Get ready folks

[Thatonedad]

So now there's deck with data provided to US Club Soccer with data that you/they want to relay.

As I said before SHOW ME THE BEEF or shutup. You might be correct you might also be making everything up. Nobody knows.

I think I’ve posted things on here before they were talked about that shows I have some level of intel. Not saying it’s accurate. Just what I’m being told. Also the primary forum poster was saying the same things I was hearing as well.

 

[Thatonedad]

I agree with you.

But there's always going to be parents who what to take things to the next level. What I'm highlighting is if ECNL switches to SY why wouldn't ECNL make it SY with no restrictions? If a player is going to graduate a certain year that's all that matters to recruiters.

See what I mean? It will start with Aug 1st as a cutoff. Then clubs will realize it's easier to just go by grade and not worry about Aug 1st.

This is one of the primary reasons US Soccer pushed for the change to CY 10 years ago.

I would not be surprised if ECNL and RL showcases are based of Grad year for 10-12 grade. Not saying league play or nationals. Again not saying the is right or wrong just saying I wouldn’t be surprised.

 

[Carlsbad7]

I would not be surprised if ECNL and RL showcases are based of Grad year for 10-12 grade. Not saying league play or nationals. Again not saying the is right or wrong just saying I wouldn’t be surprised.

That actually makes sense + I think is a good idea.

It would also make it so showcase games aren't counted in ranking calculations.

Potentially if showcase games aren't counted in the rankings it would open the door for ECNL, GA, NAL, Socal, etc to all participate in the same showcase events. Which I think would be a benefit to the entire youth soccer community.

 

[Thatonedad]

That actually makes sense + I think is a good idea.

It would also make it so showcase games aren't counted in ranking calculations.

Potentially if showcase games aren't counted in the rankings it would open the door for ECNL, GA, NAL, Socal, etc to all participate in the same showcase events. Which I think would be a benefit to the entire youth soccer community.

I agree the point of a showcase is for the kids to be seen not to “win” the showcase. I think if the change does happen it won’t be the end of the world even though it may seem like that to some. It wouldn’t be a horrible idea IMO to allow kids to play grad year in showcases currently. For older kids.

 

[rainbow_unicorn]

What ECNL clubs will not do is do BY for league and SY for showcases. I don't see that being a viable options that clubs would approve. ECNL clubs will want to position their players for success at showcases. Cobbling together a mixed team for showcases would be problematic.

 

[Carlsbad7]

I agree the point of a showcase is for the kids to be seen not to “win” the showcase. I think if the change does happen it won’t be the end of the world even though it may seem like that to some. It wouldn’t be a horrible idea IMO to allow kids to play grad year in showcases currently. For older kids.

There will always be someone that complains about an older player playing down on a younger team.

But imagine if ECNL was hosting a showcase event in California and opened it up to GA and other teams to attend.

Say at the same time GA was hosting a showcase event in Virginia and opened it up ECNL and other teams to attend.

Both coaches and families and recruiters could choose to only attend local showcase events independent of league.

 

[Carlsbad7]

What ECNL clubs will not do is do BY for league and SY for showcases. I don't see that being a viable options that clubs would approve. ECNL clubs will want to position their players for success at showcases. Cobbling together a mixed team for showcases would be problematic.

Why would it be problematic if the results don't effect league standings or rankings?

 

[Thatonedad]

What ECNL clubs will not do is do BY for league and SY for showcases. I don't see that being a viable options that clubs would approve. ECNL clubs will want to position their players for success at showcases. Cobbling together a mixed team for showcases would be problematic.

This is more than likely true as they have not allowed GY showcases to this point. If the change to SY happens I “think” they will offer GY showcases.

 

[watfly]

The MLSN & ECNL opps are more a product of the puberty lottery at 12-14, with size and athleticism trumping everything else. I've heard multiple A coaches asserting, "give me an athlete and I can make a soccer player", which just highlights the coaching problem in the US and the ripple effect from that.

100% and also they think they can teach an athlete soccer IQ.

 

[SuperSoccerStar]

Clearly you don't understand what is happening for the Trapped Players. Your post has multiple wrong assertions because you don't understand. Nobody is getting an extra year of playing. Your hype-focus on size and relative age on the team is not what any of this is about. Sounds like you are worried your player is going to get bumped off a team when other players come to play with their grade year.

If a player moves down a year then yes they get an extra year of playing club soccer. Give me examples then of the horrible things that are happening to these "trapped" players then. Like I've said from the beginning I have only seen trapped players that have been absolutely benefitting greatly from being "trapped". And no I'm not worried at all about my kid getting bumped from anything. I just think its stupid to be changing everything again and nobody has any good real reasons on why it needs to change. Seems to me people want the change so they can get their kid to play with the lower team than they have been playing with.

 

[SuperSoccerStar]

There will always be someone that complains about an older player playing down on a younger team.

But imagine if ECNL was hosting a showcase event in California and opened it up to GA and other teams to attend.

Say at the same time GA was hosting a showcase event in Virginia and opened it up ECNL and other teams to attend.

Both coaches and families and recruiters could choose to only attend local showcase events independent of league.

You mean like Blues or Surf Cup?

 

[Zeke]

give me examples then of the horrible things that are happening to these "trapped" players then. Like I've said from the beginning I have only seen trapped players that have been absolutely benefitting greatly from being "trapped". And no I'm not worried at all about my kid getting bumped from anything. I just think its stupid to be changing everything again and nobody has any good real reasons on why it needs to change. Seems to me people want the change so they can get their kid to play with the lower team than they have been playing with.

The U18/U19 year just doesn't make much sense, because the teams are so large. U13 through U17 all have 12 months worth of kids. Then they age up into U18/U19, and you have 17 months worth of kids.

The result is oversize teams and less playing time for everyone.

The other big factor is for youngers. Kids want to play with their friends. It is harder to do that if half of your school class aren't even eligible to play on your sports team.

 

[rainbow_unicorn]

Why would it be problematic if the results don't effect league standings or rankings?

Team/game results don't matter. How the players perform absolutely does and throwing them into a new mixed team would not set them up for success.

 

[Carlsbad7]

Team/game results don't matter. How the players perform absolutely does and throwing them into a new mixed team would not set them up for success.

But being thrown on a mixed new team is exactly what's going to happen in college. Wouldn't it make sense for college bound players to have that experience when they're playing at the youth level?

The ability to be a standout on a mixed team is exactly what recruiters are looking for.

The ability to beat other teams as a team isn't what college recruiters are looking for unless they're planning to recruit the entire team.

 

[Carlsbad7]

You mean like Blues or Surf Cup?

Yes but the scores wouldn't count against rankings or league standings.

This is what keeps clubs from participating in cross league play. Everyone worries about maintaining or overtaking other league/club status.

In essence if ECNL/GA/ETC did SY showcases but CY leagues and all showcases were open for anyone to attend you'd end up with a tournament of friendlies. Which is what you want if the goal is to highlight player performance not team performance.

I'm sure someone will try to track wins and losses at showcases/friendlies but it wouldn't really work because teams are only put together for that specific event.

 

[Thatonedad]

What data are you referring to?

You make wild statements with nothing to back them up.

This was the text I got when asking for the data being used.

Relative age effect across the talent identification process of youth soccer players in the United States: Influence of birth year, position, biological maturation, and skill level.

The aims of the study were to examine the relative age effect (RAE) in youth soccer players in the United States (US) and the influence of birth year, playing position, estimated maturation and skill ratings. The sample consisted of 3,364 youth soccer players who were active in the 2021–2022 US soccer season across three main stages of the talent identification (TID) process for Youth National Team (YNT) players (i.e., Club, TID Center, and YNT). A prevalent RAE for players born in Q1 was present in the full sample. A significant prevalence for Q1 players were identified for both Club and TID Center, but not YNT. A significant RAE prevalence for Q1 players was identified for most of the age groups from U13–U18 at Club. Significant RAEs prevalence for players born in Q1 were found in Goalkeepers, Center Backs, Midfielders, and Center Forwards at Club and TID Center (except Wide Forwards). The data identified a consistent RAE prevalence for Q1 players in early and on-time-maturers across all levels. An even birthdate spread was evident in YNT with a prevalence for Q4 players and a higher percentage of late maturers than elsewhere in the TID process. Results reinforce evidence indicating RAEs still exist in soccer, yet show for the first time within a youth soccer TID process, the influence of contextual factors on the prevalence of RAE. This information can be used to advance TID and development across the US soccer landscape.

 

[Carlsbad7]

This was the text I got when asking for the data being used.

Relative age effect across the talent identification process of youth soccer players in the United States: Influence of birth year, position, biological maturation, and skill level.

The aims of the study were to examine the relative age effect (RAE) in youth soccer players in the United States (US) and the influence of birth year, playing position, estimated maturation and skill ratings. The sample consisted of 3,364 youth soccer players who were active in the 2021–2022 US soccer season across three main stages of the talent identification (TID) process for Youth National Team (YNT) players (i.e., Club, TID Center, and YNT). A prevalent RAE for players born in Q1 was present in the full sample. A significant prevalence for Q1 players were identified for both Club and TID Center, but not YNT. A significant RAE prevalence for Q1 players was identified for most of the age groups from U13–U18 at Club. Significant RAEs prevalence for players born in Q1 were found in Goalkeepers, Center Backs, Midfielders, and Center Forwards at Club and TID Center (except Wide Forwards). The data identified a consistent RAE prevalence for Q1 players in early and on-time-maturers across all levels. An even birthdate spread was evident in YNT with a prevalence for Q4 players and a higher percentage of late maturers than elsewhere in the TID process. Results reinforce evidence indicating RAEs still exist in soccer, yet show for the first time within a youth soccer TID process, the influence of contextual factors on the prevalence of RAE. This information can be used to advance TID and development across the US soccer landscape.

Ok so your data is saying that RAE exists at the youth club level.

It's not saying that because of RAE we need to change team cutoff dates from Jan 1st to Aug 1st.

If anything it's saying that if you change the cutoff date from Jan 1st to any other date on the calendar. Clubs will find players that are born closest to the date chosen and that will be the new definition of where RAE will play out.

 

[Thatonedad]

Ok so your data is saying that RAE exists at the youth club level.

It's not saying that because of RAE we need to change team cutoff dates from Jan 1st to Aug 1st.

If anything it's saying that if you change the cutoff date from Jan 1st to any other date on the calendar. Clubs will find players that are born closest to the date chosen and that will be the new definition of where RAE will play out.

All I ever said was they have data that shows RAE is still a problem for youth club soccer. Which the argument for BY was that it would help combat RAE. So the point being made is that if BY actually makes things even slightly worse when referring to RAE and causes other issues with trapped players why keep BY? Again these are not my views just stating what I’m told.

 

[Zeke]

All I ever said was they have data that shows RAE is still a problem for youth club soccer. Which the argument for BY was that it would help combat RAE. So the point being made is that if BY actually makes things even slightly worse when referring to RAE and causes other issues with trapped players why keep BY? Again these are not my views just stating what I’m told.

Neither BY nor SY can combat RAE. No matter where you put the cutoff, the older kids will have a leg up on the youngers.

Aug 01 is a better choice than Jan 01, but that's more about 4th graders playing with their friends, plus eliminating the U18/U19 combo team.

 

[Carlsbad7]

All I ever said was they have data that shows RAE is still a problem for youth club soccer. Which the argument for BY was that it would help combat RAE. So the point being made is that if BY actually makes things even slightly worse when referring to RAE and causes other issues with trapped players why keep BY? Again these are not my views just stating what I’m told.

Yea, I don't get what's being conveyed.

It sounds like someone is trying to correlate/link what they think is an issue (RAE) with what they think is a solution (BY).

However, the topics are completely separate.

Also somehow trapped players are also in the mix because ????

What's being argued is not logical it's all about emotion and trying to manipulate others to get them to make a change.