Technically they're not missing a season, they'll still be playing every year with kids born in the same year as them. What they call the division doesn't really matter. Only way they could miss a season is if they are born later in the year, in Illinois Sept-Dec, and the club they're at doesn't have enough kids from these months their 8th grade year to field a team for the Fall. Even if some larger clubs do have enough kids, who will they be playing against? I can only think of maybe 4 clubs from this area who could probably field a team. Don't overlook the the big picture for what the age group will be called, U11...2006 etc
US Youth Soccer fixed the link http://www.usyouthsoccer.org/assets/1/15/US Youth Soccer Birth Year and Season Matrix.pdf
Wow this is different than a lot of people's original interpretation. I am still not entirely sure which it will be. I think these older age group assignments are different than how the Development Academy is doing it now. For example take a look (URL below) at this past seasons tryout notice for PWSI U13/U14 team. For the 2015-2016 season, 2001 birth year was considered U14 and 2002 birth year was U13. If that gets redefined next year then I think all the DA kids would "skip" a year and this years U17s would even age out. http://www.pwsi.org/Default.aspx?tabid=576442 I think it makes a difference since higher age group assignments will drive the competitive tryouts to even earlier ages. We would have gone within in a few years from 15 years old being the first age for DA tryouts to having 10 and 11 year olds trying out for new U12 DA teams for the 2016-2017 season.
So, my November 1998 born daughter who is a junior has no place on this chart for next year. Despite playing at the highest non-ECNL level (National League). She is deciding on D1 programs right now and needs a place to play her senior year. The ECNL clubs have been notified the 1998 players will be part of the U17/18 age group next year, don't quite understand why USYS is not taking the same route. This is so depressing.
How will they be part of the 17/18 age group next year? The USSF mandates (not USYS) say no. And U.S. Club Soccer, through which the ECNL is sanctioned, says (A) they're using the birth-year groups next year and (B) the "season" is defined as the entire school year. USSF says the age group is taken from the second half of the "season," so that would mean 2017. I'm looking into this with the DA as well. Maybe they should just declare a U19 group?
So, here's a partial screen print of the ECNL Director of Coaching's letter to the clubs on August 24. I couldn't fit the whole thing....
So that was nearly two months before USSF issued its FAQ that explains that the age groups will be determined by the second part of a season. I'm looking into how the Development Academy is accounting for the change. I'll look into ECNL as well. Frankly, I think the easiest solution may just be to rename the age groups U19 and U17 instead of U18 and U16.
Except that the u19 age group would only have about a third of an age group available to it with the kids born January-July 1998 shmerking berls in college, right?
Yes, if my daughter's team is any indication. She is the only 1998 junior, there are 7 1998 seniors and the rest are 1999ers. The ECNL teams seem to have a much higher ratio of 1998 born 2017 graduates. I counted 7 on one of the MD team rosters.
It would be U18/U19 combined, then U16/U17 combined. In other words, the same age groups they're planning to have (1998-99 birth years, 2000-01 birth years), just with a different number at the end.
Not surprising to find ECNL teams with more players born August-December given that RAE indisputably tends to push the older kids within any given age group onto the more elite teams. The higher you go into the club stratosphere, the more likely you are to find a greater percentage of kids born in the August-December months. The elite clubs in my area publish team brochures for college coaches and put them on their websites. The brochures list the player birth dates, and the percentage of kids per team born August-December is way beyond statistically significant. If you ever look at A and B teams for a particular age group within a particular club with a large enough sample size, RAE quickly becomes clear. I wonder if any thought will be given to having a small-sided format for U19 that will allow for small rosters for the August-December kids. Or what about making a U19 co-ed league. A solution is bound to evolve, though I'm not sure whether it will develop locally and ad hoc or in a more uniform fashion.
I thought the DA was moving to single year age groups, no? If not, are you going to have a bunch of January-July born U19s playing club soccer? And, if so, are you going to end up incentivizing parents to hold back their January-July born kids to give them a leg up in U19 club teams trying to impress college coaches?
Only for U12, U13 and U14. http://www.ussoccerda.com/151016_academy-announces-u12-program-launch-fall-2016
In that case, I would hate to see the U17 age group expanded to include U19. As I mentioned above, doing so may incentivize people to hold their January-July born kids back so that they can dominate the U17-U19 age group and win college scholarships.
I was just wondering/thinking the same thing, but for the Aug-Dec 8th grade kids (U15?)…give them something to do in the Fall, while they wait for Spring (and the younger Freshmen) to roll around...
So what about this chart? http://www.ussoccer.com/coaching-education/resources/2015-player-development-initiatives
The birth-year chart on that page? That applies if you don't define a "season" as a fall-to-spring span. Unfortunately, the DA, ECNL and U.S. Club Soccer all define as season from fall to spring.
So the talk on our fields and some of the clubs DOC is that our state is trying to "grandfather" existing teams in so that they can stay together.... i'm not sure how that is even possible if it happens because as i have read on here and other sites they are just ripping the bandaid off.
There's actually no reason you can't keep a team together -- just have half the kids play up. Not saying that's a good idea, but I know some clubs are thinking about it.
Some leagues have prohibitions against playing up 2 years and my local league may grandfather those kids who were only playing up one year under the older age destinations.
I get the playing up part... no I mean they think the Aug-Dec birthday kids will be able to stay on their existing teams so those teams won't be torn apart... as far as I understand that cannot happen and there will be no grandfathering in of those teams
Our U9 academy director told me the exact same thing on the phone a few weeks ago when we were discussing this. He's really worried.