I completely agree. I was just making the point that the current state situation of players “playing up” is highly judgmental in most cases. Mostly pushed by parents looking to claim their kid is in someway superior, yet on the field there is in reality negligible differences. There are of course examples of the rare shoe in national team players, but that’s an extreme exception, the rest of the kids can play their current age group and still develop. So if a few 2010 move to 2011 and 2011 to 2012, I don’t think in most cases that puts the current top players in 2011 or 2012 at a big disadvantage. The players struggling to maintain roster spots will likely be more heavily impacted.
Kids been getting killed with a December for years now. Aug and Sept are represented some but Oct-Dec is less than 10% id bet. 2 kids. Maybe 3. Maybe 1. If you had a spreadsheet, wouldnt take long to find a team with 0. I know my kid is better than the league above and year below from scrimmages. I expect an exodus of 4th qtrs from nal/npl teams. No way my kid is staying if he gets a sniff. Its pretty late for him but basically a choice between u17/u19. RAE is probably at its least impactful at those ages and you can still tell the difference. Saw a scrimmage between the leagues best u17s in the region and the u19s from that club a couple weeks ago and the 19s won decisively. Strength and body type differences were noticeable even if heights were similar. They lost badly because they got outplayed but I was surprised at the u17s inability to create in the offensive half. Now a lot of that was bad coaching (not sure how a guy like that gets to that level) but I expect that will continue when Aug and Sept birthdays show up. And the Oct-Dec birthdays who were able to keep up will provide a bunch of starting midfielders to the year below. Great for my kid but just means late summers get screwed. Does nothing to address RAE. They really should play in 2 year brackets. Kids would get better faster. The big fast kids couldnt rely as easily cause teams would just bring in kids from the year above to even it out and the younger kids could play down sometimes to learn to trust their athleticism. The only ones that benefit from one year age groups are the clubs that want to sell that they are the "best." Wouldnt those u17s have been better off learning how to play against u19s instead of running the table against kids their year? And these are not scrubs. This is the best team, from a top club in the league and still, get them out of their element and no plan B at all. Really really hard to say this isnt the sword of damocles hanging over a new group of kids.
Summer birthday, so youngest on the squad once the change is implemented. Young enough that the 2017 change didn't impact us. It will be interesting to see if clubs get in front of this early next year and communicate there plans/expectations. The uncertainty in roster construction pre-tryouts is painful with changes like this sitting out there.
I saw that. Goodness this conference.... A couple of things stand out. Rockfords purge of Eclipse in the u16 age bracket really really hurt Eclipse. Talk about turning around a club as a whole as well. About 4-5 girls left Eclipse for Rockford, and that team is very very good. Nationals are about where I thought they would be, but they are yet to play many of the top top teams in the conference. This weekend they have the KC teams. Specific to the u16s, last years runner up in the ECNL vs the runner up in the GA. The conference is stacked. And Minnesota hasn't even started their games yet (they start this weekend). It's a blessing and a curse for my kid. Some of these girls are ridiculous..... But what better way to learn and challenge yourself. I'm running out of motivational speeches for her after at least 4 soul crushing defeats by 1 goal while punching up. I would rank them as such, specifically for the u16s. KC, Michigan Hawks, SLSG, and Rockford.
Apologies for pointing out the obvious, but this would likely be true simply because Jan-Aug spans 2/3 of the year. Add in RAE and it seems extremely likely to be true.
Based on what I seen in our region, the top 40%–50% would be mostly unaffected by year cutoff changes, but most teams have at most 2–4 players who clearly stand out and could also (meaningfully) play up.
Yeah - RAE is the driver in my perspective. The top team of my son's club has 2 August and 1 early September out of 12. Even the 2nd team only has 2 November (also out of 12). But others seem to be saying that's not the case everywhere.
Maybe I am missing an explanation, but RAE doesn't just magically go away by switching to school year based teams, you just shift the window. Seems like a red herring. Most rec or park district teams already to school year based teams, so worrying about playing with friends seems like a fairly de minimis reason to switch for club level play. Are we just worried about the 8th and 12th graders with this fix? (Birth year cohort is split between playing HS or College).
I think it's primarily aimed at 8th and 12th graders, yeah. I don't think players/parents at the club level care otherwise. And apparently, it makes it simpler for college recruiting as well.
Eclipse vs Inter results 2011 - Eclipse 3-0 2010 - Eclipse 3-2 2009 - Eclipse 2-0 2008 - Eclipse 1-0 2006/07- 3-1 Inter
Has anyone heard if GLSA will be getting the ECNL badge for next season? It looks like majority of their ECRL teams are doing very well, and they did well in the Heartland Cup.
Nobody can tell you that for sure right now. Last year they added 3 teams in February and they all came from the GA. The year prior the Inter news came out in November. And the year before that new teams were announced in March (including Rockford). I think most agree 1974 would be a logical add based on performance and other characteristics (fields, coaching, size). But “rumor” was that the league was holding off on further illinois expansion until Rockford and Inter are more established. Their results have been improving, but only the league knows for sure. Right now Midwest girls has 16 teams which is one of the largest division, but maybe there is room for one more team and everyone plays 16 games. My guess is they get it eventually, but not for another year or two.
Hi. First post although I have been reading this thread for a bit. I have heard rumors that Elm brook United in Wi is getting ECNL R badge. That should be really interesting if true because the first teams in that club could crush the existing RL program in WI.