365 day age grouping works. It's also pre-DOA. Pre because it was never a consideration.

Nope SY+30 specifically protects against playing down which is the specific problem with both GY and 8/1.

Anything outside the 365 day period is playing down and is the first exception floodgate that parents will try to constantly expand.

If the end goal of switching from BY to SY is to only field players in a game that are a specific graduating year the 365 8/1 grouping that you're advocating doesnt work. This is because depending on the school disteict Aug birthdays (and sometimes July birthdays) would be able to play down.

Hence why people are saying SY+30

Anonymous

08/23/2025 14:21 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

It's GY without admitting it or SY with opening the floodgates for exceptions. There is a reason that a 365 day age grouping works. It's also pre-DOA. Pre because it was never a consideration.

Nope SY+30 specifically protects against playing down which is the specific problem with both GY and 8/1.

Anything outside the 365 day period is playing down and is the first exception floodgate that parents will try to constantly expand.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 14:04 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

GY for showcases is the way.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 13:38 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

It's GY without admitting it or SY with opening the floodgates for exceptions. There is a reason that a 365 day age grouping works. It's also pre-DOA. Pre because it was never a consideration.

Nope SY+30 specifically protects against playing down which is the specific problem with both GY and 8/1.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 13:23 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

It's GY without admitting it or SY with opening the floodgates for exceptions. There is a reason that a 365 day age grouping works. It's also pre-DOA. Pre because it was never a consideration.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 10:39 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

This is what gets annoying about dcum trolls. They dont even care about youth soccer. All they want to do is annoy others so they comment. Probably because their mom wants them to come out of the basement and they want to seem busy.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 10:36 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Its 30 so the concept makes sense for any month and can be modified to whatever makes sense.

So you think ECNL adding a rule that Aug birthdays must play with their grade is a dumb idea?

You think guaranteeing that all players on the field are a certain grade for recruiters is a dumb idea?

Anonymous

08/23/2025 10:12 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

It's SY-31. Makes sense you can't even get your math right on such a dumb idea

Anonymous

08/23/2025 10:02 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.

SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff not GY+30

Just wait, ECNL will add a rule that doesnt allow playing down a grade even if its possible with an 8/1 cutoff. Which is the same thing as SY+30.

Anonymous

08/23/2025 09:32 Subject: ECNL moving to school year part 2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what happened at this ECNL meeting that was to happen this week??

I guess we will find out when the rules come out?..

Trish told me that ECNL is actually moving to GY+30, a hybrid approach.