Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

USSF adds an even younger age group

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    USSF adds an even younger age group

    This is a confusing and somewhat arrogant statement by USSF. They aligned DAP age groups with US club soccer and the rest of the world but were too arrogant to say so. It will have absolutely no impact on players already playing DAP u12 and older, regardless of what they call the age groups. They did NOT add a new u15 age group, that already exists as u14, they just changed the name. They actually added yet another year of DAP at the youngest age. So instead of the new a 2005s being u12 they will enter DAP as u13, and 2006 will be u12.

    At the start of the 2017-2018 Boys Development Academy season:
    U-18/19: eligible for players born Jan. 1, 1999 or later
    U-16/17: eligible for players born Jan. 1, 2001 or later
    U-15: eligible for players born Jan. 1, 2003 or later
    U-14: eligible for players born Jan. 1, 2004 or later
    U-13: eligible for players born Jan. 1, 2005 or later
    U-12: eligible for players born Jan. 1, 2006 or later

    http://www.ussoccerda.com/20170110-n...2017-18-season

    #2
    So explain the 2004 age group playing U12 in DA right now. Are 2004's outside of DA classified as U12, or U13?

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
      So explain the 2004 age group playing U12 in DA right now. Are 2004's outside of DA classified as U12, or U13?
      Outside of DA, all 2004's are currently U13 (for both girls and boys)

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        So explain the 2004 age group playing U12 in DA right now. Are 2004's outside of DA classified as U12, or U13?
        See the chart above. Next fall:
        2006: u12
        2005: u13
        2004: u14 (so currect DAP u12s and USCS u13s)

        IMO it's simplier if you just ignore the 'u' designation altogether.
        DAP age groups next year
        2006
        2005
        2004
        2003
        2001-2002
        1999-2000

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          See the chart above. Next fall:
          2006: u12
          2005: u13
          2004: u14 (so currect DAP u12s and USCS u13s)

          IMO it's simplier if you just ignore the 'u' designation altogether.
          DAP age groups next year
          2006
          2005
          2004
          2003
          2001-2002
          1999-2000
          The losers with this change are the current 2005s at NEFC, GPS, Valeo. If they want to play DAP next fall, instead of staying with their current club they will need to compete for spots at Revs, Bolts, Seacoast.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
            The losers with this change are the current 2005s at NEFC, GPS, Valeo. If they want to play DAP next fall, instead of staying with their current club they will need to compete for spots at Revs, Bolts, Seacoast.
            DA were given an extra year to align. IMO the 2002's currently in DAP are the losers. They now have to compete with the 01's for a spot on the new 01/02 team. If they didn't add the U15 age group the 03's would be the ones trying to make the 02 team.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              DA were given an extra year to align. IMO the 2002's currently in DAP are the losers. They now have to compete with the 01's for a spot on the new 01/02 team. If they didn't add the U15 age group the 03's would be the ones trying to make the 02 team.
              No you completely wrong. You are confusing the age designations with the age groups. If there were no change at all, the current u14s 2002s would be still competing for spots on the combined u15-16 next fall. They've just changed the name designation to u16-u17.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                No you completely wrong. You are confusing the age designations with the age groups. If there were no change at all, the current u14s 2002s would be still competing for spots on the combined u15-16 next fall. They've just changed the name designation to u16-u17.
                No, it is you that is confused. We always knew that DAP was aligning with the rest of the world next year so the 02's (U14 currently) would be U16 next year and the older of the U15/16 age group as it is this year. With the new U16/17 age designation they are now competing with 01's for a spot.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  The losers with this change are the current 2005s at NEFC, GPS, Valeo. If they want to play DAP next fall, instead of staying with their current club they will need to compete for spots at Revs, Bolts, Seacoast.
                  Surprised they don't let the new U12 only teams added this year expand to U13 next year with this re-alignment. It's the same aged kids as this year's U12s (5th/6th graders), so why not let these younger kids stay more local for another year (playing the same group of local clubs as this year's U12s) before the hardcore travel kicks in?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                    Surprised they don't let the new U12 only teams added this year expand to U13 next year with this re-alignment. It's the same aged kids as this year's U12s (5th/6th graders), so why not let these younger kids stay more local for another year (playing the same group of local clubs as this year's U12s) before the hardcore travel kicks in?
                    The current 04's already knew what they were in for. They would have to do the travel even if it was left the same. The 05's have to jump right in as U13's and do the hardcore travel without even a taste of DAP yet.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      No, it is you that is confused. We always knew that DAP was aligning with the rest of the world next year so the 02's (U14 currently) would be U16 next year and the older of the U15/16 age group as it is this year. With the new U16/17 age designation they are now competing with 01's for a spot.
                      Sorry, I have to go with the other guy on this one. It's the 2002's turn next year (as it has been with all older-Freshman/younger-Sophomore aged teams in the past), no matter what the U designation is, to play in a combined age group. That's what happens those last four years in the DA program. The '02s had this year to themselves, why shouldn't the '03s get a similar year to themselves at the same point on the development timeline before hitting the big leagues and having to compete with the older kids? You were just hoping for an exception for your kid due to the re-alignment and are disappointed it's remaining fair.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        No, it is you that is confused. We always knew that DAP was aligning with the rest of the world next year so the 02's (U14 currently) would be U16 next year and the older of the U15/16 age group as it is this year. With the new U16/17 age designation they are now competing with 01's for a spot.
                        From what you said above, you make it sound like DAP was going to boot next year's u19s out of DAP which was never in the cards. Too be fair, you are just as confused as the DAP announcement from the opposite side. They say u15 is being added, you make it sound like it is being taken away!

                        Sorry I can't step you through the basics, but try reading the bottom part of the DAP link I posted above. Alternatively, think in terms of birth years instead of u's as I suggested above. Hope that helps!

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                          DA were given an extra year to align. IMO the 2002's currently in DAP are the losers. They now have to compete with the 01's for a spot on the new 01/02 team. If they didn't add the U15 age group the 03's would be the ones trying to make the 02 team.
                          This is correct

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            The current 04's already knew what they were in for. They would have to do the travel even if it was left the same. The 05's have to jump right in as U13's and do the hardcore travel without even a taste of DAP yet.
                            Try to re-read, I'm wasn't talking about the '04s. I'm talking about next years U13s='05s. Valeo, NEFC, GPS, etc., who have U12 teams this year, should be allowed to expand to include the U13='05s next year, along with the U12='06s next year. Kids at these ages were kept local this year, why not next year, as well?

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                              This is correct
                              Nope, completely clueless. Unless you are obsessed with your child's 'u' designation, there is absolutely no change at all for boys already in DAP i.e. 2004 and older, none. You might have conconted some plans based on rumours but that is irrelevant. No change.

                              Comment

                              Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                              Auto-Saved
                              x
                              Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                              x
                              Working...
                              X