Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aug poster - what's your end game? You can argue every thread here and it will result in 0 changes. Do you get a rise out of pissing off everyone (that's a troll btw!)? Some of us would like to actually discuss other issues than your one small edge case.

How many times will you respond to your own posts?

Theres no agenda just reality which you don't want to face.

I'm a different poster FFS - there are this many people pissed off at you. Just leave. You are providing nothing

Im a differnet poster as well and 100% it's you responding to your own posts.

So pathetic.

Nope, see that's where you're wrong - I see someone else thinking exactly the same so I post a similar sentiment. You just reply incessantly to yourself. I don't have to argue this, because I'm not the person that everyone else wants off of here. You offer no value - please stop posting. I could say a million mean things, but I'll leave it at that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aug poster - what's your end game? You can argue every thread here and it will result in 0 changes. Do you get a rise out of pissing off everyone (that's a troll btw!)? Some of us would like to actually discuss other issues than your one small edge case.

How many times will you respond to your own posts?

Theres no agenda just reality which you don't want to face.

I'm a different poster FFS - there are this many people pissed off at you. Just leave. You are providing nothing

Im a differnet poster as well and 100% it's you responding to your own posts.

So pathetic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aug poster - what's your end game? You can argue every thread here and it will result in 0 changes. Do you get a rise out of pissing off everyone (that's a troll btw!)? Some of us would like to actually discuss other issues than your one small edge case.

How many times will you respond to your own posts?

Theres no agenda just reality which you don't want to face.

I'm a different poster FFS - there are this many people pissed off at you. Just leave. You are providing nothing

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aug poster - what's your end game? You can argue every thread here and it will result in 0 changes. Do you get a rise out of pissing off everyone (that's a troll btw!)? Some of us would like to actually discuss other issues than your one small edge case.

How many times will you respond to your own posts?

Theres no agenda just reality which you don't want to face.

Anonymous wrote:Aug poster - what's your end game? You can argue every thread here and it will result in 0 changes. Do you get a rise out of pissing off everyone (that's a troll btw!)? Some of us would like to actually discuss other issues than your one small edge case.

Anonymous wrote:Aug poster - what's your end game? You can argue every thread here and it will result in 0 changes. Do you get a rise out of pissing off everyone (that's a troll btw!)? Some of us would like to actually discuss other issues than your one small edge case.

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: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.

They broke all the teams up last time it switched. No problem at all. Why would they suddenly behave differently this time?

Do you comment without reading the ccomment you're replying to?

"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. "

Those are 2 very real and very specific reason not to break up older teams

There were certainly kids talking to coaches last time as well and that did not stop any of the big clubs from completely re-forming all teams by BY. Those reasons existed then and no one cared. We just re-formed all the teams. Done. Zero thought was given to your supposed reasons.

Can you point to a club website in the area that says (basically): "We will not reform teams if players are talking to college coaches."?

Why would clubs tell parents anything? They hold all the cards now. The more they say the more they paint themselves into a corner.

Look at the coaches that coach the oldest teams. Its usually the club owner or someone high up the chain. This is because they want "easy" teams with minimal drama. This along with the college recruiting angle is why you wont see much movement in older teams.

Yep, there will be little drama. They will just re-form them by the new age groupings date range and move on. You are correct. Zero drama in that. Just like they did last time.

With younger not older teams.

Older teams will age out in 1-3 years anyway so why mess with them?

Because that is what they do. They did it last time too. They still hold tryouts and add/remove players for teams in the last 3 years of play at a club all the time. This is no different. There may be less movement when compared to the younger groups (as there are usually just few players at that point).

So you admit that there will be "less" movement on older teams. But you also say that there will be movement.

Ridiculious discussing things with someone that speaks out of both sides of their mouth.

Less does not equal zero the last time I checked? It is certainly possible for their to be 'less' of something and not zero. For example, I feel like have 'less' brain cells every time I respond to the famous Delusional August Guy. Please take your pills.

So what you're saying is that older clubs will stay mostly the same because there will be "less" changes.

What is mostly? More than 50% returning players? Hell, most teams will be mostly the same (50+% returning players). Why would they not be?

That doesn't mean that the clubs won't reform all of their teams to the new age guidelines, because that is exactly what they are going to do. It is bizarre to think otherwise. All you have to do is go look at what occurred last time.

Last time involved playing up.

This time it will be playing down.

The two are very different because of their affects on teams.

No, last time the switch was to 1/1 - 12/31 and had kids in multiple grades on the same team. This time the switch is to 8/1 - 7/31 and will have kids from multiple grades on the same team. Exactly the same, the window just moved.

Right now, there are a metric shit ton of kids 'playing down' with and against kids in a lower grade from them. And no one cares. Under the new window, a very small number of kids will be 'playing down' with and against kids in a lower grade from them. And no one will care. Except you, the Delusional August Guy.

Im glad you typed all this out so everyone can see how dumb/wrong you are. Please continue technically explaining things you're really good at it.

I can always tell when you run out of your typical Delusional August talking points because you just revert to nonsense like this. The only people who agree with you are the voices in your head. Take your medication.

Seriously, pull out a calendar if you need to and review what you 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: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.

They broke all the teams up last time it switched. No problem at all. Why would they suddenly behave differently this time?

Do you comment without reading the ccomment you're replying to?

"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. "

Those are 2 very real and very specific reason not to break up older teams

There were certainly kids talking to coaches last time as well and that did not stop any of the big clubs from completely re-forming all teams by BY. Those reasons existed then and no one cared. We just re-formed all the teams. Done. Zero thought was given to your supposed reasons.

Can you point to a club website in the area that says (basically): "We will not reform teams if players are talking to college coaches."?

Why would clubs tell parents anything? They hold all the cards now. The more they say the more they paint themselves into a corner.

Look at the coaches that coach the oldest teams. Its usually the club owner or someone high up the chain. This is because they want "easy" teams with minimal drama. This along with the college recruiting angle is why you wont see much movement in older teams.

Yep, there will be little drama. They will just re-form them by the new age groupings date range and move on. You are correct. Zero drama in that. Just like they did last time.

With younger not older teams.

Older teams will age out in 1-3 years anyway so why mess with them?

Because that is what they do. They did it last time too. They still hold tryouts and add/remove players for teams in the last 3 years of play at a club all the time. This is no different. There may be less movement when compared to the younger groups (as there are usually just few players at that point).

So you admit that there will be "less" movement on older teams. But you also say that there will be movement.

Ridiculious discussing things with someone that speaks out of both sides of their mouth.

Less does not equal zero the last time I checked? It is certainly possible for their to be 'less' of something and not zero. For example, I feel like have 'less' brain cells every time I respond to the famous Delusional August Guy. Please take your pills.

So what you're saying is that older clubs will stay mostly the same because there will be "less" changes.

What is mostly? More than 50% returning players? Hell, most teams will be mostly the same (50+% returning players). Why would they not be?

That doesn't mean that the clubs won't reform all of their teams to the new age guidelines, because that is exactly what they are going to do. It is bizarre to think otherwise. All you have to do is go look at what occurred last time.

Last time involved playing up.

This time it will be playing down.

The two are very different because of their affects on teams.

No, last time the switch was to 1/1 - 12/31 and had kids in multiple grades on the same team. This time the switch is to 8/1 - 7/31 and will have kids from multiple grades on the same team. Exactly the same, the window just moved.

Right now, there are a metric shit ton of kids 'playing down' with and against kids in a lower grade from them. And no one cares. Under the new window, a very small number of kids will be 'playing down' with and against kids in a lower grade from them. And no one will care. Except you, the Delusional August Guy.

Im glad you typed all this out so everyone can see how dumb/wrong you are. Please continue technically explaining things you're really good at it.

I can always tell when you run out of your typical Delusional August talking points because you just revert to nonsense like this. The only people who agree with you are the voices in your head. Take your medication.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

.

What's a 8th grade team coach?
Never heard of that

Travel Soccer goes by calendar age groups, no?

You're just saying things to be argumentative.

Even under BY because most of the players will be a certain grade that is the grade team it represents. However SY is different 99.9% of all players will be a certain grade. Because of this and because college recruiters/coaches will look at teams by grade so will everyone else.

You can sit there saying "technically" or "actually" this is a SY 8/1-7/31 seasonal year team. People will look at you weird and walk away.

My kids are U18 and U16 in MLS Next

They have been in travel soccer since U7 and I've never heard a coach or club refer to their teams by school grades

Why would it stop being U13 and U12 and U15?

MLS is BY and has biobanding. You likely wouldn't hear about teams grouped by grade in this environment because they're specifically looking to not group by grade.

SY is getting closer to grouping by grade. So since none of the SY leagues currently allow biobanding you'll start hearing grade level team more and more.

Can someone pull a soccer tournament schedule and results from the past that list the bracket groups by school grade

Before switching to BY tournaments were grouped like this...

u14 u15 u16 u17 u18/u19

However if leagues were to implement a rule that players younger than the eligibility window play with their grade in school. You could list the grade for different groupings. Although I doubt they'll do this because soccer people are arrogant, elitists, and stupid all rolled into one. They'll likely look down on grouping by grade because rec is often grouped this way and they want to appear professional. Which is grouped by BY ironically 🤣😂

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: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.

They broke all the teams up last time it switched. No problem at all. Why would they suddenly behave differently this time?

Do you comment without reading the ccomment you're replying to?

"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. "

Those are 2 very real and very specific reason not to break up older teams

There were certainly kids talking to coaches last time as well and that did not stop any of the big clubs from completely re-forming all teams by BY. Those reasons existed then and no one cared. We just re-formed all the teams. Done. Zero thought was given to your supposed reasons.

Can you point to a club website in the area that says (basically): "We will not reform teams if players are talking to college coaches."?

Why would clubs tell parents anything? They hold all the cards now. The more they say the more they paint themselves into a corner.

Look at the coaches that coach the oldest teams. Its usually the club owner or someone high up the chain. This is because they want "easy" teams with minimal drama. This along with the college recruiting angle is why you wont see much movement in older teams.

Yep, there will be little drama. They will just re-form them by the new age groupings date range and move on. You are correct. Zero drama in that. Just like they did last time.

With younger not older teams.

Older teams will age out in 1-3 years anyway so why mess with them?

Because that is what they do. They did it last time too. They still hold tryouts and add/remove players for teams in the last 3 years of play at a club all the time. This is no different. There may be less movement when compared to the younger groups (as there are usually just few players at that point).

So you admit that there will be "less" movement on older teams. But you also say that there will be movement.

Ridiculious discussing things with someone that speaks out of both sides of their mouth.

Less does not equal zero the last time I checked? It is certainly possible for their to be 'less' of something and not zero. For example, I feel like have 'less' brain cells every time I respond to the famous Delusional August Guy. Please take your pills.

So what you're saying is that older clubs will stay mostly the same because there will be "less" changes.

What is mostly? More than 50% returning players? Hell, most teams will be mostly the same (50+% returning players). Why would they not be?

That doesn't mean that the clubs won't reform all of their teams to the new age guidelines, because that is exactly what they are going to do. It is bizarre to think otherwise. All you have to do is go look at what occurred last time.

Last time involved playing up.

This time it will be playing down.

The two are very different because of their affects on teams.

No, last time the switch was to 1/1 - 12/31 and had kids in multiple grades on the same team. This time the switch is to 8/1 - 7/31 and will have kids from multiple grades on the same team. Exactly the same, the window just moved.

Right now, there are a metric shit ton of kids 'playing down' with and against kids in a lower grade from them. And no one cares. Under the new window, a very small number of kids will be 'playing down' with and against kids in a lower grade from them. And no one will care. Except you, the Delusional August Guy.

Im glad you typed all this out so everyone can see how dumb/wrong you are. Please continue technically explaining things you're really good at it.

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: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.

They broke all the teams up last time it switched. No problem at all. Why would they suddenly behave differently this time?

Do you comment without reading the ccomment you're replying to?

"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. "

Those are 2 very real and very specific reason not to break up older teams

There were certainly kids talking to coaches last time as well and that did not stop any of the big clubs from completely re-forming all teams by BY. Those reasons existed then and no one cared. We just re-formed all the teams. Done. Zero thought was given to your supposed reasons.

Can you point to a club website in the area that says (basically): "We will not reform teams if players are talking to college coaches."?

Why would clubs tell parents anything? They hold all the cards now. The more they say the more they paint themselves into a corner.

Look at the coaches that coach the oldest teams. Its usually the club owner or someone high up the chain. This is because they want "easy" teams with minimal drama. This along with the college recruiting angle is why you wont see much movement in older teams.

Yep, there will be little drama. They will just re-form them by the new age groupings date range and move on. You are correct. Zero drama in that. Just like they did last time.

With younger not older teams.

Older teams will age out in 1-3 years anyway so why mess with them?

Because that is what they do. They did it last time too. They still hold tryouts and add/remove players for teams in the last 3 years of play at a club all the time. This is no different. There may be less movement when compared to the younger groups (as there are usually just few players at that point).

So you admit that there will be "less" movement on older teams. But you also say that there will be movement.

Ridiculious discussing things with someone that speaks out of both sides of their mouth.

Less does not equal zero the last time I checked? It is certainly possible for their to be 'less' of something and not zero. For example, I feel like have 'less' brain cells every time I respond to the famous Delusional August Guy. Please take your pills.

So what you're saying is that older clubs will stay mostly the same because there will be "less" changes.

What is mostly? More than 50% returning players? Hell, most teams will be mostly the same (50+% returning players). Why would they not be?

That doesn't mean that the clubs won't reform all of their teams to the new age guidelines, because that is exactly what they are going to do. It is bizarre to think otherwise. All you have to do is go look at what occurred last time.

Last time involved playing up.

This time it will be playing down.

The two are very different because of their affects on teams.

No, last time the switch was to 1/1 - 12/31 and had kids in multiple grades on the same team. This time the switch is to 8/1 - 7/31 and will have kids from multiple grades on the same team. Exactly the same, the window just moved.

Right now, there are a metric shit ton of kids 'playing down' with and against kids in a lower grade from them. And no one cares. Under the new window, a very small number of kids will be 'playing down' with and against kids in a lower grade from them. And no one will care. Except you, the Delusional August Guy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

.

What's a 8th grade team coach?
Never heard of that

Travel Soccer goes by calendar age groups, no?

You're just saying things to be argumentative.

Even under BY because most of the players will be a certain grade that is the grade team it represents. However SY is different 99.9% of all players will be a certain grade. Because of this and because college recruiters/coaches will look at teams by grade so will everyone else.

You can sit there saying "technically" or "actually" this is a SY 8/1-7/31 seasonal year team. People will look at you weird and walk away.

My kids are U18 and U16 in MLS Next

They have been in travel soccer since U7 and I've never heard a coach or club refer to their teams by school grades

Why would it stop being U13 and U12 and U15?

MLS is BY and has biobanding. You likely wouldn't hear about teams grouped by grade in this environment because they're specifically looking to not group by grade.

SY is getting closer to grouping by grade. So since none of the SY leagues currently allow biobanding you'll start hearing grade level team more and more.

Can someone pull a soccer tournament schedule and results from the past that list the bracket groups by school grade

Before switching to BY tournaments were grouped like this...

u14 u15 u16 u17 u18/u19

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the rest of the world, parents would tell their kids that the age cutoff is changing from January 1st to August 1st

Kids would showup next season to the team where they belong and continue to play soccer

Only here this would be never ending drama.

in the rest of the world school start date and the age kids start school are different things. This is why everyone else uses BY.

Here's how it works. Legally parents need to start when they reach a certain age. It doesnt matter when school starts during that year.

This is why everyone uses BY. It makes it so soccer level is 100% independent from school start date. Which makes sense when colleges dont get involved with sports and theres no push/reason to group players by grade in school.

This isn’t true. Even in Europe most counties group their grades by BY and also use the same groupings for soccer. England groups grades with a cutoff of 9/1 and also does the same for soccer. The date school starts for the year is irrelevant.

You need to reread what I wrote. Its 100% true and I explained why every European and Latin American team groups by BY not SY.

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: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.

They broke all the teams up last time it switched. No problem at all. Why would they suddenly behave differently this time?

Do you comment without reading the ccomment you're replying to?

"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. "

Those are 2 very real and very specific reason not to break up older teams

There were certainly kids talking to coaches last time as well and that did not stop any of the big clubs from completely re-forming all teams by BY. Those reasons existed then and no one cared. We just re-formed all the teams. Done. Zero thought was given to your supposed reasons.

Can you point to a club website in the area that says (basically): "We will not reform teams if players are talking to college coaches."?

Why would clubs tell parents anything? They hold all the cards now. The more they say the more they paint themselves into a corner.

Look at the coaches that coach the oldest teams. Its usually the club owner or someone high up the chain. This is because they want "easy" teams with minimal drama. This along with the college recruiting angle is why you wont see much movement in older teams.

Yep, there will be little drama. They will just re-form them by the new age groupings date range and move on. You are correct. Zero drama in that. Just like they did last time.

With younger not older teams.

Older teams will age out in 1-3 years anyway so why mess with them?

Because that is what they do. They did it last time too. They still hold tryouts and add/remove players for teams in the last 3 years of play at a club all the time. This is no different. There may be less movement when compared to the younger groups (as there are usually just few players at that point).

So you admit that there will be "less" movement on older teams. But you also say that there will be movement.

Ridiculious discussing things with someone that speaks out of both sides of their mouth.

Less does not equal zero the last time I checked? It is certainly possible for their to be 'less' of something and not zero. For example, I feel like have 'less' brain cells every time I respond to the famous Delusional August Guy. Please take your pills.

So what you're saying is that older clubs will stay mostly the same because there will be "less" changes.

What is mostly? More than 50% returning players? Hell, most teams will be mostly the same (50+% returning players). Why would they not be?

That doesn't mean that the clubs won't reform all of their teams to the new age guidelines, because that is exactly what they are going to do. It is bizarre to think otherwise. All you have to do is go look at what occurred last time.

Last time involved playing up.

This time it will be playing down.

The two are very different because of their affects on teams.