Get ready folks

Jamisfoes said:
I disagree. If trapped players are good they would be on the top team already. A few months don’t make that much difference.
Click to expand...
This was my guess, too. At least on the girls side, a year doesn't seem to mean much for olders.

Then I looked at the rosters for a few top teams. 18-20 kids on each, but only 2-4 of them with the later grade year.

We'll see some turnover, but not a complete overhaul. I'm sure there are about ten parents of trapped RL players for every one kid who actually moves up.
 
Zeke said:
This was my guess, too. At least on the girls side, a year doesn't seem to mean much for olders.

Then I looked at the rosters for a few top teams. 18-20 kids on each, but only 2-4 of them with the later grade year.

We'll see some turnover, but not a complete overhaul. I'm sure there are about ten parents of trapped RL players for every one kid who actually moves up.
Click to expand...
High school shows that there's not much difference at older ages but suspect that the RAE is already baked in as the earlier birthday players had all the attention and development opportunity when younger.
 
Yak said:
High school shows that there's not much difference at older ages but suspect that the RAE is already baked in as the earlier birthday players had all the attention and development opportunity when younger.
Click to expand...
RAE is strongest u10 and below.

For the highest levels it tends to taper off by u12.

The problem is (if you think RAE exists) the results of RAE are already baked in by u12. It might not be happening as much at the highest levels. But the players that have been chosen to play for the best teams have already benefited.
 
Carlsbad7 said:
RAE is strongest u10 and below.

For the highest levels it tends to taper off by u12.

The problem is (if you think RAE exists) the results of RAE are already baked in by u12. It might not be happening as much at the highest levels. But the players that have been chosen to play for the best teams have already benefited.
Click to expand...
It also becomes more pronounced when teams sizes are smaller at younger years. 7v7 teams where only the top coach goes to the A team. You loose good coaching and also the opportunity to play against better competition if you are younger in comparison to peers. It creates a large headstart and advantage to those closest to whatever cut off date is used.
 
I disagree on the girls side. Some girls won’t get their menses until 14-16 years old. I’d suspect more trapped player typically are likely later bloomers than their counterparts.
 
TeamDadJokes said:
I disagree on the girls side. Some girls won’t get their menses until 14-16 years old. I’d suspect more trapped player typically are likely later bloomers than their counterparts.
Click to expand...
Yeah, to suggest that everyone has hit puberty by 11 yo (U12) is ridiculous. What is baked in is that the ones who hit puberty first, generally the older, are dominating (physically) and they are on the "elite" train. The younger ones and the ones who don't hit puberty until the 14-16 timeframe have a problem making up the ground at that point.

Zeke said:
This was my guess, too. At least on the girls side, a year doesn't seem to mean much for olders.

Then I looked at the rosters for a few top teams. 18-20 kids on each, but only 2-4 of them with the later grade year.

We'll see some turnover, but not a complete overhaul. I'm sure there are about ten parents of trapped RL players for every one kid who actually moves up.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that teams tend to have 3 basic groupings of players, 1-3 best of, 3-5 very good, and the rest. The latter group will be predominantly the Jan-Jun age group, as they are the majority in any case. Those kids will now be competing with kids from the Aug-Dec grouping from the prior BY, i.e. older kids. The split on rosters tends to get more balanced as you go from 1st team to 2nd etc., with the top teams being 80% or more Jan-Jun. The kids on the 2nd teams who are now the oldest will be competing directly for spots with the "good" kids on the top teams on the BY below, plus the younger kids on the team from the year ahead. There could be a lot of changes and a lot of movement between clubs.
 
Random said:
BTW does anyone know why 8/1 is chosen instead of 9/1? Most of the country including the biggest markets the SY cut off is 9/1:

Table 5.3. Types of state and district requirements for kindergarten entrance and attendance, waivers and exemptions for kindergarten entrance, by state: 2018

Table 5.3. Types of state and district requirements for kindergarten entrance and attendance, waivers and exemptions for kindergarten entrance, by state: 2018
nces.ed.gov
Click to expand...
Just a guess.

If soccer chooses 8/1, but schools are 9/1, then the kids in the middle can just play up to be with classmates. (they were born 12 1/2 months after soccer cutoff. Still legal.)

If soccer chooses 9/1, but schools are 8/1, then the kids in the middle are stuck. Most of their classmates make the soccer cutoff, but they don’t.

So you want to pick the earlier date, so that fewer kids are too old to be with their classmates.
 
If someone has a May or June birthday and were held back would they get to play with their grade or play up based on birth month?
 
okay now it's time for someone to explain this to me like the lost parent that I am.... My explanation I gave to another poster last month now seems moot.

If there is a kid Aug. 30th 2008 (sophomore most 08s are Juniors) if the rule changes can this kid now play 2009? (majority of sophomore are 09s)

I don't mind the changes in youth soccer because it's always happening I just need it to be clear... when the age matrix changed years ago it affected my eldest kids but it honestly wasn't that big of a deal..... if my memory serves me correct.

Thanks in advance
 
whatithink said:
Birth month. Its still a date range.
Click to expand...
For now.

But eventually clubs won't want to deal with the nuances of determining when a kid in a certain grade was born. It's easier to just say "What grade are you in school?" and that becomes the group they play with.

Parents will exploit this by holding back aka redshirting their kid so they can dominate in sports.

The only group that will actually care about the nuances of when a kid in a certain grade was born are the parents of the kids that play against redshirted players because they would perceive the situation as unfair. Is this enough so that the highest level competitive leagues maintain an age cut off on top of SY? Maybe, because I could see a situation where a parent would just hold their kidcback more than one time. But this just opens the door to league provided waivers for outlier players which becomes a $$$ game in itself.

See how SY goes off the rails even if it's based on the best intentions? There will always be someone that exploits the rules. With BY grouping that's not specifically tied to some type of school year cutoff there's less reasons to create exceptions.
 
Footy30 said:
okay now it's time for someone to explain this to me like the lost parent that I am.... My explanation I gave to another poster last month now seems moot.

If there is a kid Aug. 30th 2008 (sophomore most 08s are Juniors) if the rule changes can this kid now play 2009? (majority of sophomore are 09s)

I don't mind the changes in youth soccer because it's always happening I just need it to be clear... when the age matrix changed years ago it affected my eldest kids but it honestly wasn't that big of a deal..... if my memory serves me correct.

Thanks in advance
Click to expand...
Yes, a currently BY defined 2008 with an Aug 1st to Dec 31st birthday (aka a "trapped player" because while they're the same age as their teammates they're also a grade behind in school) would be able to play down on a SY defined 2009 team.

The same applies to all age groups if a league chooses to change from BY to SY.
 
Carlsbad7 said:
For now.

But eventually clubs won't want to deal with the nuances of determining when a kid in a certain grade was born. It's easier to just say "What grade are you in school?" and that becomes the group they play with.

Parents will exploit this by holding back aka redshirting their kid so they can dominate in sports.

The only group that will actually care about the nuances of when a kid in a certain grade was born are the parents of the kids that play against redshirted players because they would perceive the situation as unfair. Is this enough so that the highest level competitive leagues maintain an age cut off on top of SY? Maybe, because I could see a situation where a parent would just hold their kidcback more than one time. But this just opens the door to league provided waivers for outlier players which becomes a $$$ game in itself.

See how SY goes off the rails even if it's based on the best intentions? There will always be someone that exploits the rules. With BY grouping that's not specifically tied to some type of school year cutoff there's less reasons to create exceptions.
Click to expand...
You are just making stuff up. The only thing off the rails are the stories and complications you keep trying to come up with.

It's easier to do exactly what they currently do and did before the BY change, i.e. provide your birth cert and that determines what age group you can play in.
 
Footy30 said:
okay now it's time for someone to explain this to me like the lost parent that I am.... My explanation I gave to another poster last month now seems moot.

If there is a kid Aug. 30th 2008 (sophomore most 08s are Juniors) if the rule changes can this kid now play 2009? (majority of sophomore are 09s)

I don't mind the changes in youth soccer because it's always happening I just need it to be clear... when the age matrix changed years ago it affected my eldest kids but it honestly wasn't that big of a deal..... if my memory serves me correct.

Thanks in advance
Click to expand...
The way it worked before is the team year was determined by the Aug-Dec range, i.e. in your example the team with BDs from 8/1/08 to 7/31/09 would be the 08 team. Most kids on that team would be sophomores (you'd expect).
 
whatithink said:
The way it worked before is the team year was determined by the Aug-Dec range, i.e. in your example the team with BDs from 8/1/08 to 7/31/09 would be the 08 team. Most kids on that team would be sophomores (you'd expect).
Click to expand...
Aren’t August 08s Juniors in California? And they would be behind the recruiting curve compared to their classmates? Seems to shrink the “trapped” players but doesn’t completely eliminate it, why not just line it up with the school year of the majority of the country, including all of the major markets?
 
Zeke said:
Just a guess.

If soccer chooses 8/1, but schools are 9/1, then the kids in the middle can just play up to be with classmates. (they were born 12 1/2 months after soccer cutoff. Still legal.)

If soccer chooses 9/1, but schools are 8/1, then the kids in the middle are stuck. Most of their classmates make the soccer cutoff, but they don’t.

So you want to pick the earlier date, so that fewer kids are too old to be with their classmates.
Click to expand...
I would guess there are more August born kids in California alone than Hawaii, Indiana, and Arkansas. Only a fraction of California , Texas, Florida August kids will be considered physically/genetically/talent gifted enough to be allowed to play up on top teams. I guess part of my point and others have made is it seems that no matter what, it’s impossible to completely remove all boundary issues. And so it seems strange to not pick a cutoff date that eliminates the identified problem as much as possible across the entire population. No love for Leo’s for some reason.
 
whatithink said:
You are just making stuff up. The only thing off the rails are the stories and complications you keep trying to come up with.

It's easier to do exactly what they currently do and did before the BY change, i.e. provide your birth cert and that determines what age group you can play in.
Click to expand...
So you're saying that there wasn't waivers?
Random said:
I would guess there are more August born kids in California alone than Hawaii, Indiana, and Arkansas. Only a fraction of California , Texas, Florida August kids will be considered physically/genetically/talent gifted enough to be allowed to play up on top teams. I guess part of my point and others have made is it seems that no matter what, it’s impossible to completely remove all boundary issues. And so it seems strange to not pick a cutoff date that eliminates the identified problem as much as possible across the entire population. No love for Leo’s for some reason.
Click to expand...
It all depends on which group's problem you plan to "eliminate" by changing the rules.

Different implementations create different winners and losers.
 
Carlsbad7 said:
RAE is strongest u10 and below.

For the highest levels it tends to taper off by u12.

The problem is (if you think RAE exists) the results of RAE are already baked in by u12. It might not be happening as much at the highest levels. But the players that have been chosen to play for the best teams have already benefited.
Click to expand...
To me, it seems like the RAE has less to do with younger kids missing out on opportunities for the best coaching, but rather quitting the sport early (5, 6 and 7 years) due to not enjoying getting hammered by bigger kids when those few months make a big difference.
 
Footy30 said:
okay now it's time for someone to explain this to me like the lost parent that I am.... My explanation I gave to another poster last month now seems moot.

If there is a kid Aug. 30th 2008 (sophomore most 08s are Juniors) if the rule changes can this kid now play 2009? (majority of sophomore are 09s)

I don't mind the changes in youth soccer because it's always happening I just need it to be clear... when the age matrix changed years ago it affected my eldest kids but it honestly wasn't that big of a deal..... if my memory serves me correct.

Thanks in advance
Click to expand...
The kid born in August 2008 will play with kids born from Aug 2008 to July 31, 2009. Right now, that means mostly Sophomores, I believe, but it doesn't matter what grade they are in. No matter what grade a kid is in, or if even they got kicked out of school and are emancipated - they just play with kids in that birth date range: Aug. 1st through July 31st of the following year. Kids can still play up a year, but the cutoff dates are still Aug. 1st through July 31st.

One confusion is that there will be no more referring to teams as "2009s" or "2008s" because every team will be half one year and half the following year. So you could call a team "08/09s" or "09s/10s" but there won't be any more super-easy designation of a team by one calendar year. That - purely for the sake of convenience - will be a terrible loss if they switch back, because it is so much easier now to designate teams by the calendar year that they were all born.

You'll just have to ignore the constant posts on this thread saying that a child's grade has some relevance. I'm not sure why that keeps getting posted. School grade-based groupings are not under consideration, and are exceedinly unlikely to be considered despite the speculation here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top