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

[Unregistered]

The move to small sided games in intended to push 11v11 to U13 and up. Currently, and in the recent past, most states played 11v11 at U11, or even spring U10 (CalSouth still does). Of course, CalSouth teams also win just about everything nationally so maybe 11v11 at U10 is the way to go...

[Unregistered]

=>There are 2 things about these changes that do not make sense given the rationale for the changes:

1. Calendar Age: There are 2 rationales given by US Soccer for going with calendar age.

a) The first is that is aligns with the international standard. Ok, I can buy that. I am not sure given that we play so few international games in US Youth Soccer that is an important rationale (we are not in Europe where countries are small and close together so international youth games are common), but at least is a logical rationale.

b) The second rationale is it ends or curbs the relative age effect. This rationale is absurd. No doubt that under the school age system that kids born in July are going to be less developed physically than those born in August. But switching to calendar year does not change the relative age effect. It just makes January kids as dominate as August kids were and the December kids as weak as the July kids. The relative age effect is still there!

Aligning age cutoffs does curb the relative age effect. More Jan-Jul kids will be earning spots on club teams. This means there are more Jan-Jul kids who will try out for elite teams (RTC, ODP, ECNL) where more Jan-Jul kids are already being chosen. USSF can now focus more of their resources to develop more of the same kids throughout their soccer careers. Bigger pools of the players who've consistently made club, RTC, and ODP teams means more talented young adult players.

All of this comes at the expense of the Aug-Dec birth months. Relative age effect says there will be fewer of them making club and elite teams. It is what it is. Somebody has to get the short end of the stick. Having different age cutoffs to make it 'fair for everybody' ultimately waters down the pool of Jan-Jul kids for elite teams to choose from. It can never be fair for everybody and at the same time produce the best our nation can produce.

[Unregistered]

Aligning age cutoffs does curb the relative age effect. More Jan-Jul kids will be earning spots on club teams. This means there are more Jan-Jul kids who will try out for elite teams (RTC, ODP, ECNL) where more Jan-Jul kids are already being chosen. USSF can now focus more of their resources to develop more of the same kids throughout their soccer careers. Bigger pools of the players who've consistently made club, RTC, and ODP teams means more talented young adult players.

All of this comes at the expense of the Aug-Dec birth months. Relative age effect says there will be fewer of them making club and elite teams. It is what it is. Somebody has to get the short end of the stick. Having different age cutoffs to make it 'fair for everybody' ultimately waters down the pool of Jan-Jul kids for elite teams to choose from. It can never be fair for everybody and at the same time produce the best our nation can produce.

it doesn't curb it it just changes who it happens to.

[Unregistered]

it doesn't curb it it just changes who it happens to.

Wrong. Focusing training on the same groups of kids from young to old will produce a bigger pool of elite players at the very top. This means they've curbed, not eliminated, the relative age effect.

[Unregistered]

Wrong. Focusing training on the same groups of kids from young to old will produce a bigger pool of elite players at the very top. This means they've curbed, not eliminated, the relative age effect.

wrong. nothing has changed except the kids who get the "advantage" which for ODP or us soccer trainings, was already birth year so the kids who were at an advantage now get double advantage

[Unregistered]

I'd bet on a 10%-15% decrease in numbers for girls soccer across the board. If someone doesn't think this chance will turn off a lot of girls they've never had the frontline experience.

There are a large number if girls which stick with soccer for school age friendships. Some turn out to be very good players too.

That will raise costs for everyone. Less numbers/the same overhead.

Eventually it will lower overall quality I as we lose good athletes.

[Unregistered]

I'd bet on a 10%-15% decrease in numbers for girls soccer across the board. If someone doesn't think this chance will turn off a lot of girls they've never had the frontline experience.

There are a large number if girls which stick with soccer for school age friendships. Some turn out to be very good players too.

That will raise costs for everyone. Less numbers/the same overhead.

Eventually it will lower overall quality I as we lose good athletes.

Less kids will mean less overhead too as small clubs close up shop. And maybe that's not a bad thing. Far too many people have been sold the "premier" bill of goods when their kids were never "premier" level players to begin with. And maybe Parks & Rec soccer will explode if kids really want to play with their friends.

[Unregistered]

wrong. nothing has changed except the kids who get the "advantage" which for ODP or us soccer trainings, was already birth year so the kids who were at an advantage now get double advantage

Should have planned the birth of your child better.

[Unregistered]

wrong. nothing has changed except the kids who get the "advantage" which for ODP or us soccer trainings, was already birth year so the kids who were at an advantage now get double advantage

You're not getting it. Just continue to believe ussf didn't put any thought into this decision, and really just wanted to run your daughter's soccer experience.

[Unregistered]

I'd bet on a 10%-15% decrease in numbers for girls soccer across the board. If someone doesn't think this chance will turn off a lot of girls they've never had the frontline experience.

There are a large number if girls which stick with soccer for school age friendships. Some turn out to be very good players too.

That will raise costs for everyone. Less numbers/the same overhead.

Eventually it will lower overall quality I as we lose good athletes.

This will not be reduction in kids playing soccer. Parents are making this to be more of an issue than it really is. Maybe I don't think it is an issue because daughter plays ECNL and we aren't making the change until 2017 and for her last year of ECNL the '99s will play up with '98s

[Unregistered]

This will not be reduction in kids playing soccer. Parents are making this to be more of an issue than it really is. Maybe I don't think it is an issue because daughter plays ECNL and we aren't making the change until 2017 and for her last year of ECNL the '99s will play up with '98s

yep, put yourself in a 02 or 03 or even younger parents shoes

[Unregistered]

yep, put yourself in a 02 or 03 or even younger parents shoes

What am I missing? If the girls want to play for the social aspect then they should go play Rex soccer. If they are playing at ECNL level then be prepared to have some new teammates in the 2016-17 season

[Unregistered]

This will not be reduction in kids playing soccer. Parents are making this to be more of an issue than it really is. Maybe I don't think it is an issue because daughter plays ECNL and we aren't making the change until 2017 and for her last year of ECNL the '99s will play up with '98s

So ECNL will wait till 2017 across all clubs? How will next spring 2002 class be formed? Birth year?

[Unregistered]

So ECNL will wait till 2017 across all clubs? How will next spring 2002 class be formed? Birth year?

ECNL / US Club Soccer has not yet announced what their plans are other than to "coordinate with US Youth Soccer".

[Unregistered]

So ECNL will wait till 2017 across all clubs? How will next spring 2002 class be formed? Birth year?

Must be an ECNL u14 parent. I am assuming your current roster is filled with 2001 birthdays and 2002 birthdays. In the 2016-17 season the '01s will play with '01 and '02s will play with '02s

Still not sure what the issue is?