It was a bad idea to go to CY. They let it stay too long. Should have changed back after the Covid fiasco, but they didn't. The problems a CY cut-off created was never resolved over a 7 year period, so the logical thing to do is go back to what was working before the switch. Just because you can't comprehend the problems, doesn't mean US Soccer, Club Soccer, and AYSO can't. Obviously they get it, and obviously you were wrong on this one.
I don't think it was forgotten, it is just the people who were not affected didn't care about those who are. They are changing back, because it has been a constant problem for trapped players, year in and year out. The problem didn't work itself out, so now they are changing back, because there is no solution to resolve the trapped player dilemma in a CY system.
Be ready for the trapped players to need to play catch up come March. The Trapped Players may get plenty of good practice in, but no legitimate game time for four months has a notable effect. While the Highschool half will be playing 2-3 games a week during that period against older players.
There are 1000's of good reasons. Every single Trapped Player is a great reason to change it back.
How will these players be trapped after the change? By that I mean "Trapped" means they have no options due to rule restrictions.
Not knowing much about mls next vs mls academies, would letting mlsn change cutoffs make the games more competitive or are they already pretty even.
Mls wouldn't change. Games are what they are. Outside of the true mls academies you have maybe 2-3 non academies that can compete against the actual academies. Age isn't a factor. It's like different levels of D1. Yes, Xyz State is D1. But they aren't the same level playing field as let's say a Stanford. No one is adjusting to help xyz state level the playing field. Being under that umbrella, means you know what you signed up for. You will always have maybe an outlier, this yesr is FC Delco at a particular age group that balls out. But as an overall, they are the rarity not the nom.
Your kid gets to play on a younger team now right?
They will play on a team in which every player is within an age range of 365 days of each other. Does a 12 month differnce in age create an unfair advantage?
x.com
College and MLS do not have age limits so BY is irrelevant. MLS Next age groups already follow BY, so wouldn’t be a switch. I don’t see MLS Next moving away from BY. It’s reason for being is the MLS professional pathway, not college (although plenty of players end up in college programs).Since we're into rumors did you see that there's a rumor that ACC, Big 10, and other college leagues are in talks to drop NCAA and align to US Soccer. If this happens they also intend to do year round soccer that mirrors MLS. Also MLS is changing to BY.
What this means is that college might completely change to BY.
If this is all true it explains why MLS and maybe GA arent commenting on BY to SY.
x.com
Yea I agree something like what that link suggested wouldn't change anything.
I guess I'm not understanding why being a trapped player is such an impediment to a kids development. It seems your major issue is that kids that are in 8th grade that play with 9 graders are at a big disadvantage. Kids play year round, I see having a few months off from game play as a benefit and is a great time to unwind and cross train.
Not sure which is worse, the NCAA or US Soccer running college soccer. At least the NCAA has a track record of success, although arguably at the expense of student-athletes.Since we're into rumors did you see that there's a rumor that ACC, Big 10, and other college leagues are in talks to drop NCAA and align to US Soccer. If this happens they also intend to do year round soccer that mirrors MLS. Also MLS is changing to BY.
What this means is that college might completely change to BY.
If this is all true it explains why MLS and maybe GA arent commenting on BY to SY.
x.com
Maybe not that high with USL and Mexican leagues considered but outcomes are arguably biased towards college. Still not the mission of MLSN though.
Don’t know the number but the relevant measure isn’t all of mlsn. The regular mlsn teams are just there to serve the academies. Any thing else applicable to their existence is a secondary concern. The relevant figure is the number of mls academy kids who go on to play any level of pro v college.
While the odds are better with an academy since they theoretically have a more direct link to MLS teams (although I think that's overrated), why is it more relevant? You know full well MLSN's claimed mission is the pro-track, regardless of academy or not, that's part of the rationalization for the no HS play. With the exception of maybe the Union and RSL, the homegrown player track has largely been unsuccessful.
