|
|
Post by lajolla39 on Jul 2, 2024 10:11:33 GMT -5
The age mandate was birth year until the 80s, then school year until 2017 and birth year since. That part is not up for discussion. 50% of the kids would benefit, 50% wouldn't. We just swap one group for the other. The only reason USSF would switch back would be money. I don’t see the money in it for them. Maybe ECNL thinks they can make more money from the switch though. ECNL likes the change because other league teams can play in ECNL tournaments but technically ECNL teams can't play in other leagues club tournaments if they define age by calendar. . Also ECNL teams would have players that are 4-5 months older than calendar based teams. |
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Jul 2, 2024 10:18:34 GMT -5
The interesting thing to me about the "school calendar" is the August start. For most schools, the cut off for the grade is September 1st. nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/tab5_3.asp In most states, anyone in the grade that was born before September was held back by their parents or the school. Wonder why soccer uses an earlier date? |
|
|
|
Post by Oceanready on Jul 2, 2024 14:41:52 GMT -5
Not trying to switch subjects, but seeing that we are discussing ages, can anyone refresh my memory on what the ECNL composite teams represented? Was that just for younger players in the oldest groups. I remember clubs having two ECNL teams but why did these teams go away? My kids were too young back then to be invested lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by triffling on Jul 3, 2024 14:07:45 GMT -5
And before the 2017 change the school year model was probably a 15 year thing. Soccer in the 80’s and 90’s was birth year. I played in the 80's and 90's and it was still school year. I was a summer birthday so was one of the younger players on my team, but a friend of mine with an early October birthday played a year younger. We still referred to it by birth year, but it was the school calendar that determined it. My friend was born in October of 1978 but played with the 79's, while I played with the 78's. Man, I feel old typing that out... It was birth year in the 1980’s and through at least the early 90’s. The 73’s were always birth year and pretty sure the 76’s were too. |
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Jul 3, 2024 15:15:14 GMT -5
From what I remember hearing pre Covid was the age mandate did see a drastic reduction in youth soccer registrations, something like numbers down 10-15%. Especially on the girls side. This was and still seen when you go look at a current U9 tema for this fall. Those are 2016s, who have a lot of already 8 yrs old but all those Fall bdays are still 7 and convincing a 7 yr old & their parents to join Academy is tougher. Are 1st graders ready for Academy? Well numbers have shown no as most either wait or move on to other sports. Isn’t there a massive rise in volleyball nationwide? 🤔
That lose of numbers/money I know has hit say a Ga Soccer who’s also struggling from SCCL, probably enough for the State Associations to look at changing it back.
|
|
gob31
Jr. Academy
Posts: 26
|
Post by gob31 on Jul 4, 2024 13:24:04 GMT -5
I played in the 80's and 90's and it was still school year. I was a summer birthday so was one of the younger players on my team, but a friend of mine with an early October birthday played a year younger. We still referred to it by birth year, but it was the school calendar that determined it. My friend was born in October of 1978 but played with the 79's, while I played with the 78's. Man, I feel old typing that out... It was birth year in the 1980’s and through at least the early 90’s. The 73’s were always birth year and pretty sure the 76’s were too. I played in the 90's and we still referred to it by birth year, but it wasn't January 1-December 31. The 1978 age group was September 1, 1977 - August 31, 1978. If you were born after Aug. 31, 1978, you were classified in the 1979 group. |
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jul 8, 2024 8:03:12 GMT -5
It was birth year in the 1980’s and through at least the early 90’s. The 73’s were always birth year and pretty sure the 76’s were too. I played in the 90's and we still referred to it by birth year, but it wasn't January 1-December 31. The 1978 age group was September 1, 1977 - August 31, 1978. If you were born after Aug. 31, 1978, you were classified in the 1979 group. I'll never forget at Sunil's last federation meeting, it was the chance for state associations to stand up and take a stand against the age mandate, as it was obvious they were beginning to lose control of youth soccer to US Club. but nope, all the leaders instead, stood up and praised what a great job Sunil had done before he retired. I still don't understand how some state associations can even afford to operate now with so many players switching to US Club now. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Jul 8, 2024 15:01:10 GMT -5
For me the difference between later in the year vs earlier in the year year (in terms of players age) and the advantages/disadvantages are the secondary to what I see as a major benefit to changing it back to school calendar year...
The primary benefit to me would be getting rid of "trap years" AND "ability to be seen at showcases":
1)Trap years were always a downside to the age mandate and those will be gone. The team can continue to gel as a collective and players can get equal playing time. Trap players won't have to quickly adapt to different teammates, possibly be played out of position and gain the coaches confidence. Yes, I understand that that can have benefits for all the same reasons, but when you are looking at it from a recruitment standpoint, it can be detrimental as well.
2)The other thing (I realized having experienced it recently) is the difference in the amount of showcases for players to be seen in for the "trap players" in their junior and senior year, as well as national playoffs. For example, our team which consisted of half juniors and half seniors, had 3-4 showcases plus nationals when they were sophomores and juniors. Then the following year we only had 2-3 showcases and no national playoffs in the junior to senior year. So for those in the lower age grouping, it provided less playing time in front of scouts and less chance that the scouts might be at your particular showcase. Add to that, the fact that Nationals were only for the top two teams vs just about every team be invited to nationals in the junior year, which gave yet another opportunity. It might not sound like much , but going to National playoffs is a big deal because it's also at a time when coaches are in an off season and can actually take the time to attend.
|
|
|
|
Post by wolves97 on Jul 9, 2024 7:38:54 GMT -5
I'm the president of a small recreational club in the south and a member of a Georgia Soccer Committee.
I've heard absolutely zero about this.
Though we are usually the last to know...LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Jul 9, 2024 14:19:36 GMT -5
I'm the president of a small recreational club in the south and a member of a Georgia Soccer Committee. I've heard absolutely zero about this. Though we are usually the last to know...LOL Personally I am still wondering if this is real or not. I have not heard ECNL come out and confirm it. If it was true I would have expected a lot more uproar than I have heard so far. This will break up some teams again. Some will love it and some will hate it. All of the kids currently playing have played under the new age mandate basically. My 2005 (2023 grad) kid was a U10 moved up to U12 during that time. Barely anyone remains that played under the older system. I am just saying if this news is real I think I would have heard more panicking from people I know who would no longer be playing with their friends. |
|
|
|
Post by atlantagray on Jul 9, 2024 14:48:27 GMT -5
I'm the president of a small recreational club in the south and a member of a Georgia Soccer Committee. I've heard absolutely zero about this. Though we are usually the last to know...LOL Personally I am still wondering if this is real or not. I have not heard ECNL come out and confirm it. If it was true I would have expected a lot more uproar than I have heard so far. This will break up some teams again. Some will love it and some will hate it. All of the kids currently playing have played under the new age mandate basically. My 2005 (2023 grad) kid was a U10 moved up to U12 during that time. Barely anyone remains that played under the older system. I am just saying if this news is real I think I would have heard more panicking from people I know who would no longer be playing with their friends. Wouldnt it make sense to actually plan this out as an organization? Maybe start the change at say 2015s and leave current ages be? |
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Jul 9, 2024 17:13:13 GMT -5
LOL age bracket change. Really?
|
|
|
|
Post by randomparent on Jul 9, 2024 17:53:14 GMT -5
Personally I am still wondering if this is real or not. I have not heard ECNL come out and confirm it. If it was true I would have expected a lot more uproar than I have heard so far. This will break up some teams again. Some will love it and some will hate it. All of the kids currently playing have played under the new age mandate basically. My 2005 (2023 grad) kid was a U10 moved up to U12 during that time. Barely anyone remains that played under the older system. I am just saying if this news is real I think I would have heard more panicking from people I know who would no longer be playing with their friends. Wouldnt it make sense to actually plan this out as an organization? Maybe start the change at say 2015s and leave current ages be? The only people that would want to drag this out are the ones with a kid already benefiting from the current system. Rip it up, the current birth year is archaic and makes no sense, literally no reason for it. |
|
|
|
Post by wolves97 on Jul 9, 2024 18:17:57 GMT -5
I'm the president of a small recreational club in the south and a member of a Georgia Soccer Committee. I've heard absolutely zero about this. Though we are usually the last to know...LOL Personally I am still wondering if this is real or not. I have not heard ECNL come out and confirm it. If it was true I would have expected a lot more uproar than I have heard so far. This will break up some teams again. Some will love it and some will hate it. All of the kids currently playing have played under the new age mandate basically. My 2005 (2023 grad) kid was a U10 moved up to U12 during that time. Barely anyone remains that played under the older system. I am just saying if this news is real I think I would have heard more panicking from people I know who would no longer be playing with their friends. I would agree 100%. From a purely RECREATIONAL view point for kids just entering the sport--not elite kids--some parents were hesitant to send little ones out there against kids in higher grades (I get it, but there's always a young/old split whether it's January or August). I think the grade difference was a real thing for parents. Personally, I'm not looking forward to having yet another change for parents. We'd gotten used to it. I cringe every time we had to change something (and we had big changes to make with my club--people either love me or hate me (goes with the territory...LOL). |
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Jul 10, 2024 8:43:11 GMT -5
That is inherently the issue, the current system is basically a glorified rec program for boys. Players not at an MLS club are considered inferior by all, yes there are exceptions, but for the most part that is the truth.
the girls system is much different, play ecnl, your going to college -- giant rosters of americans, and they need to fill spots
I remember when a director approached me about how great the age mandate was, and my response why is that? the top players are identified before age 14 and already are playing on first teams or in the USL etc -- their not even playing in the youth system -- so you changed the entire system to accommodate the top 1% who aren't even playing youth soccer?
|
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Jul 10, 2024 11:13:36 GMT -5
That is inherently the issue, the current system is basically a glorified rec program for boys. Players not at an MLS club are considered inferior by all, yes there are exceptions, but for the most part that is the truth. the girls system is much different, play ecnl, your going to college -- giant rosters of americans, and they need to fill spots I remember when a director approached me about how great the age mandate was, and my response why is that? the top players are identified before age 14 and already are playing on first teams or in the USL etc -- their not even playing in the youth system -- so you changed the entire system to accommodate the top 1% who aren't even playing youth soccer? That’s the American way though. Just look at politics, the 80s Republicans changed/ruined everything to only benefit the 1%ers 🤷🏻♂️. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Jul 10, 2024 11:59:39 GMT -5
That is inherently the issue, the current system is basically a glorified rec program for boys. Players not at an MLS club are considered inferior by all, yes there are exceptions, but for the most part that is the truth. the girls system is much different, play ecnl, your going to college -- giant rosters of americans, and they need to fill spots I remember when a director approached me about how great the age mandate was, and my response why is that? the top players are identified before age 14 and already are playing on first teams or in the USL etc -- their not even playing in the youth system -- so you changed the entire system to accommodate the top 1% who aren't even playing youth soccer? That’s the American way though. Just look at politics, the 80s Republicans changed/ruined everything to only benefit the 1%ers 🤷🏻♂️. Way to shoehorn politics into the conversation... Congratulations! If that was supposed to be some kind of comparison, it was a horrible one. |
|
|
|
Post by slickdaddy96 on Jul 12, 2024 11:23:40 GMT -5
That is inherently the issue, the current system is basically a glorified rec program for boys. Players not at an MLS club are considered inferior by all, yes there are exceptions, but for the most part that is the truth. the girls system is much different, play ecnl, your going to college -- giant rosters of americans, and they need to fill spots I remember when a director approached me about how great the age mandate was, and my response why is that? the top players are identified before age 14 and already are playing on first teams or in the USL etc -- their not even playing in the youth system -- so you changed the entire system to accommodate the top 1% who aren't even playing youth soccer? My son actually benefited from changing to birth year vs. school year. His birthday was May and it made him in the early days just big enough to edge out the ones born later in the year, something he did not get the benefit from prior to the change. He has aged out now, so it doesn't apply to him, and my daughter only plays recreation and I think it will stay that way, so frankly I don't care how and when they change it again, but a lot of people that did not like the original age change do have to realize while penalizing some kids, it actually helped others that were previously in the late birth months of school year. No matter where you put it though you are going to screw someone over. |
|
|
|
Post by playfromtheback on Jul 12, 2024 15:08:21 GMT -5
That is inherently the issue, the current system is basically a glorified rec program for boys. Players not at an MLS club are considered inferior by all, yes there are exceptions, but for the most part that is the truth. the girls system is much different, play ecnl, your going to college -- giant rosters of americans, and they need to fill spots I remember when a director approached me about how great the age mandate was, and my response why is that? the top players are identified before age 14 and already are playing on first teams or in the USL etc -- their not even playing in the youth system -- so you changed the entire system to accommodate the top 1% who aren't even playing youth soccer? My son actually benefited from changing to birth year vs. school year. His birthday was May and it made him in the early days just big enough to edge out the ones born later in the year, something he did not get the benefit from prior to the change. He has aged out now, so it doesn't apply to him, and my daughter only plays recreation and I think it will stay that way, so frankly I don't care how and when they change it again, but a lot of people that did not like the original age change do have to realize while penalizing some kids, it actually helped others that were previously in the late birth months of school year. No matter where you put it though you are going to screw someone over. I agree that someone is always going to be the youngest and someone is going to be the oldest and while not always, more times than not the older ones will be the stronger and faster etc. if you have any doubt look at pictures people post of first day of school and last day of school each year. Its amazing to see how much someone will grow in a year. With that being said there will always be younger ones that are more talented and hard work will pay off. With all of that, moving the birth year minimizes the number of people getting the short end of the stick. By going back to the old way you remove having trapped players who bassicly miss a spring season and then have to play with a new group of kids their Sr year. |
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Jul 12, 2024 16:56:53 GMT -5
My son actually benefited from changing to birth year vs. school year. His birthday was May and it made him in the early days just big enough to edge out the ones born later in the year, something he did not get the benefit from prior to the change. He has aged out now, so it doesn't apply to him, and my daughter only plays recreation and I think it will stay that way, so frankly I don't care how and when they change it again, but a lot of people that did not like the original age change do have to realize while penalizing some kids, it actually helped others that were previously in the late birth months of school year. No matter where you put it though you are going to screw someone over. I agree that someone is always going to be the youngest and someone is going to be the oldest and while not always, more times than not the older ones will be the stronger and faster etc. if you have any doubt look at pictures people post of first day of school and last day of school each year. Its amazing to see how much someone will grow in a year. With that being said there will always be younger ones that are more talented and hard work will pay off. With all of that, moving the birth year minimizes the number of people getting the short end of the stick. By going back to the old way you remove having trapped players who bassicly miss a spring season and then have to play with a new group of kids their Sr year. You may reduce the number of trap players but you will never eliminate trap players. 1. The soccer calendar for school year (Aug 1 to July 31) does not match the school calendar.
2. As long as parents hold back kids, there will be trap players. Anyone is a grade born before August 1 will be trapped. For boys in particular, that is not an insignificant number with summer birthdays and for girls, the numbers are getting larger for summer birthdays. |
|
|
|
Post by mamadona on Jul 13, 2024 15:43:06 GMT -5
I think it should be left as it is. That way spring born players benefit in club and fall born benefit in school soccer.
|
|
|
|
Post by atlfutboldad on Aug 3, 2024 10:20:41 GMT -5
How does it not benefit everyone to play with their classmates in club? This is too late for my kid, but she played with ZERO classmates in any year of club until her senior year when they caught up.
Had ECNL kept the composite team, it would have been fine. But gong from U17 to the first year of U19 screwed up entire 2nd teams that had been together for 5-6 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by mamadona on Aug 3, 2024 16:06:54 GMT -5
How does it not benefit everyone to play with their classmates in club? This is too late for my kid, but she played with ZERO classmates in any year of club until her senior year when they caught up. Had ECNL kept the composite team, it would have been fine. But gong from U17 to the first year of U19 screwed up entire 2nd teams that had been together for 5-6 years. I’m guessing your daughter is fall born. She is one of the oldest in school and one of the youngest in club. If it changes she would be one of the oldest in both. And spring born would be one of the youngest in both. So change would be good for fall born, not so good for spring born. |
|
|
|
Post by davidj on Aug 5, 2024 11:26:40 GMT -5
This is messing with my head - I need help unraveling it for our situation.
My kid is currently a 2010 playing U15 soccer.
Because of a summer birthday & a medical issue as a young kid, we held him back & he is currently only in 8th grade (graduation 2029)
In the Fall of 2025, when he’s just turned 15 but is just going into 9th Grade, who will he be playing with?
I can’t do the Math 😂😂😂
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Aug 5, 2024 12:22:09 GMT -5
This is messing with my head - I need help unraveling it for our situation. My kid is currently a 2010 playing U15 soccer. Because of a summer birthday & a medical issue as a young kid, we held him back & he is currently only in 8th grade (graduation 2029) In the Fall of 2025, when he’s just turned 15 but is just going into 9th Grade, who will he be playing with? I can’t do the Math 😂😂😂 Haha... I get it. So basically the date of the cut off is what is changing. It gets labeled as by school year because it's easier for most to comprehend. So the new cut off would be August 31st instead on January 1st (currently they are only using the birth year). So the change to the team your kid is currently on, the players that are after August 31st would go to one team, and the one before August 31st would go to another. Basically it coincides with the start of the school year, so most just associate that to tell who will be with who. Regardless of your kids actual grade (after being held back), it would still be his birth year (your kid is 2010) and then whether his birthday falls before or after August 31st. So if he hadn't been held back, he would have been in 9th grade, and it would be those players he would be associated with based on the August cut off. Hope this makes sense, I'm not sure if I was able to better clearly define it for you. |
|
|
|
Post by footyfan on Aug 5, 2024 14:34:05 GMT -5
This is still an unsubstantiated rumor for 2025, spread by an anonymous person on Twitter, unless someone has a link to a named US Club Soccer or ECNL director saying it.
|
|
|
|
Post by flamengo100 on Aug 5, 2024 17:12:06 GMT -5
I asked my club Director who hadn't heard anything about this and looked shocked when I asked.
|
|
rotgg
Jr. Academy
Posts: 90
|
Post by rotgg on Aug 6, 2024 8:48:51 GMT -5
Its not just a rumor
|
|
|
|
Post by playfromtheback on Aug 6, 2024 11:38:46 GMT -5
Where are you seeing/hearing this? |
|
|
|
Post by footyfan on Aug 6, 2024 12:47:05 GMT -5
Quite literally Rumor noun a currently circulating story or report of uncertain or doubtful truth. |
|
