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

[Unregistered]

What about the kids who are those Jan-April kids who are the star even with the older kids in the current system. Should they play up? How will this new situation challenge them?

Actually, these are exactly the few particular players that U.S. Soccer is making this whole change for! Those early birth year stars will shine even more on birth year teams. Particularly Oregon early year stars who currently shine in OR, but not nearly as much out of state because your team is playing vs mostly the higher birth year kids from WA, CA, etc. Those states' top teams are made up almost entirely of the older Aug-Dec kids from the previous year. If your current Jan-April star switches to a pure birth year team, they will do even better and stand out even more vs the other states because now these players will be playing vs the same birth year. Those early birth month stars can help lead their team to do well in showcases, FWRL, NWCL, regionals, etc and will have a much higher chance of being identified for youth national teams. Currently these star early birth month kids may be stars on their local mixed year team but just don't stand out enough in the sea of older birth year players on other teams. It is precisely these kids that U.S. Soccer doesn't want to miss. Put it this way, these kids will go from being dark blue players in a sea of other medium & dark blue players to being a dark blue player in a sea of light blue players. Much easier to identify on a limited basis when you're not being looked at all the time like the top CA players are. It seems counter intuitive, but changing to birth year helps these top Jan-April players the most.

[Unregistered]

Similar at our club. Don't care about friends. BUT do care about not being allowed to play with kids in the same grade. Also, no "real" team in 8th grade or senior year for those Sept-Dec kids getting the rules changed on them in the middle of the "soccer game".

8th grade and senior year will work out fine. They will have teams to play on, training will continue, and all they're really missing is a 2 month fall season. A lot of teams play zero or very few games in May/June. Maybe they can play a bunch of tourneys then (there are lots every weekend up and down the west coast) and have their rest period in the fall?

[Unregistered]

Or play on the middle school team. Or do some extra training with the younger age group. So potentially an 8th grader misses a few games. Big deal. The high school age kids aren't getting any development out of school ball anyway. Take half of August, September and half of October and focus on deficiencies. Might need to buff up anyway to compete with the olders in the age range now...

[Unregistered]

The net effect is the same for both the girls and the boys. There will always be kids who will be older and kids who will be younger on a team.

I don't even think it will help the .000001% because if they are in this category then playing a kid 9 month older should not be an issue for these elite players

It's not even about helping an elite individual, or even an elite group that is currently playing. It's about dramatically increasing the pool of elite kids who continue playing soccer beyond age 13. This is supposed to be the point of classic club soccer in the first place.

Those parents/kids who are most concerned with playing with the same group of friends every year are most likely in the 70% of kids who will quit by age 13 regardless of the age cutoffs.

[Unregistered]

It's not even about helping an elite individual, or even an elite group that is currently playing. It's about dramatically increasing the pool of elite kids who continue playing soccer beyond age 13. This is supposed to be the point of classic club soccer in the first place.

Those parents/kids who are most concerned with playing with the same group of friends every year are most likely in the 70% of kids who will quit by age 13 regardless of the age cutoffs.

You do understand that .1% of kids are so elite that they don't care who they are playing with? The rest of the really good kids still love their teammates and get more from the game than just soccer. It takes a certain mentality to continue to train at an elite level when you get to 14, and sometime having friends doing the same thing on a team that has experienced everything together will be the difference when it come to choice. Splitting up those teams is not the best thing. Start with the younger age groups, but leave anything between U11-14 alone.

[Unregistered]

You do understand that .1% of kids are so elite that they don't care who they are playing with? The rest of the really good kids still love their teammates and get more from the game than just soccer. It takes a certain mentality to continue to train at an elite level when you get to 14, and sometime having friends doing the same thing on a team that has experienced everything together will be the difference when it come to choice. Splitting up those teams is not the best thing. Start with the younger age groups, but leave anything between U11-14 alone.

Club 'classic' soccer is supposed to be focussed on developing soccer players. Rec might be more appropriate for kids who are more interested in the social side of the game with a bonus of being a fraction of the cost. Both are equally valid reasons for playing the game. Frankly, too many kids who aren't on the development track are plugged into the classic clubs when they could be enjoying the spirit of competition with their friends on a rec team.

The age cutoff change won't bother the kids who are developmentally minded regardless of their birth month. They love just playing the game and aren't overly concerned about who they're playing with.

[Unregistered]

Club 'classic' soccer is supposed to be focussed on developing soccer players. Rec might be more appropriate for kids who are more interested in the social side of the game with a bonus of being a fraction of the cost. Both are equally valid reasons for playing the game. Frankly, too many kids who aren't on the development track are plugged into the classic clubs when they could be enjoying the spirit of competition with their friends on a rec team.

The age cutoff change won't bother the kids who are developmentally minded regardless of their birth month. They love just playing the game and aren't overly concerned about who they're playing with.

if you have a daughter playing soccer right now, on a "classic" team go ask each and every girl on her team if she is there "just to play soccer and develop" ask her if her team was split up how she would feel. And if she would still want to play soccer.

[Unregistered]

My oldest was on one of the better girls teams of the past ten years, mostly elite level players, and I can tell you 95% of those girls were very interested in the social aspect. Still lots of close friends to this day.

They stuck with it through the years because of those relationships.

[Unregistered]

if you have a daughter playing soccer right now, on a "classic" team go ask each and every girl on her team if she is there "just to play soccer and develop" ask her if her team was split up how she would feel. And if she would still want to play soccer.

This is my point exactly. If my daughter would rather quit soccer than make friends with new teammates, then developmental classic soccer isn't the place for her. Rec would be more appropriate for her. I certainly wouldn't expect USSF to consider her feelings while trying to improve US soccer as a whole.

[Unregistered]

This is my point exactly. If my daughter would rather quit soccer than make friends with new teammates, then developmental classic soccer isn't the place for her. Rec would be more appropriate for her. I certainly wouldn't expect USSF to consider her feelings while trying to improve US soccer as a whole.

US soccer doesn't care one iota if they hurt kids, especially girls.

This will negativity affect a lot of kids. Nobody cares. Not even a little.

Girls will be very much affected. But that doesn't matter.

[Unregistered]

"If my daughter would rather quit soccer than make friends with new teammates, then developmental classic soccer isn't the place for her. Rec would be more appropriate for her. "


I know two elite level girls that are at the too of their age group. They are great players and will either run track or play soccer at a D1 school. They both would much rather play with their "crew" than follow orders from the US ministers of soccer.

Maybe they should go play rec?

[Unregistered]

US soccer doesn't care one iota if they hurt kids, especially girls.

This will negativity affect a lot of kids. Nobody cares. Not even a little.

Girls will be very much affected. But that doesn't matter.

State your name.

This insubordination is out of line. You don't get a say in the matter and need to stop talking about it.

[Unregistered]

This is my point exactly. If my daughter would rather quit soccer than make friends with new teammates, then developmental classic soccer isn't the place for her. Rec would be more appropriate for her. I certainly wouldn't expect USSF to consider her feelings while trying to improve US soccer as a whole.

They are kids, not robots. I don't care how dedicated they are to the game and development, there is still a level of friendship that transcends competition. When you look at the purity of the statement "for the love of the game" it is always about more than just participating in it.

[Unregistered]

This is my point exactly. If my daughter would rather quit soccer than make friends with new teammates, then developmental classic soccer isn't the place for her. Rec would be more appropriate for her. I certainly wouldn't expect USSF to consider her feelings while trying to improve US soccer as a whole.

Long before birth year came up, I often wondered why so many B-team and below players spent the time and $$ on club soccer, when it seems they could get the same experience for much less $$ and time, just playing rec with their friends. The trend I have noticed with my girls (not really with my son) is that they all start out in Kinder w/all their classmates, have a great time all together in fall & spring rec until 4th or 5th grade when some of the better ones join club to be more competitive. A few more follow the first and then more after that. Eventually the entire red team joins club and the girls get split on the A & B team and then the girls get hooked on club soccer. This change to birth year might reverse some of this trend and might even be better for the kids who are mostly in it for their friends to go back to rec. sure would save the parents a load of cash & free up tons of time for school, family & other pursuits.

[Unregistered]

Not "red team" should read "rest of the team"