please explain how this works to me. So if your kid was held back and is in 8th grade right now and should be in the 10th grade how exactly would that work? If you tell me that they would be on the 10th grade team then the whole argument to change to grade year so these kids could play with their school friends just went out the window.
Get ready folks
- Thread starter soccer4us
- Start date
What level of play are these great kids being left behind because they were born Sept thru December?
So are your saying a player with "great instincts and talent" is too small and too slow and they are being left behind? What does that mean? They are not making the top team like ECNL for example because they are a 2010 player right now that is in the 8th grade?
So your telling me that a player is on 2010 ECRL team then if the rules change being the older kid on the 2011 age team would make them bigger and faster and they would then be on the 2011 ECNL team? I don't buy it.
Changing all this around for these "trapped" players is absolutely ridiculous. I think there are parents out there who have kids that are "trapped" and they are just excited for the rules to change because they will get an extra year of soccer and they are going to be able to move down a year in club and they think it will be better for their kid and increase their chances for whatever glory they are trying to obtain.
I guess you could count out any involvement in the national level system then because they are birth year based and there's no way (unless your a unicorn and you would already be in the pipeline) that this "trapped" player that just moved down a years level of team would then make the 2010 camp that's full of players that are on the club teams that are a year above them.
At the end of the day life isn't fair. We cant just keep changing the rules because of it.
Thatonedad
SILVER
I think the trapped players are just icing on the cake for people who want to change back. As many of them never wanted to change in the first place. Also there was a study done which has been presented to all major soccer governing bodies on the effects of RAE since going to BY and the data shows it has gotten worse since the change.
So if RAE has gotten worse and you have all these issues that wouldn’t be as prominent if SY was in place why keep birth year? This is not me advocating just giving you some insight.
The people pushing for change are selling this as what’s best for the majority not what’s best for ECNL. It just happens that GY works better for ECNL platform as well. People saying we don’t want to change because it will mess up my kids team won’t be good enough to stop the momentum created.
US Club wants real reasons with evidence and data that shows birth year is better for the majority in the US which has not been presented as far as I know.
Why would RAE be worse under BY vs SY? Or what was the reason that the study stated for the difference? I thought MLS Next was going to solve RAE with Bio Banding?
whatithink
GOLD
Its a date range, as now, but it more or less correlates to grade year, i.e. 8/1 to 7/31. Holding a kid back doesn't change their birth date and so they fall into whatever date range correlates to their actual age, not grade.
Agree, change to SY will solve most current 33% trapped players issue, but not the corner case like you deliberately redshirt your kids.
And I can guarantee that there will be a group of parents that say their 16 year old freshman should be able to play with kids in their grade.
And there's really no downside in ECNL allowing this to occur. Their teams will get stronger and they'll be unbeatable. If ECNLs ultimate goal is college recruitment what's the difference if 16 year old freshman play with their grade? The end goal is being recruited to play in college. Colleges don't care if high school seniors are 18 or 20 they just want players that can perform.
See how it works? Congratulations you're back to why US Soccer switched to calender year groupings.
whatithink
GOLD
I think you just have to look at the actual rosters and see when the kids are born - and yes, I've looked at rosters based on date as I wasn't convinced, and it was pretty much on the money, with many rosters being higher than 80%. There are books that have been written on the RAE, across many sports, and the data is conclusive that kids born in the first half of the year make up 80% or more of the players. Conversely, the kids in the 20% achieve the highest level at a higher rate, something like 70% of them versus a smaller % of the "older" kids. Basically, that's because the younger kids had to be that much better to even get on the team.Why would RAE be worse under BY vs SY? Or what was the reason that the study stated for the difference? I thought MLS Next was going to solve RAE with Bio Banding?
Its not a US phenomenon only, btw, but recognized in other countries also, hence the bio banding initiative which obviously fell pretty flat here.
Its a pretty big deal though as the rosters are weighted to the Jan-Jun dates and now those kids would be competing with older kids for spots for the first time ... that will certainly put the cat among the pigeons. As soon as those parents realize, if this gets announced, they are going to lose their shit.
Fwiw, for the Aug-Dec kids, its a complete cluster for college recruitment. They play with Juniors who are being recruited in their Sophomore year - U17, and then in their most pivotal year, Junior, are competing with Seniors (Aug-Jul) for spots on their team, along with the regular Jan-Jul kids, as its now U19 (U18 vanished with the BY switch).
whatithink
GOLD
They switched to calendar year groupings to align with FIFA. They said it at the time. It was easier for them to see the talent they want, i.e. the 0.001% or thereabouts.
Kind of funny the rational behind both changes was/is to appeal to a certain type of recruiter.
Unfortunately, if we go with straight graduation year, people will red shirt academically to gain a sports advantage. Parents going crazy for sports is not “a corner case”.
Aug 01 is fine. Jan 01 is also ok. Allowing older kids in younger age groups is not ok. Just pick an age limit and stick to it.
whatithink
GOLD
As I said previously, it never made sense for ECNL, but they went along as US Soccer mandated it. They obviously feel a lot stronger now to be able to even propose a reversal. Generally, it makes more sense imv, as
- Kids can play with their school friends and therefore peer group. This is applies at every level from rec through competitive. Naturally, this is the over whelming majority of the 3M youth soccer players out there.
- At the highest level, the majority of kids are trying for college and it aligns perfectly with that.
- For the most elite, i.e. the ones US Soccer are interested in 0.001%, i.e. the ones that may go pro or may make a USNT roster U15 onward, it doesn't matter, as they should already be playing up at least one age group if not two (otherwise they are not elite).
exactly
Thatonedad
SILVER
I haven’t seen the study it was only mentioned to me. But it was a 2 year study I think 2021-2023? looking at ages U11-U18 and Q4 was substantially underrepresented and Q1 was substantially over represented. However at the National team level U15-19 RAE seemed to be less prominent. However the majority of leagues outside of national teams it was very lopsided. BY was meant to fix RAE at the lowest level and up and the data shows that is not the case.Why would RAE be worse under BY vs SY? Or what was the reason that the study stated for the difference? I thought MLS Next was going to solve RAE with Bio Banding?
This change has been in the works since DA broke up and now SY supporters have data as well as many soccer operators on their side.
I don’t know that USSF would be thrilled at the idea of changing back but it “sounds like” if it’s determined by the majority of soccer operators that SY/GY would be better for the masses it will then fall on USSF to say we actually don’t really care about the majority we really only care about the 1% and I’m not sure if that’s a good look or stance to take.
I actually believe in players playing up against players 2-3 years older than they are. Assuming they're able.
Redshirting is different, players aren't playing up for higher level competition. A group of parents and players are expoiting the rules to play down against younger less physically developed competition. You see it in football all the time. To the point now that it's common to hold back players for the advantage.
Once ECNL switches to SY redshirting will be the next thing parents push for. Like I said before this is because there's no downside for ECNL not to allow redshirting players. Colleges don't care how old players are when they recruit them. All they care about is the year they graduate.
Thatonedad
SILVER
Yes, this is true and from what I understand the push is for new cutoff dates but I would not be surprised if ECNL goes with grad year for high school ages if it’s decided new cutoff off dates are better for the masses.
By the time kids get to high school the difference of a year or so isn’t as substantial as the younger age groups. If you’re playing at the ECNL level most of those kids can handle playing high school varsity soccer as freshman. I don’t think they would determine it to be an unfair advantage as that would imply others could not red shirt also.
If a kid in high school struggles playing against seniors as a junior/soph playing Juniors or seniors. They probably aren’t going to be recruited for college.
I wonder how much the US youth clubs focus on size plays into this equation?
The current USMNT roster couldn't be spread more evenly 6 Q1, 5 Q2, 4 Q3, 6 Q4.
Wait a minute...
You've been pushing for the school year change and using "trapped players" getting screwed into playing up as the justification.
Now you're saying that going strait school year with no restrictions isn't a bad thing because by high school everyone is the same size.
You are so transparent it's ridiculous.
Thatonedad
SILVER
I’m not pushing for anything? My kids would actually be on the negative end of a change. I was just speculating on conversations Ive heard nothing definitive in that statement.
Also the issue with the trapped players is they are younger and get the small end of the stick their whole soccer playing careers. Which is the thought process of US soccer club members and ECNL.
I understand that it is unfair if redshirt holdback is playing with freshman when they should be a sophomore but the way they see it is we already have that problem and a much larger level with birth year. As well as many other problems with the birth year system.
You get very defensive when I’m just saying what I hear. Not telling you to personally attack you or your views.