|
Post by jash on Oct 22, 2015 8:11:22 GMT -5
It also makes a difference because if they take it up so that 00 is U17 then that means all the August-December birthday kids will lose a whole year of soccer (unless they also increase to U20 instead of ending at U19). Im confused? How do you figure they loose a year? It ended at u18 before now at u19. If you loose a year in one end you gain one in the other end. With the current way 00's are playing u16 and playing u17 next year correct? The new chart shows 00's playing u17 next year which is the same thing, in fact by adding u19 some kids get an additional year of playing if you're born at beggining of year. It doesn't matter if your bday is in Jan or December, nowhere does it say that you have to have had a birthday before tryouts, just that you have that birth year. Georgia Soccer goes through U19 right now. If my kid jumped an age group and it still ends at U19, they lose a year. It may be their first year of college, and they may or may not choose to play even if eligible, but it's still a lost year. May not matter since it appears the matrix is wrong, but the confusion is that it ends at u18 now, which it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 22, 2015 8:21:28 GMT -5
from US Soccer and their original press release - BIRTH-YEAR REGISTRATION Birth-year registration calendars will now align with the start of the calendar year and run from January to December, rather than August to July as it had previously. For example, a U-15 player (players 15 years old or younger) would have a birth year of 2000 (Jan. 1 through Dec. 31) for the 2015 registration year. In 2016, U-15 players would be born in 2001 or earlier. Birth-year registration applies to all player age groups and not just players age 12 and younger. www.ussoccer.com/stories/2015/08/24/18/07/150824-coaching-player-development-initiatives-rel
|
|
|
Post by SoccerMom on Oct 22, 2015 8:25:37 GMT -5
from US Soccer and their original press release - BIRTH-YEAR REGISTRATION Birth-year registration calendars will now align with the start of the calendar year and run from January to December, rather than August to July as it had previously. For example, a U-15 player (players 15 years old or younger) would have a birth year of 2000 (Jan. 1 through Dec. 31) for the 2015 registration year. In 2016, U-15 players would be born in 2001 or earlier. Birth-year registration applies to all player age groups and not just players age 12 and younger. www.ussoccer.com/stories/2015/08/24/18/07/150824-coaching-player-development-initiatives-relwell there you go then...no sense in arguing this anymore
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 22, 2015 8:40:40 GMT -5
I've sent some tweets, lets see if they get responded to.....
|
|
|
Post by soccerdadinga on Oct 22, 2015 9:22:47 GMT -5
Think of it as 15 and Under. All that's happened is that they have shifted the playing year to the calendar year. So anyone that turns 15, for U15 in 2015 is a U15 player. Whereas now a U15 player is anyone who turns 15 from 8/1 - 12/31. I don't think that there is any inconsistency there. I suspect that everything the nomenclature still hangs in place. The issue is that there was a reason why 8/1 - 7/31 was picked and that is to keep in line with the academic year.
In so doing, the age groups for everything shift downwards 4 calendar months. I don't see any conflict between the DA timeline or terminology and ODP and this calendar. There are interesting questions about the high school problem of older U14's in 2016, but I am sure that they considered that problem in advance and will simply say that kids in that age group have to make a choice. Right now there are kids who play up who face that same choice, so its not a new phenomenon. I am curious about what ECNL would do with the new age grouping.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 22, 2015 10:34:49 GMT -5
this was the original USYS matrix:
|
|
|
Post by soccrballr on Oct 22, 2015 11:41:44 GMT -5
For what it's worth, Georgia Soccer says they're waiting for USSF and USYS to figure it out before releasing their age chart. Given that, it sounds like one or the other is in error and I'd be willing to bet that the USSF version (which corresponds to DA age groups, etc.) is the correct one.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 22, 2015 16:09:28 GMT -5
haven't heard back on twitter from some top dogs, but from speaking with others it does appear that the current USYS matrix is incorrect! Interestingly though, I found a state (forgot which one) but it already had their own version of what we think is the wrong matrix for their club..........
I'll try to keep harassing some folks on twitter tomorrow!
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 23, 2015 10:38:33 GMT -5
yikes..... they are saying US soccer has fixed theres to align.... something ain't right here guys!
|
|
|
Post by zizou on Oct 23, 2015 11:03:58 GMT -5
Like I said before, this is the chart that makes sense if you want to keep the 'U' designations AND you have seasons that cover 2 calendar years. The initial US Soccer chart, which was totally based on a single calendar year, would have led to a Spring birthday player being older than their U-designation at the time of their Spring birthday. But as multiple other people have said, the U-designation does not matter. These things are only labels. Players will play with their birth year. Now when a team is called "Totally Awesome 01G Elite" it will actually mean that you must be an 01 birthday or younger to be on the team, not an 01 born in a particular part of 01 OR an 02 born in a particular part of 02. The start of Select soccer will be modified, the start of ECNL will be modified, if US Soccer want to make the DA chart equivalent to this chart then they will change the DA age matrix. But I do not know if DA seasons are organized by calendar year or they run Fall to Spring. If they are organized by calendar year, then they can keep their DA chart and confuse the hell out of everybody.
BUT, I sure would be more comfortable if it was US Soccer telling you this, not USYSA.
|
|
|
Post by volunteercoach on Oct 23, 2015 11:11:44 GMT -5
So the late year (Aug-Dec) 2002's could only be 8th graders next year but will have to play U15 soccer. So will U15 have spring? The earlier year 2002's will be 9th graders with high school soccer. What a mess. Either no spring season for some or double seasons for others.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 23, 2015 11:16:42 GMT -5
Its all strange, because the Us still have meeting for age standards etc. Even looking at that europe report it referred to all the youth academies by "U's" vs birth year.
its funny the entire thing is to keep kids from playing 11v11 to fast etc, but now for example the 2004s on a current u11 team will be playing 11v11 next year vs 9v9........how is this good???
Is it me or is this counter-intuitive?
|
|
|
Post by zizou on Oct 23, 2015 11:18:26 GMT -5
So the late year (Aug-Dec) 2002's could only be 8th graders next year but will have to play U15 soccer. So will U15 have spring? The earlier year 2002's will be 9th graders with high school soccer. What a mess. Either no spring season for some or double seasons for others. What we call U14s now have what you call double seasons in the Spring if they are playing Middle School or JV (8th and 9th graders), and those U14s that are 9th graders that play High School have double seasons as well.
|
|
|
Post by volunteercoach on Oct 23, 2015 11:33:02 GMT -5
So the late year (Aug-Dec) 2002's could only be 8th graders next year but will have to play U15 soccer. So will U15 have spring? The earlier year 2002's will be 9th graders with high school soccer. What a mess. Either no spring season for some or double seasons for others. What we call U14s now have what you call double seasons in the Spring if they are playing Middle School or JV (8th and 9th graders), and those U14s that are 9th graders that play High School have double seasons as well. Yes I know it happens now (I was a U14 in 9th grade) but there were very few of my peers that had a spring season as the age cutoff for school is September some time (not sure exactly what it is now). When I made varsity it was physically demanding playing high level select and HS at the same time. I was also never in a situation where I wouldn't have a season to play. Had I played with my birth year I still would have had varsity as a freshman in spring and no club. My point in saying is that without a spring U15 next year, 4 month of 02's may not have a season to play (if they are 8th graders...which the September to December kids will be...and their respective high schools wont allow them to play up) or 8 months of 02's will have double seasons (as 9th graders) which is a lot more kids playing two seasons as opposed to the few August babies that have to deal with it now.
|
|
|
Post by zizou on Oct 23, 2015 12:37:52 GMT -5
What we call U14s now have what you call double seasons in the Spring if they are playing Middle School or JV (8th and 9th graders), and those U14s that are 9th graders that play High School have double seasons as well. My point in saying is that without a spring U15 next year, 4 month of 02's may not have a season to play (if they are 8th graders...which the September to December kids will be...and their respective high schools wont allow them to play up) or 8 months of 02's will have double seasons (as 9th graders) which is a lot more kids playing two seasons as opposed to the few August babies that have to deal with it now. I am guessing that U15 will be the new U14. How we understand the current labels will change if these youth soccer associations are smart.
|
|
|
Post by 04gparent on Oct 23, 2015 13:11:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by zizou on Oct 23, 2015 13:20:00 GMT -5
Yes, except for the fact that if you look up a bit in this thread you will see that Soccerhouse received a tweet TODAY from USYSA that says US Soccer has changed the matrix and indicated that the one you just linked is incorrect. I am not saying I have any special knowledge. I am just trying to follow along. Again, I would feel more confident if that tweet had been from US Soccer. ADDITION: 04gparent, I also just went to the FAQ section of the webpage you linked, and it says the following: "Again, when determining the age group for a season, the year the season ends should be used for determining the birth year." And the chart provided at US Soccer's FAQ page is the one indicating that, for instance, 2001s will be U16s and 2002s will be U15s next year (2016-2017 season).
|
|
|
Post by jash on Oct 23, 2015 13:23:53 GMT -5
Like I said before, this is the chart that makes sense if you want to keep the 'U' designations AND you have seasons that cover 2 calendar years. The initial US Soccer chart, which was totally based on a single calendar year, would have led to a Spring birthday player being older than their U-designation at the time of their Spring birthday. But as multiple other people have said, the U-designation does not matter. These things are only labels. Players will play with their birth year. Now when a team is called "Totally Awesome 01G Elite" it will actually mean that you must be an 01 birthday or younger to be on the team, not an 01 born in a particular part of 01 OR an 02 born in a particular part of 02. The start of Select soccer will be modified, the start of ECNL will be modified, if US Soccer want to make the DA chart equivalent to this chart then they will change the DA age matrix. But I do not know if DA seasons are organized by calendar year or they run Fall to Spring. If they are organized by calendar year, then they can keep their DA chart and confuse the hell out of everybody. BUT, I sure would be more comfortable if it was US Soccer telling you this, not USYSA. It matters... if they don't extend soccer out to U20, then they cut a year of eligibility out for people born august to december. I doubt they care though.
|
|