Email
Print
LTAD: Competition Review - pt. 2
2019-11-13
The Ontario Football Alliance is pleased to share Part 2 of the 2016 Competition Review Survey that took place from Sept. 19 - Oct. 14, 2019.
BACKGROUND
From September 19th - October 14th, the Ontario Football Alliance opened a survey to the football community to share their thoughts on the 2016 Football Canada: Competition Review.
WHO RECEIVED THE SURVEY?
The Ontario Football Alliance shared the survey by email with all registered participants of the OFA. As well, the survey was shared on social media in an attempt to capture anyone in the football community that did not receive the email.
WHY?
With the upcoming changes in 2022, concerns were raised by some member clubs/leagues, from these concerns the Ontario Football Alliance identified 5 specific strategies. The Ontario Football Alliance in an effort to advocate on behalf of their members will share the results with Football Canada.
SCHEDULE
PART 2: Strategy 1.A
Should you have any questions about the survey or responses, please do not hesitate to reach out to Josh Prior at operations ontariofootball.ca.
QUESTION 4:
Strategy 1.A: Standardized two-year age categories and designations. Mandate: 2022
A standardized system in-line with the LTAD would allow players from across the country to compete in the same groupings. Confusion would be minimized when determining a standarized pathway for athletes to move from grassroots to high performance.
Two exceptions can be made:
Some comments that Agree with Question 4:
"I love the idea of standardizing age categories nationally and staying consistent across the country from grassroots to high performance. My only caveat is to make sure that the two exceptions are clearly defined and structured so any applicants can clearly see what the stipulations are and the PSO has clear direction to make decisions fairly and consistently across the board for this applicants, nationally. "
"Strongly support the consistency this brings in age groups and the flexibility for appropriate exceptions regarding developmental age."
"If players are new to the game and below the average size of athletes their age they should be able to compete at a level suited to their athletic ability"
Some comments that Neither Agree nor Disagree with Question 4:
"I don't know how to answer this without more information. Are there going to be tests done to determine their level of skill? Who decides which level of skill is age appropriate?"
"I do not think players should be able to be moved down an age under any circumstances. If the reason to be moved down is size, the football IQ of said player may create a large advantage of playing down. Coaches will be coaches and will try to violate the spirit of this pathway."
Some comments that Disagree with Question 4:
"You either have two year categories or you don't ... every club can ( and will ) move kids all over the place based on THEIR input and an on-going series of "exceptions" that never balance out over time. Metaphorically moving the goalposts as it were. I've been a coach for 18 years now going all the way back to "age + weight" breakouts and "X" marked kids not carrying the ball, etc.. - although well meaning to get more kids playing in totality, the "law of unintended consequences" outweigh any gains every single time."
"If these changes are made you are taking away a year of competitive football from EVERYONE assuming the 19 year olds are removed. Not everyone goes on to another level, some just want to play competitive football and may not mature until then. A better solution would be to not allow committed university players at the SV level and still allow the 19 year olds that are there for the love of the sport."
"Unlike other sports, playing up is dangerous for youth. It's a basic health issue. Players need to have the physical, mental and emotional tools to play this sport and although some players may have one or two of these requirements, very few to none have all three. Learn to be a better player. Learn the techniques & fundamentals. Learn to understand the football concepts. Learn to be a leader amongst your peers. This is not a "ME" first sport. I am absolutely against allowing a player to play up a level."
From September 19th - October 14th, the Ontario Football Alliance opened a survey to the football community to share their thoughts on the 2016 Football Canada: Competition Review.
WHO RECEIVED THE SURVEY?
The Ontario Football Alliance shared the survey by email with all registered participants of the OFA. As well, the survey was shared on social media in an attempt to capture anyone in the football community that did not receive the email.
WHY?
With the upcoming changes in 2022, concerns were raised by some member clubs/leagues, from these concerns the Ontario Football Alliance identified 5 specific strategies. The Ontario Football Alliance in an effort to advocate on behalf of their members will share the results with Football Canada.
SCHEDULE
| PART | RELEASE DATE |
| Part 1: Opening | Wednesday, November 6th, 2019 |
| Part 2: Strategy 1.A | Wednesday, November 13th, 2019 |
| Part 3: Strategy 2.A | Wednesday, November 20th, 2019 |
| Part 4: Strategy 2.B | Wednesday, November 27th, 2019 |
| Part 5: Strategy 2.D | Wednesday, December 4th, 2019 |
| Part 6: Strategy 2.F | Wednesday, December 11th, 2019 |
PART 2: Strategy 1.A
Should you have any questions about the survey or responses, please do not hesitate to reach out to Josh Prior at operations ontariofootball.ca.
QUESTION 4:
Strategy 1.A: Standardized two-year age categories and designations. Mandate: 2022
A standardized system in-line with the LTAD would allow players from across the country to compete in the same groupings. Confusion would be minimized when determining a standarized pathway for athletes to move from grassroots to high performance.
Two exceptions can be made:
- If a players has no participation pathway, he/she can be moved to a different age group pending the approval of the PSO.
- If the current agre category does not fit the developmental age of the player, he/she can be moved up or down an age category pending the approval of the PSO.
Some comments that Agree with Question 4:
"I love the idea of standardizing age categories nationally and staying consistent across the country from grassroots to high performance. My only caveat is to make sure that the two exceptions are clearly defined and structured so any applicants can clearly see what the stipulations are and the PSO has clear direction to make decisions fairly and consistently across the board for this applicants, nationally. "
"Strongly support the consistency this brings in age groups and the flexibility for appropriate exceptions regarding developmental age."
"If players are new to the game and below the average size of athletes their age they should be able to compete at a level suited to their athletic ability"
Some comments that Neither Agree nor Disagree with Question 4:
"I don't know how to answer this without more information. Are there going to be tests done to determine their level of skill? Who decides which level of skill is age appropriate?"
"I do not think players should be able to be moved down an age under any circumstances. If the reason to be moved down is size, the football IQ of said player may create a large advantage of playing down. Coaches will be coaches and will try to violate the spirit of this pathway."
Some comments that Disagree with Question 4:
"You either have two year categories or you don't ... every club can ( and will ) move kids all over the place based on THEIR input and an on-going series of "exceptions" that never balance out over time. Metaphorically moving the goalposts as it were. I've been a coach for 18 years now going all the way back to "age + weight" breakouts and "X" marked kids not carrying the ball, etc.. - although well meaning to get more kids playing in totality, the "law of unintended consequences" outweigh any gains every single time."
"If these changes are made you are taking away a year of competitive football from EVERYONE assuming the 19 year olds are removed. Not everyone goes on to another level, some just want to play competitive football and may not mature until then. A better solution would be to not allow committed university players at the SV level and still allow the 19 year olds that are there for the love of the sport."
"Unlike other sports, playing up is dangerous for youth. It's a basic health issue. Players need to have the physical, mental and emotional tools to play this sport and although some players may have one or two of these requirements, very few to none have all three. Learn to be a better player. Learn the techniques & fundamentals. Learn to understand the football concepts. Learn to be a leader amongst your peers. This is not a "ME" first sport. I am absolutely against allowing a player to play up a level."