|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jan 26, 2016 14:54:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by zizou on Jan 26, 2016 14:57:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Jan 26, 2016 19:25:44 GMT -5
did people still not think this was a done deal?
|
|
|
Post by youthsoccerdad on Jan 27, 2016 8:48:49 GMT -5
did people still not think this was a done deal? people have a hard time grasping the inevitability of things. somehow that online poll, hashtag, and forum posts were not persuasive enough.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Jan 27, 2016 9:25:02 GMT -5
From reading comments on various articles, and tidbits here and there, I'd say there are still LOTS (the majority?) of people who don't even know this is happening. Our club (a small club with zero or one teams per age group/gender) recently had a meeting to talk about the mandates and most people who attended had not heard it at all and had the same reactions many people have had -- confusion and anxiety.
I've seen articles and comments by coaches and soccer leaders with lots of questions and concerns, and lots of hope that the implementation can be delayed or eliminated until and unless the concerns can be addressed.
What I haven't seen is ANY leadership from USSF. There have been no responses, no clarifications, no guidance, no reassurances, no expounding on their reasoning -- nothing. They made the decision, seemingly in a vacuum, and then left it there with no help for the legitimate concerns that the little people have -- and I don't mean players and parents who are definitely not on their radar, I mean coaches and club leadership.
So maybe that complete lack of anything, even a "screw you deal with this it is going ahead" has given some people hope that USSF is reconsidering. Not me, I'm sure they are pushing ahead and working with the organizations that they actually care about.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jan 27, 2016 10:20:02 GMT -5
The states would have had to come together and brought their concerns together to USSF, but I'm sure that didnt' happen. For example, its clear that are region had already decided to push forward and make the switch. Every state in region III should have had a meeting and discussed the ramifications of the change and if they agree or disagree and state why. But the last town hall meeting, one of the summaries was, we will see what the region does. I'm sure the region, did the same thing, we will see what the national league does etc... Just Defer to the higher entity.
My next guess is most states do not want to stand up to US Soccer and US Youth soccer and prefer to just move forward. At this point, not matter how much complaining clubs DOC do, I don't think it has any impact, because Georgia Soccers hand are tied.
I fear the impact will be huge for the small club with not much depth in certain age groups where kids want to maintain playing at a high level. The small club with pockets of quality players and quality teams will have trouble with this transition. Heck we are a big club and I can tell even at one of two of the u9-u12 age groups the teams will not be as "strong" as the current ones.
|
|
|
Post by spectator on Jan 27, 2016 10:20:59 GMT -5
The concept is not a bad thing - the execution is a disaster - especially at older ages and especially at smaller clubs. For the UFA's, Concorde's and NASA's of the world, this isn't as earth shattering because they have depth in each age group to pull together complete teams to meet the calendar year mandates. For clubs that have only one team per age group or teams of vast difference in levels, it's a disaster and will mean either kids don't get to play at all for lack of a team or they have to move clubs completely.
The smart thing is to implement this calendar year mandate with Academy and rising U13's first. Leave the older teams alone so they can finish out their high school/college recruiting seasons.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jan 27, 2016 10:40:00 GMT -5
The states would have had to come together and brought their concerns together to USSF, but I'm sure that didnt' happen. For example, its clear that are region had already decided to push forward and make the switch. Every state in region III should have had a meeting and discussed the ramifications of the change and if they agree or disagree and state why. But the last town hall meeting, one of the summaries was, we will see what the region does. I'm sure the region, did the same thing, we will see what the national league does etc... Just Defer to the higher entity. My next guess is most states do not want to stand up to US Soccer and US Youth soccer and prefer to just move forward. At this point, not matter how much complaining clubs DOC do, I don't think it has any impact, because Georgia Soccers hand are tied. It's this kind of mentality that led to the multiple recent FIFA scandals. Sounds like Groupthink to me.
Say what you will about government but if I have a problem, I know who my representatives are. I can contact them if need be (not saying I am high on their list). Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the members of GA Soccer, the clubs? As a dues paying parent, I'm not a member, right? If I have a problem with X, I should go to my DOC and let him take up my case? That's probably the last thing he wants is to hear a bunch of input about the way GA or US Soccer should be run.
|
|
|
Post by youthsoccerdad on Jan 27, 2016 11:06:52 GMT -5
The states would have had to come together and brought their concerns together to USSF, but I'm sure that didnt' happen. For example, its clear that are region had already decided to push forward and make the switch. Every state in region III should have had a meeting and discussed the ramifications of the change and if they agree or disagree and state why. But the last town hall meeting, one of the summaries was, we will see what the region does. I'm sure the region, did the same thing, we will see what the national league does etc... Just Defer to the higher entity. My next guess is most states do not want to stand up to US Soccer and US Youth soccer and prefer to just move forward. At this point, not matter how much complaining clubs DOC do, I don't think it has any impact, because Georgia Soccers hand are tied. I fear the impact will be huge for the small club with not much depth in certain age groups where kids want to maintain playing at a high level. The small club with pockets of quality players and quality teams will have trouble with this transition. Heck we are a big club and I can tell even at one of two of the u9-u12 age groups the teams will not be as "strong" as the current ones. Why will those teams not be as strong?
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jan 27, 2016 11:59:56 GMT -5
The states would have had to come together and brought their concerns together to USSF, but I'm sure that didnt' happen. For example, its clear that are region had already decided to push forward and make the switch. Every state in region III should have had a meeting and discussed the ramifications of the change and if they agree or disagree and state why. But the last town hall meeting, one of the summaries was, we will see what the region does. I'm sure the region, did the same thing, we will see what the national league does etc... Just Defer to the higher entity. My next guess is most states do not want to stand up to US Soccer and US Youth soccer and prefer to just move forward. At this point, not matter how much complaining clubs DOC do, I don't think it has any impact, because Georgia Soccers hand are tied. I fear the impact will be huge for the small club with not much depth in certain age groups where kids want to maintain playing at a high level. The small club with pockets of quality players and quality teams will have trouble with this transition. Heck we are a big club and I can tell even at one of two of the u9-u12 age groups the teams will not be as "strong" as the current ones. Why will those teams not be as strong? The current depth just isn't in the younger half of the age group. The #s and quality of those numbers just isn't there. Their is a possibility the teams just stay together and 1/2 the team plays up.
|
|
|
Post by youthsoccerdad on Jan 27, 2016 13:31:45 GMT -5
Why will those teams not be as strong? The current depth just isn't in the younger half of the age group. The #s and quality of those numbers just isn't there. Their is a possibility the teams just stay together and 1/2 the team plays up. Could what you are seeing just be Relative Age Effect? - Perceived better quality players because they are older or top half of the age group - More players in the older age groups, they have seen more success and stuck with soccer while younger birth months drop out One last question, at a general level do you think the quality kids in the older half of the age group will continue to excel after the switch or struggle?
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jan 27, 2016 14:14:37 GMT -5
How about this scenario?
Small Club X has the following teams:
0 U16 teams 1 U15 team made up of 4 2000s and 10 2001s 1 U14 team made up of 10 2001s and 4 2002s 0 U13 teams
Choice A: continue to field the same 2 teams. Some players will struggle against a now much larger RAE. Choice B: field 1 large 2001 team and no 2000 or 2002 teams.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Jan 27, 2016 16:28:07 GMT -5
Yeah, or a team at a small club with 2 99s, 8 00s, and 7 01s (playing up). No older team available.
To field a team either the 01s have to play up 2 years or the 2 99s have to be cut.
Nice.
Now some will rush to say this is a problem today, and there are rural clubs already dealing with this kind of thing, and it'll be fine. That's true as far as it goes, but there will be dozens and dozens of examples of this and lots of kids/teams will get displaced.
If USSF thought this through they would realize grandfathering in the existing select teams wouldn't hurt their plans at all and would eliminate this messiness. But they truly don't care.
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Jan 28, 2016 6:43:35 GMT -5
Will it convince clubs to communicate and help each other out?
|
|
|
Post by plcarrigan on Mar 24, 2016 11:36:29 GMT -5
The states would have had to come together and brought their concerns together to USSF, but I'm sure that didnt' happen. For example, its clear that are region had already decided to push forward and make the switch. Every state in region III should have had a meeting and discussed the ramifications of the change and if they agree or disagree and state why. But the last town hall meeting, one of the summaries was, we will see what the region does. I'm sure the region, did the same thing, we will see what the national league does etc... Just Defer to the higher entity. My next guess is most states do not want to stand up to US Soccer and US Youth soccer and prefer to just move forward. At this point, not matter how much complaining clubs DOC do, I don't think it has any impact, because Georgia Soccers hand are tied. I fear the impact will be huge for the small club with not much depth in certain age groups where kids want to maintain playing at a high level. The small club with pockets of quality players and quality teams will have trouble with this transition. Heck we are a big club and I can tell even at one of two of the u9-u12 age groups the teams will not be as "strong" as the current ones. Why will those teams not be as strong?
|
|
|
Post by plcarrigan on Mar 24, 2016 11:40:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Mar 24, 2016 11:45:00 GMT -5
This quote is so classic: "For you 10,000 coaches out there, we are making this change because Tab Ramos and the other U.S. Soccer coaches couldn’t look at a birthday and identify a player’s birth year for their international calendar."
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Mar 24, 2016 16:40:18 GMT -5
Good link. Seems like an easy topic for one of those online petitions. Imagine if 2 million ppl "complained" together.
|
|
|
Post by fan on Apr 15, 2016 6:42:22 GMT -5
Will U18 and U19 be separate age groups in Athena/Classic this fall? There still seems to be conflicting information on the Georgia Soccer and US Soccer sites (I know, big surprise!). Some club tryout websites list U17, U18 (no U19) or U17, U19 (no U18) as their oldest age groups.
|
|
|
Post by SoccerMom on Apr 15, 2016 8:48:16 GMT -5
Will U18 and U19 be separate age groups in Athena/Classic this fall? There still seems to be conflicting information on the Georgia Soccer and US Soccer sites (I know, big surprise!). Some club tryout websites list U17, U18 (no U19) or U17, U19 (no U18) as their oldest age groups. What I remember from our presentation, is that there was going to be a U18, U19 and a U19/U20. But I think they said it was going to depend on how many clubs would participate www.unitedfa.org/Default.aspx?tabid=315532
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Apr 15, 2016 9:41:59 GMT -5
We were told by Georgia Soccer that they are planning a U18 and U19 division mainly so the current U16s (mostly sophomores) don't jump straight to U19 and then play two years at that age group.
|
|
|
Post by infoguy on Apr 18, 2016 7:49:16 GMT -5
That seems like great judgment.
|
|