Shift to Jan. 1 cutoff next year or year after?

[Unregistered]

Whatever the purpose of the rule change, we will do what's best for our group of girls. That probably means playing up the younger age girls.

I have to admit I have not read the rationale behind the change. If it is a positive benefit to our girls to change, we will. If not, we will play up.

There is no rationale other than standardization

[Unregistered]

There is no rationale other than standardization

Taken SEPARATELY there is no difference. BUT currently using both systems in the U.S. is causing more of an effect. Currently, Aug-Dec birthdates are the oldest on their club teams & practice & play with & against the younger kids from Jan-July birthdates of the next year. The Aug-Dec (2000 for example) goes to ODP and suddenly is up agains all the older Jan-July 2000 kids who are not only older but have also been playing with & against the even older Aug-Dec 1999 club kids and have been playing competitively an additional year as well. Those Aug-Dec kids don't stand much chance vs the Jan-July 2000 kids who have been playing on the year older club teams. This compounds the effect for all those possibly elite kids. That and the even bigger problem for the summer babies (especially July) is one of the main reasons the powers that be want to change to one system. Since the rest of the world (England has already switched) goes by birth year, that is the one we must narrow it down to as well.

[Unregistered]

Nice to see someone reposting my post!

[Unregistered]

Taken SEPARATELY there is no difference. BUT currently using both systems in the U.S. is causing more of an effect. Currently, Aug-Dec birthdates are the oldest on their club teams & practice & play with & against the younger kids from Jan-July birthdates of the next year. The Aug-Dec (2000 for example) goes to ODP and suddenly is up agains all the older Jan-July 2000 kids who are not only older but have also been playing with & against the even older Aug-Dec 1999 club kids and have been playing competitively an additional year as well. Those Aug-Dec kids don't stand much chance vs the Jan-July 2000 kids who have been playing on the year older club teams. This compounds the effect for all those possibly elite kids. That and the even bigger problem for the summer babies (especially July) is one of the main reasons the powers that be want to change to one system. Since the rest of the world (England has already switched) goes by birth year, that is the one we must narrow it down to as well.

You might want to think it through a bit more. The coming change actually hurts more kids than it helps. The only reason for it happening at all is standardization. It will not improve player development one iota and may even hurt it.

[Unregistered]

Nice to see someone reposting my post!

Your post is spot on. Most of the commenters in here are failing to see the 2 systems working against each other. By favoring the Aug-Dec birth months in club through cuts or playing time, we are limiting the pool of Jan-Jul players who are available to try out for the more elite levels of competition. It's not that one system is better than the other. It's that both systems need to work together to identify and foster the development of the same players without losing some to the age effect.

Alternatively, changing the elite programs to match the club system (Aug-July aka school yr) would be equally beneficial. The powers that be have to choose one, so my guess is they chose the system that is already being used in most other countries.

[Unregistered]

Your post is spot on. Most of the commenters in here are failing to see the 2 systems working against each other. By favoring the Aug-Dec birth months in club through cuts or playing time, we are limiting the pool of Jan-Jul players who are available to try out for the more elite levels of competition. It's not that one system is better than the other. It's that both systems need to work together to identify and foster the development of the same players without losing some to the age effect.

Alternatively, changing the elite programs to match the club system (Aug-July aka school yr) would be equally beneficial. The powers that be have to choose one, so my guess is they chose the system that is already being used in most other countries.

Might want to think it through a bit more. You're missing the point entirely.

[Unregistered]

I like the idea of entire teams reshuffling because mamy players will have a great reason to leave their club and figure out what works best for them without current coaches and DOCs going crazy about it.

[Unregistered]

Your post is spot on. Most of the commenters in here are failing to see the 2 systems working against each other. By favoring the Aug-Dec birth months in club through cuts or playing time, we are limiting the pool of Jan-Jul players who are available to try out for the more elite levels of competition. It's not that one system is better than the other. It's that both systems need to work together to identify and foster the development of the same players without losing some to the age effect.

Alternatively, changing the elite programs to match the club system (Aug-July aka school yr) would be equally beneficial. The powers that be have to choose one, so my guess is they chose the system that is already being used in most other countries.

I think that the way it works right now is the "fairest" gives all the kids some disadvantage.

Say you have a December 01 kid. Right now, Birth year stuff (odp/rtc, the us soccer trainings, ect) that kid is at a disadvantage theoretically, but with club, they are in the "advantage" group being the older half.

Switch it so it's all the same and that "poor" December kid really gets the short end of the stick on both fronts.

[Unregistered]

Might want to think it through a bit more. You're missing the point entirely.

Having one system is the most efficient way to develop higher quality soccer at every level. What's the point we're missing?

[Unregistered]

Having one system is the most efficient way to develop higher quality soccer at every level. What's the point we're missing?

Please explain how this change helps develop better players. U.S. soccer can't explain it. Can you?

[Unregistered]

Please explain how this change helps develop better players. U.S. soccer can't explain it. Can you?

I think they did explain it several posts ago.

[Unregistered]

Please explain how this change helps develop better players. U.S. soccer can't explain it. Can you?

U.S. Soccer is basing changes on the best way to improve the national team pools (particularly boys); You are thinking about this in terms of general soccer development. They are addressing a completely different problem. Basically, any cut off system will favor kids born close to the cutoff but national teams have to play birth year so that is why birth year is the way to go to improve the national teams, create more home grown stars and increase interest in soccer. Also, starting the elite identification process earlier before age bias is set in stone. Hence ODP, Academies, etc are starting younger and younger. Although, sadly, they still seem to mistakenly simply pick mainly based on size.... U.S. Soccer doesn't care that this will blow apart your team, that it will hurt tons of players (the 99%) who will never be elite, or that it will particularly hurt girls - who should have a school year cut off to create the strongest recruiting classes for college: the goal on the girls side. Men's soccer won't become a first choice for our athletic boys unless the boys & men's national teams can dominate. The changes are being made for that.

[Unregistered]

Please explain how this change helps develop better players. U.S. soccer can't explain it. Can you?

Please explain how this change helps develop better players. U.S. soccer can't explain it. Can you?

U.S. Soccer is basing changes on the best way to improve the national team pools (particularly boys); You are thinking about this in terms of general soccer development. They are addressing a completely different problem. Basically, any cut off system will favor kids born close to the cutoff but national teams have to play birth year so that is why birth year is the way to go to improve the national teams, create more home grown stars and increase interest in soccer. Also, starting the elite identification process earlier before age bias is set in stone. Hence ODP, Academies, etc are starting younger and younger. Although, sadly, they still seem to mistakenly simply pick mainly based on size.... U.S. Soccer doesn't care that this will blow apart your team, that it will hurt tons of players (the 99%) who will never be elite, or that it will particularly hurt girls - who should have a school year cut off to create the strongest recruiting classes for college: the goal on the girls side. Men's soccer won't become a first choice for our athletic boys unless the boys & men's national teams can dominate. The changes are being made for that.

[Unregistered]

Oregon should stick with existing model.

[Unregistered]

Sorry. Done deal. The State Youth Soccer Associations have already voted it in. Birth year and small sided games starting at tryouts spring 2016. A couple states may wait till 2017. The best we can hope for is some sort of grandfathering for the existing competive teams like little league did.