Controversial opinion here, but why is it that there is such an uproar about "holdbacks." The Canadian model for hockey and lacrosse is a two-year window. E.g., PeeWees this year are kids with birth years of 2011 AND 2012. The spread is up to 23 months between kids. It seems like the problem with those who detest "holdbacks" is that their kid will never be in the "older" group. If that's the complaint, I get it. But let's remove this talk of its unfair for older kids to play against younger ones, or safety. The model seems to be working just fine for our northern neighbors.
If by "working just fine" you mean that the players that receive the most development and become most dominant, are the ones at the very beginning of that two year birth window. Well researched by non-sports statisticians as well.
I've given up at this point and I've seen that, strangely, my kid seems to play better or "more free" when he plays UP. Just saying, if there's no advantage, nobody would do it because between private school tuition and another year of club dues, holding back a kid costs $30K ish.
