This list is essentially no different than than Top Drawer's listings, except less openly nuanced. In order to build a national list, there is no choice but to go the usual available accolades: AA listings, YNT rosters, pools, & camps, ODP rosters & camps, ECNL, and various showcases. After that it's talking with whatever coaches one can find (of course these are "elite" coaches) and trying to size up the high school scene. That they would praise the same players is not surprising. What you get is essentially the same top players by virtue of the sources, but while the general picture is the same, the order is shuffled somewhat. The only real difference between lists is where to place the outliers in the order. For instance, how do you rank a high school player who has had a outstanding season (but did not particularly distinguish herself on her club team?) Assuming, however, that the names who regularly appear in the accolades do, in fact, represent the best soccer talent, we see the usual results. Looking at this list's top 50, we see that Stanford and UCLA are cleaning up. They each have 5 top-50 players committed for 2013. Stanford and UCLA have become the top recruit destinations in recent years. Next in line on this list are Southern Cal and Boston College with three top 50 players. Then come 9 schools with 2 top-50s each. (Santa Clara, Notre Dame, UNC, Florida State, Maryland, Wisconsin, Michigan, Oklahoma State, and Clemson.) Yes, Clemson by virtue of one of its recruits (Gabby Byorth) being elevated to #18 by ECNL, whereas she is approximately at #135 if one goes to Top Drawer. Go figure.) These lists do draw attention, which is why ESPN puts one out....
I would suggest the ESPN list might be better because it isn't put together until their junior year after the girls have had a bit more time to develop as players. The TDS list comes out much earlier and there is very little movement up or down the list. So if you get on the radar early as a 13 or 14 year old you have an advantage with the TDS rating.
Re: EPSN HS Top 150 for 2012 Is there a similar list for ESPNHS Class of 2012? Searching the ESPN website only provided prospect lists for a few individual states.
Re: EPSN HS Top 150 for 2012 I think there's supposed to be, but the link for it wasn't active yet. It was on the front page of the Girl's Soccer page on the right hand side. You could see the top ten players for 2012 and 2013, but when you looked at the 2012 list, the link to see the entire Top 150 list wasn't there.
I know a girl on the list does not even play soccer anymore. If you are judging the strength of your recruiting class based on lists like these I can understand teams with "great" recruiting classes failing miserably.
Re: ESPN HS Top 150 for 2013 They look pretty similar, hard to say which is better. Biggest gap is ESPN has Amack #2 while TopDrawer's Top 100 doesn't even have her in the Top 40. Also, nitpicking, but after seeing Boyles play many time, it's pretty hard seeing her NOT #1 IMO.
Re: ESPN HS Top 150 for 2013 It'd be neat to see how schools were ranked, based on their recruiting classes, on average over the last four cycles (2008s, 2009s, 2010s and 2011s) and then compare that to the current RPI. Might tell us about some of these recruit rankings.
i guess 2 undefeated regular seasons(with a third likely) and 3 final fours with another likely,( we hope), is not enough for you to give the program the credit it deserves? it's only about the national title?
Hold on, cardinalfan. I wasn't talking about any specific program at all. Just would like to see the rundown and how it correlates. Through the top 40-50 programs, it would be interesting.
I don't think cardinalfan was referring to you. The poster was referring to NilamCA's comment about UCLA and Stanford not winning any national championships.
I think you're right. That's why it's always helpful to quote the person you're responding to. Helps eliminate confusion.
Re: ESPN HS Top 150 for 2013 This is exactly what I am planning on doing, except I am going to do it with my own data which I know is internally consistent based on being as rigorous as I can be with regard to methodology for player rankings. I only started with 2009 when Brian came out with his amazing resource, so I'll have to wait for another year. (On the other hand I've been itching to do it anyway starting with 2008 data from Soccer Buzz.)
As I have said several times before, I think that the Stanford women's program deserves great credit for its record in recent years. Most recently I was sad to see some frustrated Cardinal fans starting to beat up on Ratcliffe after last year's NCAA final. 99.9% of fans would be thrilled with such a record of success!
you would have to have been closely involved all year to understand the questioning about coaching in the championship game. certainly thrilled to not lose any games for so long, but the question raised was whether the pursuit of the undefeated season overshadowed the development of the entire team and made it unprepared for the finals 3 years in a row. no meaningful use of subs or change of strategy even when team looked to be playing badly and could have used something different . just left it the same. the team could definitely not have been said to have played well in any of its 3 losses in the final 4. why? that was the reason for questioning PR. in terms of winning games for several years he has no equal. hope this is the year to get the big one .