Question - who determines the playing season? If a Club wanted to form teams and run their season from Spring to Fall, and stay within a single calendar year, could they do so? Wouldn't that allow them to align themselves better with the calendar year age cutoff?
The mandate says you need to use the year the season ends to determine your players age (i.e. 2016-2017 season uses 2017 for basing age). If you changed your season to run Jan 1st - Dec 31st, 2016, you would use 2016 for basing age. That would, of course, make your team older than those using split-year seasons during the Fall, but the same age during following Spring when you will be starting your 2017 season.
I thought there were some states and programs that currently use the Spring to Fall, single year season. With this new age change, won't this be a problem when they now compete against combined year programs?
To me, it makes more sense to have the club season run within a single calendar year in order to better comply with this new age change mandate. This would also help the older Aug - Dec kids transition to their new age group, as they wouldn't actually "skip" a year but instead would move up one year the Fall, and then another year the following Spring. The younger Jan - July kids would repeat their same playing age in Fall and then move up one year the following Spring. From that point forward they would stay on course.
It just seems to make more sense to have a calendar year season when you have a calendar year age chart. For example, as it currently stands with the split-year season, many players on a U-13 team would only be 11 when their season starts and the majority would only be 12 when the season ENDS in Spring and that doesn't seem logical. U-13 means 13 or younger, and there wouldn't be hardly any 13 year olds. Although, under a calendar year season you would have a well balanced group of kids aged 12-13 at U-13, without having any kids turn 14 before the end of the season.
The mandate says you need to use the year the season ends to determine your players age (i.e. 2016-2017 season uses 2017 for basing age). If you changed your season to run Jan 1st - Dec 31st, 2016, you would use 2016 for basing age. That would, of course, make your team older than those using split-year seasons during the Fall, but the same age during following Spring when you will be starting your 2017 season.
I thought there were some states and programs that currently use the Spring to Fall, single year season. With this new age change, won't this be a problem when they now compete against combined year programs?
To me, it makes more sense to have the club season run within a single calendar year in order to better comply with this new age change mandate. This would also help the older Aug - Dec kids transition to their new age group, as they wouldn't actually "skip" a year but instead would move up one year the Fall, and then another year the following Spring. The younger Jan - July kids would repeat their same playing age in Fall and then move up one year the following Spring. From that point forward they would stay on course.
It just seems to make more sense to have a calendar year season when you have a calendar year age chart. For example, as it currently stands with the split-year season, many players on a U-13 team would only be 11 when their season starts and the majority would only be 12 when the season ENDS in Spring and that doesn't seem logical. U-13 means 13 or younger, and there wouldn't be hardly any 13 year olds. Although, under a calendar year season you would have a well balanced group of kids aged 12-13 at U-13, without having any kids turn 14 before the end of the season.
Comment