RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
No. It won't happen anything like you describe. Check back on this post in 8/26. Have a crow nearby, perhaps with some ketchup.
Youth Soccer Rankings ?
- Thread starter dawson
- Start date
Maybe, maybe not.
I'm only describing what will happen if things stay as is today.
If all leagues change to SY (which is also a possibility) then it would be all one grouping + everything currently implemented would work and not need to be updated.
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
So I asked SR, and they shared what they are planning to do for the transition. First, they are going to try and bring game data over from teams with the old calendar, to teams with the new calendar. There will not be a reset, causing all teams to start anew in 8/26, like happened years ago for the transition in the other direction. The *new* team that has 8 months overlap of players to the old team, will be considered the same team. As an example, a 2011B U15 team now this season, kids born 1/1/2011 - 12/31/2011, will be a 2010B/2011B U16 team in fall 26, with kids born 8/1/2010 through 7/31/2011. So roughly 8 months of kids will carry over. Their thinking is that there could be a 33% turnover in rosters from one to the other - which is significant, but not so much more so than roster turnover that already occurs year on year anyway. One problem can be that in the past, some states used different nomenclature to define team ages, and U14 meant one thing here, and a different thing there. The hope is that there is enough consistency across states to place teams in the appropriate age group.
Second, there will only be a single grouping for ratings. They do not plan to split teams apart between the new SY teams, and any that stick to BY. They feel that in any of the major tournaments where there is crossplay - this is how teams would generally be entered, and this is how they can be compared (as listed above).
We're a year out from the transition, so circumstances can change, and nothing's necessarily set in stone - but assuming it's going to happen differently than above, is counter to how the developers are thinking about it.
Second, there will only be a single grouping for ratings. They do not plan to split teams apart between the new SY teams, and any that stick to BY. They feel that in any of the major tournaments where there is crossplay - this is how teams would generally be entered, and this is how they can be compared (as listed above).
We're a year out from the transition, so circumstances can change, and nothing's necessarily set in stone - but assuming it's going to happen differently than above, is counter to how the developers are thinking about it.
Thanks for the update. I wonder if there will be a label indicating BY vs SY teams? E.g. 2011B for teams that stay in BY, and 2010/11B for teams moving to SY. Or B11 and B10/11 respectively. Or U14 and 14U respectively. Hope it's not the latter as that would be most confusing.
Hopefully there will be one standard way and all teams stay consistent. Probably wishful thinking.
Hopefully there will be one standard way and all teams stay consistent. Probably wishful thinking.
This is exactly what I was talking about.
If the leagues have different groupings people will want to view the data from the perspective BY vs SY that their kids team plays in. If this isn't available whichever leagues perspective isnt provided will say the ranking app is crap and useless.
Why alienate a group of users when all you have to do is provide a view of the data from their perspective.
I think we're talking about related but different things. I believe you are proposing for rankings to be split teams into two groups - BY and SY. Sorry if I'm mistaken.
But if that's what you are proposing, I don't think it should be taken that far. But I do think a simple label to distinguish between teams would be helpful. And I'm not talking about just the rankings app. It would be great to have these labels included for tournaments as well.
I get what you're looking for.
But if a specific tag or metadata for league was defined. The next logical step is to create a rankings view from that leagues perspective.
The views would be...
-1/1 and everything younger (each year)
-8/1 and everything younger (each year)
I do agree that it would also be nice to break out leagues rankings even if everyone was in the same grouping.
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
Translated - this means GA parents will be butthurt because their rankings, already lower across the board than what they (incorrectly) feel to be "equivalent" ECNL teams, will be expected to end up even slightly lower if their teams are 4 months younger. MLS N parents couldn't care less, as their top teams are going to be so far ahead of ECNL anyway that the 4 month swing is irrelevant.
Splitting the team inventory so whiny parents don't get their feelings hurt, isn't a choice that SR has to make, or sounds like they would want to make.
It all depends on the ranking apps end goal. As of right now I see that they want $10 a year from users. If a portion of the leagues stay BY and the ranking app only caters to SY groupings I dont think the BY parents would want to pay $10 a year.
Also yes, people will complain if their worldview isn't being provided. It's how things work. If the ranking app chose to stay BY then all the ECNL parents would complain.
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
I realized that the date switch is now 1 month different from when it was first proposed, so it would be 7 months of overlap, not 8. (Initially with the Sep 1 proposal, it would have been 4 months worth of kids able to move to the younger team. With the change to Aug 1, it's now 5 months able to move to the younger team). Everything else being equal - that would imply a 42% roster turnover assuming birthdates are evenly distributed and everyone chooses to move to the youngest team they're eligible for.
No matter what the real-world change is for a particular team, large or small, their ratings will start to follow their game results as soon as games are played. If their ratings are far off their current reality - the ratings will quickly move to that new reality with each new game.
It wouldn't be hard for another developer to provide an alternate app that ranks by BY, but it doesn't seem like a huge cash cow business, so I don't know if that would happen. But I'd pay for both if given the choice. What's $10 per year?
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
I just came across a team this morning, a 2011 MLS team in SoCal, that is in this boat. Unranked tournament results as of a week ago - unable to add to actual team as it's locked. Will be interested to see if it eventually gets added to their history, or if the result just gets buried.
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
I think you're right, there just isn't enough money in it to sustain an actual business on it. Look at the download #'s in the app store and google play store, take a guess at how many of them are paying $10/yr for a sub, and ballpark the total amount of income this app is making. It's not very much at all. It's kept running because it's an interesting hobby for someone, not for profit motive. I personally think they could charge $50-$100 per year and while the amount of pro subs would decline, more than enough would stay on for it to be a much better way to make money (and keep SR sustainable). I certainly don't mind that they've instead kept it so affordable.
Have leagues said when the transition from 9v9 to 11v11 will happen when it goes to SY?
Currently, the transition from 9v9 to 11v11 happens at U13. So for next year (2026-27), if it had stayed BY, the 2014s would move to 11v11. Correct me if I have this wrong.
When the transition to SY happens, will Aug 1 2014 - Jul 31 2015 play 9v9 or 11v11? In other words, would the Aug-Dec 2014 be pulled down and play an extra year of 9v9? Or will Jan-Jul 2015 be pulled up and play one less year of 9v9?
Currently, the transition from 9v9 to 11v11 happens at U13. So for next year (2026-27), if it had stayed BY, the 2014s would move to 11v11. Correct me if I have this wrong.
When the transition to SY happens, will Aug 1 2014 - Jul 31 2015 play 9v9 or 11v11? In other words, would the Aug-Dec 2014 be pulled down and play an extra year of 9v9? Or will Jan-Jul 2015 be pulled up and play one less year of 9v9?
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
I'm not sure it's been clarified anywhere yet - but I may have just missed it. But the assumption is that the former is correct, not the latter. From an individual perspective, Aug-Dec kids now have the option of staying with their existing team (which is moving up an age group in the fall, like always), or changing teams to move down with the 1 year younger team (and essentially replaying the same year). Kids wouldn't lose a year of 9v9 - they'd either get an extra 1, or they'd choose not to. There's no assurance this would be uniform across all leagues and all geographies, it certainly isn't currently.
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
To determine whether a team is BY or SY going forward - it doesn't need to be that onerous for the user to do so. From 8/2026 onwards - If it's an MLS N team or GA team, it's BY. Anyone else, it's SY (and it's conceivable it will be for GA soon as well). Regardless of what they name themselves, teams on their own don't get an option to define themselves as one or the other - they become so just by membership in the league.
There very well may be additional leagues not considered above, that are included in SR's database of competitive soccer clubs in the US, that will buck the trend and stay BY - but they aren't significant in terms of where their teams would be ranked anyway. Their teams can all be put in the same data set without much issue, as they are now.
I think a data field for league would be quite helpful. I also think there could be additional data fields for things like zipcode on the club entity, and a few more that could make searches and views useful for answering different queries. Being able to run various views on the same data set would only add flexibility for the user. That is different than defining the two categories of teams as inherently different enough that they shouldn't be ranked together as a primary view.
When we follow that train of logic though, it gets to the point where they are essentially just re-creating the standings tables for each league. The best team in the nation doesn't become #1 by having the highest SR rating (though it is probably close), they do it by winning the championship in their league. Same with state championships, same with league championships, same with pretty much anything else. If the question is how to rank/rate teams in any of these subgroups - it already exists - just go to the published league table, or playoff results, and they are already there. Sure - you could add SR rating against each of them, as I sometimes do on this board when comparing teams/brackets - but it's not uniquely useful data. The only time comparative ratings are useful, other than for team vs. team, is aggregating them at a large level across leagues & geographies. The fact that SR can do that - and is doing that - is the reason that it's interesting, relevant, and useful.
children born August - December will play an extra year of whatever they are in this year (unless, of course, they decide to stay with their current teams and play up a year.
JustaSpectator
SILVER
I can't wait for the SY change to take place and the team/club shake ups it's going to cause. I also find it comical that parents of kids who are going down are automatically assuming starting spots on that team since they are dropping down. Does it really work that way? Say that isn't so. I'm looking forward to the team shake ups and parents finally getting a dose of reality.
RandomSoccerFan
PREMIER
I dunno - like always, it's going to depend on the particulars. But if a standout Aug-Dec kid comes down to the younger team, most coaches would be salivating to keep/make them a starter on the younger team. If instead a kid who isn't impactful on the current team now comes down to the younger team, it's probably presumptuous for them to think that they will be likely to quickly displace someone and get a starting spot there. We can speculate how many of these older kids will fit into either of these cases.
I imagine the roster changes will be pretty club specific. On average, teams would probably have the same overall starters, but there might be some shifts, based on who is more physically developed for the new age ranges. Higher level teams certainly seem to prioritize physical development over just skill, for example.
I'm curious to see if (assuming this is adopted as planned) if clubs use it as an excuse to shuffle kids around more generally. I know for my son's club, for example, they appear very reluctant to ever move kids "down", even though there's uneven individual development over several years, and as a result some players are probably on higher level teams than they should be (ie: if they were joining the club now, they would be placed on a lower team). The club might, for example, use the SY change to just start fresh with placement, which they have not done previously (lip service to that effect at tryouts notwithstanding). I guess we'll see.
I'm curious to see if (assuming this is adopted as planned) if clubs use it as an excuse to shuffle kids around more generally. I know for my son's club, for example, they appear very reluctant to ever move kids "down", even though there's uneven individual development over several years, and as a result some players are probably on higher level teams than they should be (ie: if they were joining the club now, they would be placed on a lower team). The club might, for example, use the SY change to just start fresh with placement, which they have not done previously (lip service to that effect at tryouts notwithstanding). I guess we'll see.
Scrub It Kook
SILVER
I agree and have seen the same. Mostly from mid-flight teams where the club is trying to retain players. On the other hand, I have seen MLS Next players moved all the way down to EA2 teams. So really depends on the level of the team and of course, the results. If teams are winning there is usually reluctance to change the formula.