CPT states the past quite clearly. The issue is the future. What's going to happen in Fall 2016 is unknown to me. Maybe it'll be the same as the past. Maybe it won't.
There has always been an opportunity to redshirt for international play, but if you use it, you still have to maintain your progress toward degree requirements, i.e. Go to classes while you redshirt. It can otherwise affect the University's APR and your academic eligibility. Your five year clock still runs. If you can manage it with online courses or whatever methods are used during a soccer season, you need not take the redshirt. With the u20's being during soccer season, you won't get near a full season in with your college. What Full National team players can instead use is the National Team Exception, which is a one-time waiver of the five year clock for up to one year and has no requirement to maintain your progress toward degree. You just get the time off. In Soccer, this can be used for training, tryouts and play for the national teams in World Cups, Olympics, Pan Am games, and the World University Games ( Universiade). You can use it for less than a year, but still only use it once. (The USA generally doesn't send the full team to the Pan Am games or Universiade) The waiver of the 5 year rule requires an NCAA committee vote. I've never heard of one being refused, but I suppose it's possible. until 2011, it was possible to use this for youth competition, specifically u20's but a rule change that year eliminated that possibility. Here's the statute. (14.2.1.4 also has five year rule provisions)
Quick Note. As previously planned, I will get a full update on the 2016 class next week (probably Friday) after NLI opening day.
Some others in 2016 that might make an impact. Only saw a few... add others if you know of some. Seen or Heard of: Eden Kawabe, Defender, from Hawaii Surf going to UNC looked good. Kylee Kim , FWD, from Hawaii Surf going to Sac State looked good. Will do very well in that conference. Alisha Maners , Defender, from Hawaii Surf the big center back who is going to Rhode Island is very athletic. Yaritza Arista, MF, San Jose State . JC Transfer and is very good. Oliva Torres the Mustang ECNL forward going to Nevada will have an impact on that team. Anna Parker, DEF from North West Nationals. Going to Saint Mary's 5'11" center back who can move. Jaylen Crim, FWD from Sac United. Going to Saint Mary's Tia Furtua FWD from Hawaii Surf going to UH Manoa. Best player in Hawaii in 2016 according to the web. Tea Carillo, Def from San Diego Albion Soccer Club going to Cal Poly SLO. Long Throw in. Club team was pretty good. Throw in was a mile long. Olivia Hernandez, FWD going to Arizona State Banat Soccer Club Shaelan Murison, FWD going to UCSB from MVLA. Kailana Ka'eo from Hawaii Surf. MF. Going to Saint Mary's Leah Carillo, Defender, from Scottsdale Blackhawks in AZ going to Arizona State. The GotSoccer #1 team, Beach FC, in Cal South had kids going to: North Dakota, Cal Poly SLO, Fullerton and Long Beach State. Assume they will have impact.
Pretty random post with some random names/schools but thanks I am curious if there were many last minute shenanigans. I have heard rumors of 1 high profile player that didn't sign with Stanford but don't know where she landed Any other news on NLI day that turned heads?
I'm not one to out a kid....when Stanford releases its class basic investigative work will make it fairly obvious
Are you all referring to the Stanford recruit that changed her commitment back in November/December or is this someone else?
Every year, at least one or two gets denied admission at Stanford. last year it was two, and it looks like (at least) two again this year.
It's been clear since the time this recruit committed that she wasn't going to get admitted. It sucks that they didn't tell her sooner or do like they did for another bigtime 2017 recruit that they simply told she wouldn't get admitted. The family should have been more realistic. They knew their player's academic record.
DING DING DING...pretty sure we speak of the same kid...what I didn't get was they had to know and she still committed despite an overload of talent and another recruit in her position
I don't know when this girl committed, but I assume that if Stanford thinks a kid is going to have a hard time getting in, the coaches would be open and honest about that from the get-go and, in fairness to the kid, stop recruiting her--tell her to look elsewhere. It's not like Stanford has a shortage of prospect options. I suppose if a kid is borderline, then you have to go through the process --but seems like the drama should usually be avoidable given that both the kid and the school have plenty of other options.
Assuming Stanford did not sign Kat Hess from So Cal Blues. National pool goalkeeper from Newport Beach. So if this happens every year to 1-2 kids at Stanford why doesn't their coaching staff get called out more for this? If a kid is not going to get in the staff can make an academic read early based on grades and SATs instead of waiting until February of senior year. If I was a college coach that was actively recruiting a kid and then lose her to a verbal commitment to Stanford, why not keep recruiting that kid? Knowing that there is a decent chance that Stanford won't get that kid in. Stanford will still get their share of top caliber kids and they have another national pool goalkeeper in this class any way.
Stanford does inform potential recruits and their parents the minimum academic admissions requirements. The problem is her parents already knew their daughter had poor grades. They should have never had her commit to Stanford in the first place.
So let's just say you commit to Stanford in your Sophomore year, and you struggle academically in your late Junior, or early Senior year, and you get denied, and the coaches should be held accountable? I know a kid that went through the process, and as far as I know, they make it very clear of what is expected of them, and it's not just your GPA or Test scores that get you in there. If it's still true, their admissions office accepts or deny these kids between September and March of their senior year. So those that are clearly aren't getting in like the one they had in October, will have more time to look elsewhere. It is tough though, I must say, if you get denied this close to the signing date. Which probably means you were extremely close to getting in but you didn't. That is very hard for the kid and her family.
Given how aggressively Stanford over-recruits at multiple positions they are already stacked at (Like UNC, I think they do it both to keep a deep bench and keep talented players from going to other schools) I find it hard to agree with those trying to shame or place blame on a player that commits and is, apparently at the last minute, "not accepted." I'm calling shenanigans and bad faith on the whole deal based on what I've seen and experienced.
Hypothetically speaking, if the college coach already knows about the poor GPA. Informs the family, this is the minimum GPA and SAT/ACT score to gain admissions. If you can hit the marks I will have a roster spot for you. Player and parents then verbally commit to the said school, knowing what is required and player fails to meet the minimum requirements. How can that be the coaches fault? It's probably a blessing in disguise. If any player is struggling academically in HS (below 3.5 GPA). It's safe to say, they will drown academically at Stanford whole playing on the womens soccer team.
Because they say that to 10 kids knowing only 7 will make the mark and 3 will get crushed. They hedge their bets and make sure they have the quality they need since the worst thing for them is they may end up with a bigger roster of great players then they might have expected. On the flip side, several kids don't make it and have to go to Plan B or C and their Stanford dream is over. This is one of the consequences of early recruiting and at selective schools and I've commented many times here the process needs reform fast. Clearly, many of these kids are not being promised any or much money so it's low risk for the coaches. This happens at Army and Navy and the Ivies all the time, we just don't talk about it as much since they aren't top-10 teams after well-known YNT players and don't have folks like us scrutinizing their recruiting classes. I know a Stanford kid who committed early and knew she had to kick ass in school and on the SAT to get admitted and it was a powerful source of motivation for her. She's a prominent player there now. Sometimes it works out for the kid quite nicely. It's just not fun to talk about success stories on an anonymous forum like this so feel free to ignore this last paragraph.
From TopDrawerSoccer. Anxious to see Soccer hunter's rankings as I like his systematic formula. Top 20 Girls Recruiting Class Rankings: February update 1. UCLA 2. Virginia 3. North Carolina 4. Duke 5. Boston College 6. Stanford 7. USC 8. Florida State 9. Kentucky 10. South Carolina* 11. Santa Clara 12. Rutgers 13. Clemson 14. Utah 15. Texas 16. Vanderbilt 17. Miami 18. Syracuse 19. Penn State 20. Tennessee
What is aggressively over-recruiting? I just looked at both Stanford and UNC rosters from this past season, and UNC has 32(4 GKs) players, and Stanford has 22(4 GKs)total. If Stanford is trying to keep players from going elsewhere, they are not doing a very good job. Do you really think they are turning players away when they only have 18 field players? I find that one harder to believe.
OK, I found the details here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I It's actually 14.0 for NCAA D1 Women's Soccer, which offers "Equivalancy" scholarships. The NCAA has limits on the total financial aid each Division I member may award in each sport that the school sponsors. It divides sports that are sponsored into two types for purposes of scholarship limitations: "Head-count" sports, in which the NCAA limits the total number of individuals that can receive athletic scholarships, but allows each player to receive up to a full scholarship. "Equivalency" sports, in which the NCAA limits the total financial aid that a school can offer in a given sport to the equivalent of a set number of full scholarships. Roster limitations may or may not apply, depending on the sport. The term "counter" is also key to this concept. The NCAA defines a "counter" as "an individual who is receiving institutional financial aid that is countable against the aid limitations in a sport."[10] http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D116.pdf