So who is voting on this then? And when is the vote?
Get ready folks
- Thread starter soccer4us
- Start date
It's basically all the sanctioning bodies and US Soccer that discuss and theoretically vote on the results.
US Club Soccer = ECNL, SOCAL, others
USYS = E64
USSSA = GA, DPL, EA
MLS = MLSN
Code
GOLD
Wait? I thought that there were only a handful of Trapped Players. How can a few players create a cascade event that effects every team?
Of course they are competitive. Haven't you read all about how the Trapped Players are not at a disadvantage playing with their current teams. The same teams they would be "playing up" on under the proposed rule change.
whatithink
GOLD
for example the Aug-Dec older kids could currently be on a 2nd team but are better than the younger Jan-Jul players, unlikely all but likely some or a lot - we’ll see if it pans out.
SocalSockerDad
BRONZE
Probably different as they get older, but I’m already seeing the impact on youngers. Aug-Dec U11 players who will probably play U11 next year and displace some of the younger U10’s that normally would play U11 next year. They already have a year of 9v9 experience and could be close to 18 months older than the youngest players. They are still really young so in the grand scheme of things it’s probably not a huge deal, but will definitely have families looking for other options that will break up some existing teams.
US Soccer Board has their next meeting on 11/22/2024. They’ll be voting on this topic during the meeting.
Soccermomma24
BRONZE
Can we all agree that the “vote” is just a formality at this point? The decision has been made.
I don’t think anything is set in stone. The soccer community is running away with news of this only hearing from ECNL. Although I think most of us can rationalize and justify why this change makes sense that it would happen.
There's now people starting rumors that US Soccer voted internally on BY vs SY and chose to stay BY.
Since nobody is providing sources everyone is equally credible.
The only two official statements I've seen on the matter are from ECNL leadership in a podcast and a response from the DPL president on the DPL homepage.
Code
GOLD
So in the current Birthyear scenario, are the Jan-Sep older players better than the Oct-Dec younger players?
Code
GOLD
The trapped players, are already playing on those teams. Why would a date change suddenly change those players skill level. They are not choosing to play on a different team, they would be choosing to continue play on their current team, which would now be considered playing up for that player.
Code
GOLD
One thing I've learned about rumors on this forum, is that they are usually correct, unless it is some one off poster with a troll account making their first post. After all the chatter about it on the sidelines, and this forum, it would be a very safe bet.
whatithink
GOLD
I expect so.
They don't choose, the club does, and if the kids who are a year older, and used to playing against kids 18-21 months older still are likely better than them.
Yes, generally older kids are more mature, bigger, faster, and have better coordination.
I find it ironic that parents are worried their child will have to play against older kids( born 5-12 months older) or get knocked down to the 2nd team….while ignoring that those Aug- Dec kids set to benefit…have always had to compete against kids almost a year older.
I always thought the change to BY was stupid..and a decrease in numbers coincided with this change. Especially when kids start in rec, they want to play with their friends when they start.
I agree, you're never going to get a straight answer from parents. Responses will always be though the lens of what's best for their kid.
This is one of the reasons I prefer BY. It works, its what most of the world uses, and it doesn't introduce variables like homeshoolers or redshirts. I realize that people are saying that it's SY but with a defined cutoff date of Aug 1st. Maybe I'm just cynical about youth soccer at this point but I don't believe clubs will be able to maintain the cutoff date without adding accommodations for exceptions. Over time exceptions will become the rule.
Karlton Athletic
SILVER ELITE
We're at a club with an NL and 2 RL teams. The 2nd RL team was added just before last season and was a bit of scramble to put together. Officially, the 2nd RL team was supposed to be equal to the 1st, but we all know the 2nd team is really the "C" team and to be honest, management seem to have given up the pretense too.
My kid's a trapped player on that "C" team and as a side note, I'm happy with that: the NL and other RL have massive rosters with a lot of players sitting each week, whereas we keep it lean and mean. Based on what I'm hearing, our kids (and parents) are much the happier right now.
But, come the High School break, the plan is to combine the remaining middle schoolers (e.g. the trapped players) across all 3 teams into a single team and play some scrimmages and tournaments. What's interesting though is that the initial word is that we'll only have 10 or 11 players and that maybe 8 or 9 of those are from our "C" team.
In other words, the NL and top RL team only have 2 or 3 trapped players across both their massive squads, whereas the "C" team is around 50% middle school. It's anecdotal of course, but seems to highlight the Relative Age Effect.
They maintained it like that for 30+ years.
The whole world doesn’t use it..though many do (most of the international teams we play are from Mexico, or England - that don’t use BY.) In Spain they group kids by 2 years..so one year you are the oldest..the next year younger..kids often move between A, B, and C teams. They also play 7v7 until u14…which likely helps with the RAE as the game is more based on technical skills than athleticism. So if we are copying the international community…than go ahead and copy Spain…but using BY in and of itself does nothing to help.
The age effect has been well documented across numerous studies and numerous sports. The only thing shifting the age line will do is reward some players closer to the start of the new age line and punish players on the other side of the new age line. Given the size of the relative age effect (it's pretty massive from what everyone who has studied it has looked at), if we really cared about "fairness" in youth sports the age brackets would be 6 months. But nobody wants that because it would separate friends and classmates ("social" aspect of sports) and it would be hard to administer and administer of a level playing field ("efficiency"...harder to form teams, harder to bracket tournaments and leagues, some people wouldn't want to do it etc). The argument against the trapped players is it has a dramatic effect in 8th grade and senior year on the trapped players. In my kid's case he's had to decline several opportunities to "play up" because he was a trapped player (he would have been, for example, an 8th grader playing with sophomores in high school).
I like 7v7 until u14 that's a good idea.
US Club Soccer, US Youth Soccer, AYSO statement on forthcoming U.S. Soccer decision regarding age group formation by school year vs. calendar year
US Club Soccer, US Youth Soccer and AYSO members and participants,
In 2017, U.S. Soccer decided to change age group formation by school year (Aug. 1-July 31) vs. calendar year (Jan. 1-Dec. 31). Since the change was made, we have been reviewing the impact on our sport, specifically for players of all ages and competitive levels.
Over the past few months, U.S. Soccer, at the request of its Technical Development Committee, has engaged in a review of that decision. We support these efforts and appreciate their approach to engage Organizational Members, leagues and clubs in collecting feedback. Additionally, US Youth Soccer, US Club Soccer and AYSO have solicited and shared additional feedback with one another in an effort to make the most informed and appropriate decision for our sport.
US Youth Soccer, US Club Soccer and AYSO have been in constant communication on the topic, recognizing the importance of consistency across the three biggest youth soccer organizations in America. US Youth Soccer’s and US Club Soccer’s leadership teams have met in person multiple times, most recently in September at the US Youth Soccer Grassroots Symposium in Salt Lake City. Additionally, we welcome the involvement of other U.S. Soccer Organizational Members.
We believe that any decisions should be made as a collective with as many youth organizations as possible, and it is our intention to do so.
As chair and vice chair of the U.S. Soccer Technical Development Committee and Youth Representatives on the Board of Directors, Mike Cullina (US Club Soccer CEO) and Louis Mateus (US Youth Soccer Board of Directors member) are directly involved in the conversation and recommendation to U.S. Soccer’s Board of Directors. As chair of the Youth Council and Youth Representative on the Board of Directors, Tina Rincon (US Youth Soccer Board of Directors chair) is also actively engaged.
The next U.S. Soccer Board of Directors meeting is Nov. 22, 2024. We expect this topic to be on the agenda for that meeting and, consequently, a formal and public decision by the end of the calendar year.
As always, thank you for your passion for the sport and commitment to our athletes.
Skip Gilbert
US Youth Soccer
Mike Cullina
US Club Soccer
Doug Ryan
AYSO National President
US Club Soccer, US Youth Soccer and AYSO members and participants,
In 2017, U.S. Soccer decided to change age group formation by school year (Aug. 1-July 31) vs. calendar year (Jan. 1-Dec. 31). Since the change was made, we have been reviewing the impact on our sport, specifically for players of all ages and competitive levels.
Over the past few months, U.S. Soccer, at the request of its Technical Development Committee, has engaged in a review of that decision. We support these efforts and appreciate their approach to engage Organizational Members, leagues and clubs in collecting feedback. Additionally, US Youth Soccer, US Club Soccer and AYSO have solicited and shared additional feedback with one another in an effort to make the most informed and appropriate decision for our sport.
US Youth Soccer, US Club Soccer and AYSO have been in constant communication on the topic, recognizing the importance of consistency across the three biggest youth soccer organizations in America. US Youth Soccer’s and US Club Soccer’s leadership teams have met in person multiple times, most recently in September at the US Youth Soccer Grassroots Symposium in Salt Lake City. Additionally, we welcome the involvement of other U.S. Soccer Organizational Members.
We believe that any decisions should be made as a collective with as many youth organizations as possible, and it is our intention to do so.
As chair and vice chair of the U.S. Soccer Technical Development Committee and Youth Representatives on the Board of Directors, Mike Cullina (US Club Soccer CEO) and Louis Mateus (US Youth Soccer Board of Directors member) are directly involved in the conversation and recommendation to U.S. Soccer’s Board of Directors. As chair of the Youth Council and Youth Representative on the Board of Directors, Tina Rincon (US Youth Soccer Board of Directors chair) is also actively engaged.
The next U.S. Soccer Board of Directors meeting is Nov. 22, 2024. We expect this topic to be on the agenda for that meeting and, consequently, a formal and public decision by the end of the calendar year.
As always, thank you for your passion for the sport and commitment to our athletes.
Skip Gilbert
US Youth Soccer
Mike Cullina
US Club Soccer
Doug Ryan
AYSO National President
whatithink
GOLD
The other thing to consider, assuming this goes through, is that, for those that want/say teams will stay together, there is a ripple effect with the new team groupings, i.e. the oldest current age group is U18/19 because BY doesn't work at the oldest level. There will now be U18 & U19 teams. So there will be a ripple downwards, i.e. U19 picks Aug-Dec from prior U18/19 team PLUS Jan-Jul from prior U17 team. That means the prior team is now broken up and will replicate and so on and so forth.