Mandates- a better approach

[timbuck]

saw this article about EDP in New Jersey
http://goalnation.com/edp-takes-sting-out-of-us-soccer-mandates/
It sure sounds like they used a common sense approach with the focus on what's best for kids.

 

[timbuck]

From the article:

"For its leagues, at least for the 2016-17 season, Shilling says teams in EDP won’t necessarily have to worry about strictly adhering to calendar year structure as EDP has come up with a proprietary three-step bracketing process that tries to neutralize the transition to calendar year.

• Step one involves age-based bracketing, with some flights consisting of teams in the older six months of an age group and other flights consisting of teams with mostly players in the younger six months of that particular age group.

This will allow for some teams to stay together for this first year despite the move to calendar year.

Example: If a team is playing in a 2003 bracket but is mostly made up of 2004 with a 2003 mix EDP wouldn’t put them in the highest bracket, EDP would group them with similar aged team makeups unless told otherwise from a DOC. EDP will also group true birth year teams together.

• Step two looks at the makeup of a team versus the previous year (percent of new players vs. existing players).
• Step three takes into account EDP technical staff and our member DOCs and administrative staff input on the quality of teams, as well as the input on competitive balance from coaches in the particular age groups.

“We will also conduct a mid-season review and take appropriate action to reassign teams with the goal of keeping under a 2.5 average goal differential,” Shilling said. “Our goal from this interim bracketing process will be to give each team a good, very competitive game each and every weekend with a travel time of 1.5 hours or less.” "

 

[MostlyDisappointed]

This is an implementation strategy, not an alternative to mandates, or a change in the mandates themselves.

 

[timbuck]

This is an implementation strategy, not an alternative to mandates, or a change in the mandates themselves.

Exactly. A well thought out approach.
US Soccer gave everyone 2 seasons to comply. Cal-South ripped of the band aid and we had 3 months of tryout mayhem. State Cup was more of a tryout. SCDSL cancelled their spring league. And now we have tournaments playing 7v7 on postage stamp fields with half of the rules being implemented (Surf Cup is the issue here, not necessarily Cal-South). And soon we will have a fall season with some teams in the wrong place due to all of the player movement.

 

[MostlyDisappointed]

Exactly. A well thought out approach.
US Soccer gave everyone 2 seasons to comply. Cal-South ripped of the band aid and we had 3 months of tryout mayhem. State Cup was more of a tryout. SCDSL cancelled their spring league. And now we have tournaments playing 7v7 on postage stamp fields with half of the rules being implemented (Surf Cup is the issue here, not necessarily Cal-South). And soon we will have a fall season with some teams in the wrong place due to all of the player movement.

The truth is, cal-south probably overestimated the intelligence and competence of its constituents. Watching video from surf cup, it's clear socal should have brainstormed all the ways the new rules would be abused by the rank-and-file morons who pass for coaches around here. Watching an 8 year-old chip a ball at the goal off of a kickoff is the funniest, saddest soccer thing I've seen this week.

 

[zebrafish]

This all sounds great, but who has the overall perspective among different clubs/teams/age groups to really implement this properly?

I suspect no one.

Given how I see some coaches/parents push to win at all costs, there are those who will abuse the system to their advantage.

With respect to calendar year, I think the band-aid needs to be ripped off, and fix the problems as they arise.