Get ready folks

I honostly don't think the age difference of 3-6 months makes any real difference.
It doesn't. It's about biology and not the calendar. The only way to correct for RAE would be to compete based on bone age, which is obviously not feasible.

Starting at U13 my son played against kids a foot taller and 80 pounds heavier. He survived just fine. Was he at a disadvantage, sure, but he compensated with other skills.
 
That's the thing. Even if every single soccer organization changed the date to the exact same cut-off with the same rules, a significant issue remains that school-year cutoffs for grade in the US vary across geography, from as early as Aug 1 to as late as Sep 30. There is no 1 date that aligns with the school calendar, as there are many variations. While any cut-off in that stretch leaves less kids in a situation where their soccer year differs from their school year (currently most all Aug --> Dec kids), it doesn't fully solve the issue. That's one reason why a Jan 1 cut-off was harder to argue against, as it is defined the same for all.
Can you provide an example of a State that has a date earlier than Aug 1 for there school enrollment?
 
Thanks for pointing that out. I still think of those players as "trapped" in the sense they aren't playing with their majority of kids in their grade. Maybe it should be called reverse trap lol since it creates the reverse problem for these kids. They would be in high school when 11/12th of the team is in middle school. They would be in recruiting year when 11/12th of the team would be one year away. As someone pointed out above, it will suck for them. Unless they play up. Or unless they focus on the upside, which is they will be oldest player on the team and have higher likelihood of standing out. The current trapped players (being younger) don't have that possible benefit.
But they are not Trapped, just offset, there is no rule preventing them from playing up.
 
Can you provide an example of a State that has a date earlier than Aug 1 for there school enrollment?
There's a few school districts that start in July but they're all late July and some are July 31st.


Aug 1st would represent 99.9% of all students.

If you wanted to include all students make the cutoff July 1st.
 
Honestly I don't know why the cutoff date isn't July 1st. Some kids (July 1st till whenever their school district starts) might gets the option of playing with their school grade (up) or down with the grade below them but most would choose to play with their grade in school by the time they're in High School.

Just change BY to July 1st instead of Jan 1st and it eliminates trapped players and is simple to implement.
 
It has nothing to do with when your school district starts school. The cut off date for California first.
Honestly I don't know why the cutoff date isn't July 1st. Some kids (July 1st till whenever their school district starts) might gets the option of playing with their school grade (up) or down with the grade below them but most would choose to play with their grade in school by the time they're in High School.

Just change BY to July 1st instead of Jan 1st and it eliminates trapped players and is simple to implement.
It has nothing to do with when your school district starts their school year. The cut off mandate date for California public schools affecting the trapped kids is September 1.
 
It has nothing to do with when your school district starts school. The cut off date for California first.

It has nothing to do with when your school district starts their school year. The cut off mandate date for California public schools affecting the trapped kids is September 1.
I understand

But, if you choose July 1st ALL schools are covered across the nation. If you choose Aug there's a very small minority (less than 1%) with school starts in July.

What I'm saying is give some players that are born after July 1st but before their school cutoff date the option to chose between playing up or down.

In the end most will choose to play with their age in school.

This is basically BY but starting July 1st not Jan 1st. All trapped players are addressed and you don't need to do waivers to accommodate the 1% of edge cases.
 
I understand

But, if you choose July 1st ALL schools are covered across the nation. If you choose Aug there's a very small minority (less than 1%) with school starts in July.

What I'm saying is give some players that are born after July 1st but before their school cutoff date the option to chose between playing up or down.

In the end most will choose to play with their age in school.

This is basically BY but starting July 1st not Jan 1st. All trapped players are addressed and you don't need to do waivers to accommodate the 1% of edge cases.

No. Nothing will cover all kids, if the goal is to make sure that 100% will play with their grade. Kids start school early, and are allowed to start late, all the time. When it comes to club soccer, many of them are also enrolled in private school, where in that case these school cutoff dates don't matter much. Moving it to July 1 instead of Aug 1 may in fact be beneficial in that less kids would be affected - if that is closer to the cut-off date for most school starts. But any date chosen is going to advantage some and disadvantage others. If they choose Aug 1, those with aug birthdays have the most options, while those with July birthdays are hosed. If they choose July 1, those with July birthdays have the most options, while those with June birthdays are hosed. And if they stay with Jan 1, those with Jan birthdays have the most options, while those with December birthdays remain hosed.
 
No. Nothing will cover all kids, if the goal is to make sure that 100% will play with their grade. Kids start school early, and are allowed to start late, all the time. When it comes to club soccer, many of them are also enrolled in private school, where in that case these school cutoff dates don't matter much. Moving it to July 1 instead of Aug 1 may in fact be beneficial in that less kids would be affected - if that is closer to the cut-off date for most school starts. But any date chosen is going to advantage some and disadvantage others. If they choose Aug 1, those with aug birthdays have the most options, while those with July birthdays are hosed. If they choose July 1, those with July birthdays have the most options, while those with June birthdays are hosed. And if they stay with Jan 1, those with Jan birthdays have the most options, while those with December birthdays remain hosed.
I'm only considering defined school district start dates.

Private school, and homeschool hold backs can play with their age.

What I'm looking for is a way to accommodate most players and to make things as simple as possible for Clubs to implement.
 
I'm only considering defined school district start dates.

Private school, and homeschool hold backs can play with their age.

What I'm looking for is a way to accommodate most players and to make things as simple as possible for Clubs to implement.

"My proposal will cover 100% (of the kids that I choose to cover with my proposal)".
 
It has nothing to do with when your school district starts school. The cut off date for California first.

It has nothing to do with when your school district starts their school year. The cut off mandate date for California public schools affecting the trapped kids is September 1.

The commonly reffered to mandated cut off date is the minimum age (5) to start kindergarten. It would be incorrect to use it as the strict maximum age for soccer purposes. Agreed with other posters that summer kids start kindergarten the summer they just turned 6 all the time.
 
Back
Top