|
Post by hotspur1 on Nov 6, 2015 20:35:38 GMT -5
Probably has a late spring or summer baby who will benefit... That's the driving force for most people who are happy about this. I have kids on either end of the calendar, so I don't have a preference on that front. I can, however, see how the fall-born kids are getting screwed in multiple ways that are unrelated to age. My kids fall on both sides. One March and one October. I still have not bought into kids getting screwed, I think everything will be fine once folks have time to work through some solutions. Fair enough. I have a daughter with an October bday that moved from a mega club to a small club that will have her team possibly lose 5 players. Plus that club will likely lose a u16 squad. But at the end of the day, my daughter's goal is to make her high school team and have fun. She tried the ODP thing...thankfully it wasn't for her. Unfortunately it seems to me that US Soccer thinks it's more important to look for the 1/2 of 1% that MIGHT be able to compete on the Int'l level. I personally have issues with the implementation and reasoning. It is easy to see that it wasn't thought out properly (i.e. the lack of consistency throughout the issuance of mandate), certainly wasn't explained/communicated well, and quite frankly I don't believe it will solve the overriding issues that we see in US soccer, especially on the men's side. While I do have issues with the women's side of US Soccer (more from the standpoint of nat'l team coaching) the bday issue certainly hasn't affected identification of players based off of on field results on the women's side. Is the bday mandate really going to make a difference on the men's side? Or maybe we should decide to promote soccer better? Make it more affordable? More available to all? Market it properly to make it more popular? Have better development? And for God's sake, get better coaching on the US Men's side! Not a Klinsmann fan I do like the thought of small sided games for the early years. In fact I love the idea. But from what I've heard today, I don't think that US soccer is pushing this well either. At the end of the day, I will (weather permitting) be out this weekend cheering on my daughter's team making some beautiful passes, maybe scoring some goals, and hopefully watching the young ladies have some fun.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Nov 6, 2015 20:52:07 GMT -5
Agree - end of the day it's not going to make a lick of difference to our US national teams.
In my opinion (broken record) - older teams, you choose the cutoff should be grandfathered in - calendar year switch should 100% align with small sided mandates - 11 & 12 year olds, aka 2004s and 2005s for 2016/2017 season should be playing 9v9 - development is crucial but for 99% of kids what the heck are we developing them for? Focus on competition, sportsmanship, working to achieve team and individual goals and always prioritize education. - clubs should also mandate their own training curriculums. No reason isolated coaches are running kids 85% of a practice session for example at u12/u13
Sorry have to add - clearly I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about because all of the above things will not and are not going to happen.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Nov 6, 2015 21:53:04 GMT -5
I still say the whole reason for the mandate is so our RAE-enhanced players won't be 7 months younger than the RAE-enhanced players from other countries.
It's the only valid reason I have *ever* heard or thought of for making the change.
|
|
|
Post by youthsoccerdad on Nov 6, 2015 22:58:03 GMT -5
I still say the whole reason for the mandate is so our RAE-enhanced players won't be 7 months younger than the RAE-enhanced players from other countries. It's the only valid reason I have *ever* heard or thought of for making the change. I think it is one change but is more of a byproduct. To me the entire process is just around standardization. If I was responsible for the output of something so broad as US soccer one of the first things I would look to do is try to standardize everything. Age groups, small sided games, etc. and later things like formations. I would expect a imperfect system to begin with, and folks to be mad. My primary objective would be to get it started and then I can tweak later. At that point I could begin to try to shift the big boat that is youth soccer in the us. I am not saying their communication is good, or that they thought through their changes well, or any soccer organization has done a reasonable job explaining this. I also think a couple folks need to lose their jobs over the whole thing but all of that is just noise. After it is done they are one step closer in managing us soccer and that will make for better outputs at some point in the future. With all of that said, things like dads that teach their sons and daughters how to play soccer will have a bigger impact as will games like FIFA and EPL games on the weekends. But I think at some point you do need a standardized system even if it is not this one.
|
|
|
Post by soccernotfootball on Nov 7, 2015 12:52:55 GMT -5
I didn't follow the town hall and have not found an answer to this question...
If we are going to calendar year, wouldn't it make sense to change the "soccer year" from Fall/Spring to Spring/Fall. Then you would not have a 16/17 season, only a '16 season and a '17 season and so on.
A "soccer year" that crosses over the new year only makes sense with the current birth date rules. Shouldn't the new rule for calendar year align with the true year-long season?
Thoughts...?
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Nov 7, 2015 13:04:51 GMT -5
Soccernotfootball: You make a good point...
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Nov 7, 2015 13:41:32 GMT -5
I didn't follow the town hall and have not found an answer to this question... If we are going to calendar year, wouldn't it make since to change the "soccer year" from Fall/Spring to Spring/Fall. Then you would not have a 16/17 season, only a '16 season and a '17 season and so on. A "soccer year" that crosses over the new year only makes sense with the current birth date rules. Shouldn't the new rule for calendar year align with the true year-long season? Thoughts...? The problem you have there is the fact you are using logic. You should know that organizations like US Soccer follow the example of Board of Educations, Republicans, Dept of Transportaton, and American Airlines. They go with very nonlogical thinking to keep everyone asking WTF....
|
|
|
Post by soccrballr on Nov 7, 2015 23:13:39 GMT -5
Soccernotfootball: You make a good point... Which is probably why it won't happen... Things that make sense don't seem to gain much traction in the world of youth sports.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Nov 9, 2015 9:28:20 GMT -5
- development is crucial but for 99% of kids what the heck are we developing them for? Focus on competition, sportsmanship, working to achieve team and individual goals and always prioritize education. I think you put your finger on it. I read other people's responses about how this is about achieving consistency across the entirety of US Soccer, and how this will make it easier to manage for the highest level folks... and that makes a lot of sense on the one hand. But I have a few issues with the basic premise. 1) the methodology, practices, and goals of training players for the US senior teams may not even remotely align with the goals of the players, parents, coaches, and leagues for the huge bulk of people involved in youth soccer in this country. Nor do they need to. Different goals may mean different rules and procedures. Right now the break is between rec/academy/select on one side and ODP/DA on the other side. That actually seems like a good break because it defines the line between the players who have a shot at having an impact on the national team and those who don't. 2) the more we mandate the more creativity we remove from the process of training the small number of players who DO have a shot at being on the senior teams. So far it's just ages, field sizes, number of players, and a couple strange new rules. What is the next mandate? What happens when we get a new senior team coach? Will we completely change youth soccer again all the way down to rec to match the new coach's philosophies?
|
|
|
Post by infoguy on Nov 12, 2015 8:09:28 GMT -5
hum -- well so much for that. Age switch is for next year! This explains what GA Soccer will do. I saw some mention of RPL deciding separately on the birth year issue. Since RPL is USYS, seems they have already decided... Is this your understanding?
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Nov 12, 2015 9:57:23 GMT -5
I forgot the date of the RPL vote/meeting, but yes, it appeared that Georgia Soccer was making decisions that agreed with RPL, and the expectation is RPL will also be making the switch for next fall.
|
|
|
Post by infoguy on Nov 12, 2015 14:02:23 GMT -5
Interesting, because it sounds like they still need to meet for an official next step. But again, as SRPL is USYS Region III, what's to discuss?
|
|
|
Post by soccerfutbolfam on Nov 13, 2015 8:34:23 GMT -5
Probably has a late spring or summer baby who will benefit... That's the driving force for most people who are happy about this. I have kids on either end of the calendar, so I don't have a preference on that front. I can, however, see how the fall-born kids are getting screwed in multiple ways that are unrelated to age. My kids fall on both sides. One March and one October. I still have not bought into kids getting screwed, I think everything will be fine once folks have time to work through some solutions. I have kids on both sides, too. I do think the overall impact will even out once the dust settles. I think this could have been handled better. People, in general, have a hard time with any kind of change. Throwing something out without having answers and proper communication makes it worse and increases the stress for parents. We see a bigger picture than the kids and how we react will impact how they react. On the flip side, I do feel for the older kids - especially those 16+. There are too many unanswered questions there. But, they will get answered. In the meantime, there's some soccer to be played.....
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Nov 13, 2015 11:05:41 GMT -5
In the meantime, there's some soccer to be played..... Heck yeah there is! After a week of actually being able to practice who's ready to get 17 games in this weekend??? <------this guy here
|
|
|
Post by infoguy on Dec 9, 2015 7:55:12 GMT -5
Bumping this post up to hear from anyone about the RPL vote, what your respective clubs are communicating, etc. Our coach informally indicated that no one seems to have a clue, but it seems to me that GA Soccer has already adopted the new age chart, and we are all waiting on the RPL vote? Thanks,
|
|