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.

Biobanding in ECNL?

The moment ECNL allows biobanding, the cheaters will knock on the door.

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.

Biobanding in ECNL?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was looking at ECNL rules have trapped U19 players always been eligible to play in U17 showcases for the entire season?

Yes…mine is a junior in college and played u17 ECNL showcases as a trapped u18/19

Anonymous wrote:Was looking at ECNL rules have trapped U19 players always been eligible to play in U17 showcases for the entire season?

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.

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: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.

Changing fron BY to SY is to make grouping players easier for clubs and to make it so all players on the field during a game are graduating the same year.

For the first situation clubs want an easy way to group players. Just ask players what grade they're in and that's the level they play.

For recruiters clubs want an easy way for college coaches and recruiters to review talent. It really is this simple.

What you dont want is the 16 year old freshman holdbacks playing with 14 year old players. (This is GY)

They get how necessary maintaining the strict 365 day window is to keep meddling parents at bay.

So August birthdays can play down?

Whatever, it doesnt matter ECNL will draft a rule not allowing August birthdays to play down. Then your "strict 365 window" will be exactly the same as SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff.

There are no grades, only a strict 365 starting Aug 1, nobody plays down. Advocating for exceptions is cheating selfish clown behavior masquerading as a savior. Oh the kids, this kids! You are the reason that the leagues have to go with a strict 365.

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: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.

Changing fron BY to SY is to make grouping players easier for clubs and to make it so all players on the field during a game are graduating the same year.

For the first situation clubs want an easy way to group players. Just ask players what grade they're in and that's the level they play.

For recruiters clubs want an easy way for college coaches and recruiters to review talent. It really is this simple.

What you dont want is the 16 year old freshman holdbacks playing with 14 year old players. (This is GY)

They get how necessary maintaining the strict 365 day window is to keep meddling parents at bay.

So August birthdays can play down?

Whatever, it doesnt matter ECNL will draft a rule not allowing August birthdays to play down. Then your "strict 365 window" will be exactly the same as SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff.

There are no grades, only a strict 365 starting Aug 1, nobody plays down. Advocating for exceptions is cheating selfish clown behavior masquerading as a savior. Oh the kids, this kids! You are the reason that the leagues have to go with a strict 365.

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: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.

Changing fron BY to SY is to make grouping players easier for clubs and to make it so all players on the field during a game are graduating the same year.

For the first situation clubs want an easy way to group players. Just ask players what grade they're in and that's the level they play.

For recruiters clubs want an easy way for college coaches and recruiters to review talent. It really is this simple.

What you dont want is the 16 year old freshman holdbacks playing with 14 year old players. (This is GY)

They get how necessary maintaining the strict 365 day window is to keep meddling parents at bay.

So August birthdays can play down?

Whatever, it doesnt matter ECNL will draft a rule not allowing August birthdays to play down. Then your "strict 365 window" will be exactly the same as SY+30 with a 9/1 cutoff.

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: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.

Changing fron BY to SY is to make grouping players easier for clubs and to make it so all players on the field during a game are graduating the same year.

For the first situation clubs want an easy way to group players. Just ask players what grade they're in and that's the level they play.

For recruiters clubs want an easy way for college coaches and recruiters to review talent. It really is this simple.

What you dont want is the 16 year old freshman holdbacks playing with 14 year old players. (This is GY)

They get how necessary maintaining the strict 365 day window is to keep meddling parents at bay.

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

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.

Changing fron BY to SY is to make grouping players easier for clubs and to make it so all players on the field during a game are graduating the same year.

For the first situation clubs want an easy way to group players. Just ask players what grade they're in and that's the level they play.

For recruiters clubs want an easy way for college coaches and recruiters to review talent. It really is this simple.

What you dont want is the 16 year old freshman holdbacks playing with 14 year old players. (This is GY)

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

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 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: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.