"Early" Commitments, Decommitments

Referring to Ms. Andrews, maybe she learned more about Boston College's level of support for women's soccer and decided she wanted to go elsewhere. Last year, notwithstanding their having a very good team, they averaged 600 fans at home games which ranked them at #64 in attendance. Not very good. Notre Dame was #8 at 1,570. This year, we are a month before the season begins and BC has not yet posted the women's soccer schedule on their website (and are one of only 14 teams not to have posted their schedule yet.) As I recall, this happened last year too. These things may be an indication that the school itself (I'm not referring to the coaching staff) doesn't care about women's soccer. Or, they may at least give the appearance that the school doesn't care.

Perhaps between giving an oral commitment and reaching the time to give a written commitment, some of these young women and their families take another look and decide the school they gave the oral commitment to isn't really the kind of program they want.

 

Who cares? As stated before, you have to do what is right for your player. A teenager is at a huge disadvantage against an experienced adult college coach. Not to say you have to go on a sleepover with the player, but when it comes to determining the right situation the parent has to do what it takes to get enough information. No question should go unasked or unanswered. If the coach can't handle this, then move on. Fast. Once the honeymoon is over communication with the coach isn't going to improve. Recruiting is really the parent's only chance to make a difference. Don't let it go to waste.

 

I think this is an excellent post. I would like to hear a little more specifics about what you did to contact coaches and get your player seen.

 

Hi SCUFANTASTIC. Rather than put a long description here on the forum, it's probably easiest to refer you to a series of posts I made on a Northern California youth soccer forum a few months ago. If you visit http://www.norcalsoccer.com/ICT/index.php?threadid=3184 you'll see a series of 11 posts that talk about our overall strategy.

I'd definitely be interested in any response you might have. Ultimately, I plan on putting those tips (along with other similar information) on a free website - sort of as a way of giving back to the youth soccer community. A lot of what we did was the result of the information we researched on the web, so it only seems right to try and help other families - at least with the perspective of one family.

Thanks!

 

WOW! That is a link to a very detailed set of posts describing the process. Great job on posting all of that and on being so thorough and organized in your approach to recruiting. No wonder your daughter got into her dream school.

Two quibbles with your approach. One, I would probably have changed club teams. I agree that bouncing around is bad, but so is frustration and playing on a better team may have helped your daughter's development. I am with you on honoring commitments, but typically the commitments are only for a year and at some point in time I would have encouraged the kid to commit differently. However, you do describe the club as being very helpful in the recruiting process and not every club/coach is, so you may have made the right choice.

I would have also probably been more involved in questioning the coaches about how things were. I think parents have more experience in evaluating answers, whereas teenagers tend to take people more at their word.

But I think your series of posts you linked to are an excellent resource for anyone who has to go through the process. It sounds like it really worked out for you and your daughter. Congratulations.

 

Thanks for the kind words.

Thank you as well for the feedback. I always enjoy hearing others' perspective on the process. We know what worked for us, but that doesn't mean it will work for every family. That's why it's always interesting to me to hear what others have to say and to learn about their experiences with the process.

A couple of things that probably weren't entirely evident in that set of posts:

1) We did ask her every year if she a) wanted to keep playing soccer; and, b) wanted to keep playing for her club (or switch clubs). Every year, she said she wanted to keep playing and wanted to keep playing for her club. So you're right - technically, the commitments are only for one year. But I think there is still value in loyalty - in not giving up when things become difficult and frustrating but working to make things better.

I also think there is a certain advantage for a keeper to be on a team that is not the top team in the area. One of the teams that recruited her last season (and for several seasons before) has historically been extremely successful. But she might not have had a shot on goal for several games in a row, which wouldn't have helped her development. By staying with her current team - which is probably top 10-15 in the state for her age group - she is going up against strong competition, but also getting a fair number of shots, having to learn when to come out and when to stay back, learning to persuade (sometimes gently, sometimes forcefully) her defenders to position themselves per her directions, etc., etc.

One of her GK coaches, a former U23 men's national team keeper, has told us that he had a very similar experience with his club team growing up.

2) Her club team has a very close relationship with her dream school. The goalkeeper coach for the club (who has also been one of our daughter's private GK coaches for about 7 years) is a former men's keeper at her dream school. Her team coach two years ago was a former player and assistant coach at her dream school. And the club in general has a great relationship with the school. All of that was also an important consideration for us and played a part in our overall strategy.

Thanks again.

 

If the "direction this is going" is going older - that is good. I seem to be in the minority blaming the parents MORE than the coaches. You are the adults. Stop giving your 9th/10th grader the choice and tell them to wait.

 

Parents cede more control of the process to coaches than they should. Another way to say it: Parents have more control of the process than they realize.

 

Sure you can wait but then the money goes away at least at the big schools. The smaller D 1 and D2 schools wait until later in your Junior year. For this very reason there where several kids that just waited that have the talent to play at a BCS school.

We waited and were still talking to a couple BCS schools and they wanted to know why we waited. She opted for a smaller D1 with a lot more money and as guaranteed as you can get to playing as a freshman over the big school with little money and no guarantee of playing time.

 

So how and when do you propose the parent taking control of the process? When does the parent get involved, and what are the issues the parent has control over?

Thanks.

 

I think that this is something that adults care much more about than the kids. Of all the families that I was talking with on our club teams, I never heard anything like this as a consideration. The thing that matters to some players, however, is a chance to win, whether that be a conference, a chance at the tournament or a trip to the college cup. I think it's possible that she could reason that Notre Dame is a better shot at a national championship.

There is blame both ways, but you are possibly minimizing the power of the coaches and their scholarships. This is not the reality of what takes place between families and coaches. If you decide to wait until the junior year to begin talking, the reality is that some schools will have made significant progess with other players at your daughter's position, and a door could be closed. In fact, a few coaches had players listed for each position that they were interested in/and showed interest in the school. And so, they made it known that they were looking for a couple of players in a certain position and they had six players of interst, for example. When the two positions were taken, there would be little or no money available. A number of parents felt great pressure in such circumstances, as they realized that coaches are not foolish enough to wait for one player, but look for a number of players that could work in that position (unless you are Mr. Andrews )

 

A parent knows what a 14 year old will want when she is 18 - or 22 better than the 14 year old.

So, I'd say, know what your kid can do and scope out the qualified/vs non qualified schools early. If the grade/scores are not there - simple - take the best offer. You can get a pretty good idea how full the roster is and if your kids position is at risk or not. The less money you need the more power you have. I just don't see that any 14 year old needs to commit.

 

Good points here. Please note, as one of the earlier commentators mentioned...this is a business-teh coaches livlihoods depend on their success. That being said, all the "guarantees and handshakes" that happen at the recruiting meetings are not always honored once school begins. Money situations change-these are one year deals, remember....playing time is absolutely not guaranteed...coach reputation not always valid. Someone commented about a high profile player transferring in to a school, only to be followed by a transfer out at the same institution. I would caution all parents to do their due diligence and really look at the historical roster movement at your school of choice. The should give you a much more clear reference as to how much the coaches honor their commitments. We were quite surprised to see the turnover rate at my daughter's first choice...not at all lining up with the coache's comment of one to two players a year movement-more like 40 to 50% turnover within 1 to 2 years. This is a business and 15 year old girls are not expecting the reality this brings with it.

 

Everybody has to do what is right for themselves. But I will say, nobody is happy if they don't play.

Oh, that won't be me. I will win a starting spot.

Yeah, sure. While on the one hand I encourage people to strive to be the best they can be, on the other hand it is hard to be the best you can be if you don't get on the field. Speed to me is one big divider, if you don't have it you might want to think about smaller D1 or even lower division.

Oh, but if I don't go high level D1 people will look down on me.

Who cares? 1st of all, everybody is too busy thinking about their own selves to devote much time to thinking about you. Secondly, in the end its all about the player and her teammates, and it is MUCH easier for the player to think more highly of themselves if they made a meaningful contribution to the team. 4 years later, when you think about the soccer aspect of your college education, it will only matter that you were on the team and made some great friendships and memories. What level you played at will be WAY secondary. For you and everybody you know in soccer.

 

Great post!!!!!!!!! speed is a big divider because it is the easiest way to get good fast for coach and it is easier to find speed than quality technical player.

Just as in life getting a chance is often the hardest part kids get reputations and are recruited on reputations if your name is not known it will be hard to get recruited getting on the field over said highly recruited player is not easy either . Schools like Florida like to hedge their bets they will bring in seven forwards with reputations and hope one or two stick. Now the trend is to bring in Foreign (semi-amateur) players to compete for those spots. IT is not getting any easier.

Lets take a look at big conference schools yeah you may play in the ACC but never get a chacne to play in the tournament. You play in a smaller conference with a good coach that can recruit well and you have a good chance to make the tournament.

 

interesting to see the transfers occurring between seasons- and to correlate these to the new the classes coming in ? or transfers coming in.
2 players have left St Marys ? change of coach ?
2 players from Santa Clara ? Marlborough shuffle ? is this a case of better talent basically pushing out existing players?
2 players leave from Nebraska- what going on there?
2 Players from North Carolina out- is this a sign of poor recruitment or needing room for the bumper class and its shuffle effect ?
A star player from Notre Dame off to Colorado ?did this make room for others - big time starter and rookie of the year player off to a lesser program?
Another player out of UCLA... big classes coming in , need the money off you go ?
So top programs - kids switching out and sometimes in- the question remains
- is this a sign of recruitment that was inappropriate for the kid
- was it an early commit
- do these things just happen
- or are some of these kids encouraged to leave as they aren't going to fit the coaches future agenda and they are taking money away from hotter prospects.

 

My daughter has enrolled as a Freshman to play soccer this year at an ACC school. We were late to the recruiting game for some reasons outside of our control and others in our control. I think that the NCAA has a much bigger role to play. I heard coaches and parents complaining about the process and frustrated by the rules about communication. We were lucky because our daughter wanted to leave California and I happen to have a friend who coaches in the PAC12 who gave me great advice when I ran down her list of schools with him. He gave me comments like, "Colorado has to look in state." "Wake Forest is done." Other coaches we finally got in touch with were also very honest about how our daughter might fit in with their school. I got feedback like, "Yes, she definitely belongs at a top 40 team., but our money is spoken for." I mean how are we supposed to know how they stack up against the entire COUNTRY for crying out loud? The "NO"s were as helpful as the "Yes"s. Our club coach was just not as helpful as I thought he would be.

I believe Basketball has "viewing periods". It seems that if soccer instituted the limits on tournaments only during "viewing periods" and disallowed anyone younger than 16 from participating, that might help. However, I would rather have the chance to openly talk to coaches and get their feedback instead of this you can call me, but I can't call you game. What if there were a 15's viewing period and the kids were allowed to talk to the coaches, but no verbal commitments were allowed? I don't know, but I think it's a mess and parents of a recruit aren't going to be the ones to change things.

 

That

I agree with you.
We were so late because we were kept that way by a club that liked to place kids themselves. Once we found we were late we took it on ourselves. At one time I was thinking we should have her sit out a year and try as a 2013 - anyway things worked great - except for the pocket book part. Die broke - right?

 

Soccer has "viewing periods" they are called Surf Cup, WAGS etc. How do you limit who can attend when the tournaments are not set up by the NCAA? Can you tell the coach that he can watch a U16 game but no sneaking peeks at the U15's playing on the field behind?

The limits on communication are established to try to limit the early recruiting. Obviously not working. But more limits just leads to more clandestine activities in my opinion. I am probably for fewer limits rather than more. It is up to the parents, but as others have posted if you wait too long the opportunities become limited.

One benefit of early recruiting is that parents have more influence over a 14-year-old than they do over 16/17-year-olds. If the premise is that 16/17-year-olds can make much better decisions than they would have as 14-year-olds, I think that is debatable. A little bit better, sure, but the "I want to go where my friends are going" argument is very persuasive to many teenagers. Or with soccer players, "I want to go where the coach really likes me."

 

This is an important fact that many parents fail to assess properly. Norcalkeeperdad talked about how helpful the club coach and director were in the college search. That is a tremendous asset. Is the club coach helping you or hurting you? Placing limits on the player's recruiting process, such as saying no to odp or guest playing or other opportunities to be seen are all things club coaches do to try to keep control of where their players go. Don't stand for it. Control your own process.

 

Our experience was very similar. In fact, most families on our team took matters into their own hands. We had a little help from the club, and occassionally some good advice, but we were disappointed by the lack of follow-through by our director, and his propensity to keep families in the dark. And so, we became unconcerned about etiquette and did things ourselves.

Our daughter was also faced with situations in which the club/team was disappointed because of her involvement in other activities. I've seen some clubs which create a platform for stronger players (play them up, practice with boys, etc) or others which want to appease all of the families and can retard development.

 

One thing about early recruiting is that it gets your child thinking about colleges and how important grades and planning are. And it may be the best thing for the parent who is trying to control where their child goes to school. But most of the teens I have watched go through the college application/acceptance process chose much different schools than they would have at age 14/15. I don't think it is good for personal development for a teen to know where they are going to college at age 14. It completely changes the high school experience for them. I had friends all of my DD
s Senior year saying, "your so lucky you don't have to go through this..." But we did go through it, just much earlier and when it really wasn't developmentally appropriate. Whatever can be done to allow for good development for the student, needs to be implemented and followed.

As to the viewing periods comment above, I don't know how to embed yet, Surf, WAGS, etc could absolutely schedule so that only the u-17's were there. Just think, they could invite a LOT more clubs if they were only doing one age group. Then it would be about performance, not whether or not your club gets invited. Surf cup would still be a great tournament for the younger teams without college coaches there. Maybe the clubs would actually still develop players past U-14 instead of just churning around the tournament circuit. While I"m at it, let's change the age groups to grade based, so all the kids are in the same grade. Much easier for recruiting...

 

Perhaps it's slightly off-topic, but as a high school coach of many years, the thing I find most inappropriate is that starting before high school, kids are thinking that if they do really well in their sport they will get a college scholarship. They no longer are playing simply for the love of the sport, but rather to get a scholarship. And, this is something I think a lot of parents encourage. It's sad.

PS - Don't hope too much for a shift to a grade-based rather than age-based club system. Studies have been done and it results in kids at the "old" end for their grades getting preferential treatment from coaches when they are young and thus better learning opportunities. The study results are quite striking.

 

Age isn't any better. The u17 pool currently has 28 kids born in the first half of the year and 9 kids born in the second six months.

Interestingly, by the time it gets to the National Team Pool the ratio is 14:14.

I understand that in Canada they now divide younger kids by which half of the year they were born in. They have doubled their player pool. it seems more younger kids dropped out.



One of the studies CPT is talking about is here:
http://psychology.msu.edu/pers_hambric3/PSY493 Spring 2012/Week 2 - Barnsley et al. (1988).pdf