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

[Unregistered]

Teams that try to stay together will quickly implode. With a girls DA on the horizon, teams won't stay the same regardless, so best to rip the bandaid off & form the best birth year teams possible. Hate this change overall. Should be school year based teams for college - at least on the girls side.

[Unregistered]

The European model is good and they do push kids beyond their age group. It has to be a kid by kid basis. It's not "playing up". There's not reason why kids should be playing with their age peers. It's playing where your kid fits talent/athletically.

Quality clubs will put kids where they belong developmentally. In many cases this means kids are playing up. Low quality clubs will keep talented kids on age level to get more wins.

[Unregistered]

Teams that try to stay together will quickly implode. With a girls DA on the horizon, teams won't stay the same regardless, so best to rip the bandaid off & form the best birth year teams possible. Hate this change overall. Should be school year based teams for college - at least on the girls side.

Every club I've heard of is reshuffling teams by new birth year. New teams will be formed and the players will all make new friends and be fine.

[Unregistered]

Quality clubs will put kids where they belong developmentally. In many cases this means kids are playing up. Low quality clubs will keep talented kids on age level to get more wins.

At the top clubs very very few kids play up. There is no need if the kids around them are also talented and the level of competition is up there. Now if you're at a Mickey Mouse club and playing 4th division OYSA...

[Unregistered]

Exactly. Kids at top clubs across the country rarely play up.

[Unregistered]

At the top clubs very very few kids play up. There is no need if the kids around them are also talented and the level of competition is up there. Now if you're at a Mickey Mouse club and playing 4th division OYSA...

And if the club has good coaching (no matter what league) they won't allow it except for the truly talented. The general guideline is the younger player needs to be at least in the top 3 players of the team they are playing UP TO, not top 3 of their age appropriate team. Too many parents don't get that and push to have their kids play up. Weak clubs cave to the pressure to try and keep decent players.

[Unregistered]

And if the club has good coaching (no matter what league) they won't allow it except for the truly talented. The general guideline is the younger player needs to be at least in the top 3 players of the team they are playing UP TO, not top 3 of their age appropriate team. Too many parents don't get that and push to have their kids play up. Weak clubs cave to the pressure to try and keep decent players.

That's not a bad rule of thumb but it suggests that the team 1 year up is a talented team. You really need to look at whether the kid would make an "all-star" team of all the top kids 1 year up. If not, stay on age, even if that means finding a new club/team.

[Unregistered]

And if the club has good coaching (no matter what league) they won't allow it except for the truly talented. The general guideline is the younger player needs to be at least in the top 3 players of the team they are playing UP TO, not top 3 of their age appropriate team. Too many parents don't get that and push to have their kids play up. Weak clubs cave to the pressure to try and keep decent players.

My son's team has 4 players on his team who "play up". There is probably only one who deserves to be there. The other three are there because the parents whined about it to someone and the club caved. It's the old story of the club taking one player to play up, which then pissed off the other 3 "decent" but not standout players in the age group below... Who then complained and all of the sudden we had all 4 at our practices! The kicker here is that they practice with us and play in our games but also double roster on the age appropriate team. Basically get all the perks for playing time (2 teams), plus get pushed a bit by playing with older players... To the rest of the our team, there is zero benefit having them there. With all the shake-ups coming next year anyway, it will all work out, but it has caused negative vibes throughout the team(s) for various reasons.

[Unregistered]

My son's team has 4 players on his team who "play up". There is probably only one who deserves to be there. The other three are there because the parents whined about it to someone and the club caved. It's the old story of the club taking one player to play up, which then pissed off the other 3 "decent" but not standout players in the age group below... Who then complained and all of the sudden we had all 4 at our practices! The kicker here is that they practice with us and play in our games but also double roster on the age appropriate team. Basically get all the perks for playing time (2 teams), plus get pushed a bit by playing with older players... To the rest of the our team, there is zero benefit having them there. With all the shake-ups coming next year anyway, it will all work out, but it has caused negative vibes throughout the team(s) for various reasons.

Politics runs youth soccer and ruins youth soccer.. The squeaky wheel often gets the grease. Whiny parents have way too much influence.

[Unregistered]

And if the club has good coaching (no matter what league) they won't allow it except for the truly talented. The general guideline is the younger player needs to be at least in the top 3 players of the team they are playing UP TO, not top 3 of their age appropriate team. Too many parents don't get that and push to have their kids play up. Weak clubs cave to the pressure to try and keep decent players.

That's why so many kids end up leaving certain Clark County clubs and play in Oregon.

[Unregistered]

My son's team has 4 players on his team who "play up". There is probably only one who deserves to be there. The other three are there because the parents whined about it to someone and the club caved. It's the old story of the club taking one player to play up, which then pissed off the other 3 "decent" but not standout players in the age group below... Who then complained and all of the sudden we had all 4 at our practices! The kicker here is that they practice with us and play in our games but also double roster on the age appropriate team. Basically get all the perks for playing time (2 teams), plus get pushed a bit by playing with older players... To the rest of the our team, there is zero benefit having them there. With all the shake-ups coming next year anyway, it will all work out, but it has caused negative vibes throughout the team(s) for various reasons.

We left a club for that very reason. Weak DOC would basically let any kid play up who asked. Maybe one was really good enough. It left our team decimated (at one point 6 kids were playing up!) and pi$$ed off everyone on the older team. Many of them left because of it as well. DOC was eventually let go but not before he had done a lot of damage.

[Unregistered]

Quality clubs will put kids where they belong developmentally. In many cases this means kids are playing up. Low quality clubs will keep talented kids on age level to get more wins.

There is too much concern with winning at clubs. In European academy systems elite players get identified and placed where it will benefit them as a player not kept on age level for wins. Bradley and Klinsman have both said pushing top players from a young age would help to build a better pool of talent.

Unfortunately, at clubs here in Oregon winning is more immediate and chosen over what's best for kids. Playing up weakens both the older and the younger teams but benefits development.

[Unregistered]

There is too much concern with winning at clubs. In European academy systems elite players get identified and placed where it will benefit them as a player not kept on age level for wins. Bradley and Klinsman have both said pushing top players from a young age would help to build a better pool of talent.

Unfortunately, at clubs here in Oregon winning is more immediate and chosen over what's best for kids. Playing up weakens both the older and the younger teams but benefits development.

Winning is the priority because that's what the parents want.

[Unregistered]

Winning is the priority because that's what the parents want.

and they don't know any better. so many parents never played the game at a decent level and can't tell good coaching from bad. looking at w/l records and gotsoccer points is much easier

[Unregistered]

Winning doesn't matter until U19.