ECNL wants to switch back to school year from birth year

[Guest]

30% is ridiculous. That means on a team of 20 there’s 6 trapped players. Can’t say I’ve seen that be the case in 20 years of youth soccer. Typically you may get 1-3 max. Its a minor issue

You are once again incorrect. My daughter’s team had 5 trapped players. This is not unusual why is it so difficult for you to understand? They’re going to use grad year because college coaches want to see recruiting year cohorts playing each other. They do not care who has reclassed and actually prefer it. Many recruited athletes are told to do a PG year before enrolling.

[Guest]

None of this matters with the changes come to the NCAA. Roughly 3,500 girls playing D1 per graduating class down to 400 per class and Men's D1 soccer will be a thing of the past. House vs NCAA, birth year or school year will not matter. Good luck to every one making money off youth sports.

Sorry can you elaborate?

[Guest]

Maybe look at the examples of 4 actual high school aged ECNL teams above. None has 1-3 trapped players. And as much ch as BY sucks for kids in 8th grade, it’s worse for all kids come junior/senior year of high school.

That’s because trapped 8th graders quit soccer. They are going to graduation year. An August cutoff doesn’t eliminate the recruiting problem for college coaches which is what is driving the change. Straight graduation year does. I legitimately do not understand why everyone has such a problem with this concept. There will not be a mad rush of girls regrading for club soccer please just get a grip.

[Guest]

30% is ridiculous. That means on a team of 20 there’s 6 trapped players. Can’t say I’ve seen that be the case in 20 years of youth soccer. Typically you may get 1-3 max. Its a minor issue

You are so wildly incorrect you just need to stop posting. That is not hyperbole. There are routinely 5-7 trapped players in both 8th grade and 12th grade. Trapped 12th graders impact the 11th graders when they play down. But most importantly the college coaches are sick of watching teams of multiple graduating years it is a nightmare for recruiting. They want to see players from the class of 2026 playing other kids in the same recruiting bracket.

[Guest]

That is not hyperbole. There are routinely 5-7 trapped players in both 8th grade and 12th grade.

We keep hearing about the relative age effect hurting fall-born players.

Numbers above would suggest that relative age is not a strong effect. Is that a fair reading?

[Guest]

We keep hearing about the relative age effect hurting fall-born players.

Numbers above would suggest that relative age is not a strong effect. Is that a fair reading?

No it is not a fair reading. You can clearly see a steep drop off after the first four months of the year in pro, college, and high school. Are there Q4 birthdays on your kids team? Yes, but not nearly as many in comparison to how many kids are actually born in Q4 and enter soccer in U6-U9. This change wouldn’t be to address relative age affect, because all you do is move who it affects. This change is to address the misalignment that occurs in 8th and senior years due to birth year being at odds with school year for college recruiting. Since the college system and title 9 is largely responsible for the powerhouse that is US women’s soccer, it actually makes a lot of sense to do. Can I sit here and say that the change disrupted the pipeline to the USWNT and that’s why they currently struggle, no I don’t think we have enough data yet for that. But it does undercut the soccer career of 25% of players which is not insignificant. The only people whining about this are the January birthdays who now realize that their kid will be middling in their age group and that they probably really aren’t that talented compared to other teammates anyway. The calendar is just most friendly to them and some clubs literally seek them out based on this birth month regardless of actual talent.

[Guest]

This change is to address the misalignment that occurs in 8th and senior years due to birth year being at odds with school year for college recruiting.

A third misalignment is during recruiting years. For example, by 11th grade much D1 recruiting is done, but trapped players are still in 10th grade.

[Guest]

No it is not a fair reading. You can clearly see a steep drop off after the first four months of the year in pro, college, and high school. Are there Q4 birthdays on your kids team? Yes, but not nearly as many in comparison to how many kids are actually born in Q4 and enter soccer in U6-U9. This change wouldn’t be to address relative age affect, because all you do is move who it affects. This change is to address the misalignment that occurs in 8th and senior years due to birth year being at odds with school year for college recruiting. Since the college system and title 9 is largely responsible for the powerhouse that is US women’s soccer, it actually makes a lot of sense to do. Can I sit here and say that the change disrupted the pipeline to the USWNT and that’s why they currently struggle, no I don’t think we have enough data yet for that. But it does undercut the soccer career of 25% of players which is not insignificant. The only people whining about this are the January birthdays who now realize that their kid will be middling in their age group and that they probably really aren’t that talented compared to other teammates anyway. The calendar is just most friendly to them and some clubs literally seek them out based on this birth month regardless of actual talent.

It’s absolutely ridiculous to conclude kids don’t play youth soccer because they are born in q4. Do you know how insane you sound? The trapped player issue is a non-issue. It impacts a small number of kids and not even negatively. This isn’t happening and if it does it’s to benefit colleges not some idiotic line that q4 born kids don’t play soccer. Pure utter conjecture

[Guest]

It’s absolutely ridiculous to conclude kids don’t play youth soccer because they are born in q4. Do you know how insane you sound? The trapped player issue is a non-issue. It impacts a small number of kids and not even negatively. This isn’t happening and if it does it’s to benefit colleges not some idiotic line that q4 born kids don’t play soccer. Pure utter conjecture

Simple Facts:
It will benefit college recruiting.
ECNL exists only to provide a pathway to college play.
ECNL leadership has been speaking publicly, multiple times now, about wanting to change back to pre-2017 ways.
Unless you are a D1 coach your opinion on this doesn't matter to ECNL.
As a customer my opinion doesn't matter to ECNL (my daughter is a Q4 player and rising Junior so she won't benefit from the change anyway, too late for her)

you can keep spamming your opinion all you want but what I just posted is reality.

[Guest]

It’s absolutely ridiculous to conclude kids don’t play youth soccer because they are born in q4. Do you know how insane you sound? The trapped player issue is a non-issue. It impacts a small number of kids and not even negatively. This isn’t happening and if it does it’s to benefit colleges not some idiotic line that q4 born kids don’t play soccer. Pure utter conjecture

Why is it insane? I am a u-littles coach for a town club and I see it every year...parents sign up their 2nd grade kid for the team, and they quit 3 weeks into it because they are on a team full of 3rd graders.

[Guest]

Why is it insane? I am a u-littles coach for a town club and I see it every year...parents sign up their 2nd grade kid for the team, and they quit 3 weeks into it because they are on a team full of 3rd graders.

Your pov is pure conjecture. There’s no data to suggest this just your personal viewpoint. If they quit because they don’t “win” that’s on the parents not the kid. They quit because they don’t like it. They don’t like it because they aren’t immediately successful. Parents don’t allow their kid to fail and improve. No mental toughness. Nothing to do with month of birth. More to do with pansy parents who raise pansy children

[Guest]

It’s absolutely ridiculous to conclude kids don’t play youth soccer because they are born in q4. Do you know how insane you sound? The trapped player issue is a non-issue. It impacts a small number of kids and not even negatively. This isn’t happening and if it does it’s to benefit colleges not some idiotic line that q4 born kids don’t play soccer. Pure utter conjecture

There are at least 5 studies on soccer in sports science journals and at least one per sport. You are fighting something you do not understand. Search your feelings. Google it. ChatGPT it. Believe it.

[Guest]

There are at least 5 studies on soccer in sports science journals and at least one per sport. You are fighting something you do not understand. Search your feelings. Google it. ChatGPT it. Believe it.

Yes search for relative age bias or relative age effect. Get your head out of you zzz. This has been a known, known for over twenty years. It is science.

[Guest]

Your pov is pure conjecture. There’s no data to suggest this just your personal viewpoint. If they quit because they don’t “win” that’s on the parents not the kid. They quit because they don’t like it. They don’t like it because they aren’t immediately successful. Parents don’t allow their kid to fail and improve. No mental toughness. Nothing to do with month of birth. More to do with pansy parents who raise pansy children

For retards like you, I’ll make it easy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effect

[Guest]

For retards like you, I’ll make it easy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effect

Stop bursting his bubble, he actually thought his kid was good. You are just reminding him that his Q1 birthday kid simply got lucky on when they were born and has nothing to do with skill, tenacity, IQ, etc.