Originally posted by Unregistered
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Birth year /school year relative age effect
Collapse
X
-
Unregistered
- Quote
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostYou are so wrong with this post . The massive drop off has a direct correlation with the birth mandate . It’s very easy to find out just check all the DA teams ages . Barely any are born in the last quarter . Why ? Because they are quite clearly a grade younger ! It was a undeniable mistake and like most people in soccer they will never admit it .
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostYou are so wrong with this post . The massive drop off has a direct correlation with the birth mandate . It’s very easy to find out just check all the DA teams ages . Barely any are born in the last quarter . Why ? Because they are quite clearly a grade younger ! It was a undeniable mistake and like most people in soccer they will never admit it .
I had already agreed that the change had an impact, but if you choose to ignore specialization, parents taking the fun out of sports, video games, and pay to play there is nothing more to say.
Soccer in the US was perfect prior to the change. Go on believing that.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostRegardless of birth year or grade there will be age disparity. Further this massive misnomer regarding kids being in the same grade was already an issue with the fact that the same parents screaming about birth year were holding back September- December kids because you were so afraid they would be the youngest in their class.
I had already agreed that the change had an impact, but if you choose to ignore specialization, parents taking the fun out of sports, video games, and pay to play there is nothing more to say.
Soccer in the US was perfect prior to the change. Go on believing that.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostThe idea that birth year is the reason why soccer is declining is absurd. There are many factors, the primary one being that parents demand DD or DS be on the “A” team. Families aren’t willing to invest the time, money, and energy to see DD or DS play on the “C” team and will instead look to other sports activities to “invest” in.
Pay to play is ruining soccer, not birth year.
Birth year had a large initial impact as players were being split from their teams, but it has evened out.
The declining enrollment has more to do with Pay to Play and specialization than birth year. Continuing to harp on birth year makes you sound like all the other parents and kids making an excuse as to why their DD or DS is not on the “A” team. Move on.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostSorry, but you are wrong. You are obviously from a high population area where teams can reshuffle with some discomfort but teams and clubs can survive the birth year switch. Soccer in smaller cities and more outlying areas is dramatically struggling because of this change. Clubs in those areas went from one team per high school year, ranging in skill from decent to outstanding, to having to blend multiple grades to form one high school team. This isn't fiction - it's reality and ask anyone in a club from a smaller population area. And it has nothing to do with pay to play - pay to play has been around for years and as is always the case, reputable clubs work hard to find pathways for motivated kids who are financially disadvantaged to be able to play. Specialization is also not the problem. I've been around enough and can tell you that we are actually experiencing LESS specialization than we did 5-10 years ago, as research has shown the benefits of being a multi sport athlete.
Can you produce the study that demonstrates that specialization has reduced from 5-10 years ago? I’m sincerely interested in reading.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostParents wanting the “premier” label in a region that doesn’t have the population to support a premier team is a big part of the problem!
I'd also add parents paying premier prices starting at U8 and having state championships at U9 to the problem list. The U9 coaches, parents, and players are the worst, they think they're playing in the World Cup.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostTrue dat! Birth year age groups is causing a cluster at so many ages - particularly ulittles where kids want to play with grade mates, at the 8th-9th transition and at the junior-senior year. U19 used to be for a few seniors. Now 1/3rd of juniors (prime recruiting year) must play u19. DUMB. More and more will say goodbye to soccer because US Soccer only cares about older early bloomers. Participation will continue to fall. Sad!
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
The mandate was introduced in 2015 and implemented in 2016. Soccer has been declining since 2010. You are right, it’s all because of birth year.
- Quote
Comment
-
Guest
Because US Soccer isn't the only dumb one. These issues persist globally:
https://www.theguardian.com/football...ive-age-effect
- Quote
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by Guest View PostBecause US Soccer isn't the only dumb one. These issues persist globally:
https://www.theguardian.com/football...ive-age-effect
Question is, how do we fix it? I would bet a lot of the ECNL teams, especially at the u13-u15 ages skew toward early birth year. And it's not just scouting and recruiting. Even once a kid makes a team, their size can play a big role. There is a player on my sons team who is probably the most technical and tactical player they have and he gets limited minutes. Only obvious reason would be coach chooses to player bigger kids in the position as he thinks they need size and speed.
- Quote
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by Guest View Post
Yes, the issue does exist everywhere and it doesn't matter where you start and end the age group. A group of kids is always going to get the raw end of it.
Question is, how do we fix it? I would bet a lot of the ECNL teams, especially at the u13-u15 ages skew toward early birth year. And it's not just scouting and recruiting. Even once a kid makes a team, their size can play a big role. There is a player on my sons team who is probably the most technical and tactical player they have and he gets limited minutes. Only obvious reason would be coach chooses to player bigger kids in the position as he thinks they need size and speed.
- Quote
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by Guest View Post
Yes, the issue does exist everywhere and it doesn't matter where you start and end the age group. A group of kids is always going to get the raw end of it.
Question is, how do we fix it? I would bet a lot of the ECNL teams, especially at the u13-u15 ages skew toward early birth year. And it's not just scouting and recruiting. Even once a kid makes a team, their size can play a big role. There is a player on my sons team who is probably the most technical and tactical player they have and he gets limited minutes. Only obvious reason would be coach chooses to player bigger kids in the position as he thinks they need size and speed.
- Quote
Comment
-
Guest
You can always turn a negative into a positive. If you have a truly elite player that is late in the birth year, you can use it as incentive. If they are future pro/ national team caliber they should still be great at their age regardless. They will need to excel at everything in their power. Previous poster mentioned a lot of things that arent dependent on size. Height and distance sprinting speed should be the only things they really lack. If they are motivated, they can work on everything the can control, knowing when the size and speed comes, it will just boost them. If they are struggling in a bunch of areas, not really an issue of them being young.
- Quote
Comment
Comment