Ignorant general question about early verbal commits. Since nothing is in writing, I know coaches are able to change their mind but do they actually pull their offers from players? If so, I assume it comes with a solid excuse such as the player wasn't putting in the work they wanted, academic or off-field issues...etc. or do they ever do it because of injury or if the player isn't turning out to what they thought when they were 14?
Its rare, but it happens...a lot of times it deals with academics...not having the grades and the coach not wanting to call in favors. Long and short is that it is a verbal non-binding agreement. Coaches that back out on kids get a reputation that other coaches make sure kids know about
It is also a very fair question to ask the coach while he is recruiting you. "Coach what happens if I get injured between now and the time I come to you? Is your offer still going to be valid?". I know we asked that question when my daughter went through the process a few years ago.
I have to disagree with you on this one as I think it happens quite a bit more often than we realize. I have seen it happen to quite a few kids over the years and I am just 1 parent. It especially seems to happen when a new coach comes in and hasn't recruited the player. They tell the kid they can come but will never play or that the money is not there that they were promised. Most parents will just accept this quietly and go away, not knowing if there is any recourse. Look what happened at UNC two years ago with a top recruit who was dropped because the chance for a NT recruit became available once Stanford dropped her! It is a big and complicated web! I do have to say that I have not seen it occur as much over injuries, but it seems to be more about when a team can get someone they deem to be better. I have seen a lot of crushed dreams over this.
My understanding is that coaches make it clear to any verbal commit that grades are critical. In other words the commitment is contingent on the player achieving a specified GPA and graduating on schedule. If these things were not laid out with some precision, then angry parents would be all over these boards with the specifics of how they and their daughter were mis lead or cheated and there would be lawsuits. (I personally know of several high strung soccer-dads who would have relished the prospect of dragging a coach through the mud if he thought that his kid had been screwed over.) I suspect that many of the verbal commitment changes are due to grades, but we'll never know unless the details are released by the player or her family or the schools involved. I agree with you that appearances sometimes do look highly suspicious, but it is also important not to jump to conclusions.
FIRST CUT at 2017 recruiting status. I promised that I'd get a little glimpse out after at least 200 players had committed and we blew by that mark a few days ago. With only 204 players committed, it doesn't make sense to try to go very deep, so only the top 15 make it in this listing. On the other hand, most all of the blue chippers are accounted for as, of course, the coaches are frantically trying to sew up who they see as potential game changers--at least as they may be known at this time with 2.5 years more to develop or fade. As usual the rich seem to get out fast and corral the best known prospects. So it's not very challenging to guess who is in the top position. Yup, Stanford once again with 6 fine prospects. But right behind is....UCLA with three of the best. Then comes CAL who cleaned out the San Diego Surf cupboard and added a few more from California before looking north to Washington. Then we go to the east coast where Penn State is next followed by Duke. A fairly substantial quality jump takes us down to Tier 3 where a more nearly ordered list starts with Ohio State, Texas A&M, Rutgers, Arkansas, and UNC. The last of the present top 15 are Michigan, USC, Arizona State, South Carolina and Notre Dame. From this point forward in time this listing will be greatly influenced by who picks up the remaining known top players and other less known but good prospects who may develop in the next several years to rival the young bucks of today. While I don't see Stanford as being bumped out of the top tier (unless a few de-commits happen) at this stage of things even one excellent player added to the smaller classes of quality players could cause a big jump. Most likely for this are UCLA, Texas, TAMU, Rutgers, UNC, South Carolina , ND, Virginia, and Florida all of whom could significantly move up with a single excellent prospect or two. In short, it's still quite volatile at this early state. Two of the most interesting classes are Arkansas and Ohio State. The Razorbacks have the largest group of 2017 commits, and while my system does not necessarily reward large classes, in this case the quality of the talent is just enough to have the quantity help out and land in the middle of Tier 3. OSU is a similar position but with slightly better talent overall. In both cases, I suspect that that the scholarship money drawer may be a little empty and so these classes may remain the same while other schools move up around them even though they'll most probably stay in Tier 3. Likewise for CAL who with its huge cashe will remain near the top of Tier 2, but is not likely to move up to the top Tier of recruited classes. Again, for those of you who may be concerned, my system severely penalizes a class that does not have at least three recruits. Your favorite school may have two excellent recruits (Texas and Florida, for example) but until they add a third, they will remain low in my scoring. (Ya hafta average three players per year to get 11 players on the field!) Such schools will inevitably add a handful of more players before this is all over in the summer of 2017, so not to worry. (Mark at FSU always slides a few fabulous internationals on to his roster in the late spring or early summer before the season starts.) Remember, this is not hard science and is just for fun and you could likely do better! (And I always, even with embarrassment, appreciate errors that y'all spot. I correct 'em.) AND finally, a nod once again to cbg for his tireless wwork! Tier I 1 8.66 Stanford 2. 8.33 UCLA Tier II 3. 8.13 CAL 4. 8.08 Penn St. 5. 7.67 Duke Tier III 6. 7.11 Ohio St 7. 7.10 TAMU 8. 7.01 Rutgers 9. 6.78 Arkansas 10. 6.77 UNC 11. 6.67 Michigan 12. 6.33 USC 13. 6.03 AZ St 14. 6.00 S.Carolina 15. 5.67 Notre Dame
Indeed, Madison Haley no less. I somehow thought that Stanford might be finished, but I guess not. Scholarship money must not be an issue. Stanford is remarkably consistent in their recruiting over the years... and it's improving! Looking back, recall that in 2009 the Cardinal came into the national championship game undefeated and untied with a crew of stars (three of which are in the present full national team pool.) Jumping to 2012 the numbers on the field for Stanford were 10 Youth All Americans of the 17 with US Youth National Team experience. This fall (2015) there will be 14 Youth All Americans available to play and 19 players with USYNT experience. And then looking forward (assuming no additions to come) in 2017 there will be 12 All Americans available to play as part of 23 players with US YNT experience (and that's not counting foreign national teamers.) Getting stronger..... Is there any other D-I university with this kind of recruiting consistency over the last decade? Paul and his staff are doing a fantastic job at corralling the talent!
He gets incredible talent. We will see what is done with it. Virginia and FSU seem to do more with less. It seems that some of these YNT vets never pan out. I've been more impressed with the teams from his odd numbered years than his even numbered ones. The 2014 class that was ranked number one has one ridiculously good player and the rest didn't get much PT. The 2013 class has several outstanding players. It looks like that trend is continuing. The 2015 class should have 4-5 impact players. The 2016 class probably has 1 maybe 2 that are going to make an impact. The 2017 class looks like it will have 4-6 impact players. Overall I would agree that they have recruiting classes that have a consistently high number of players with YNT experience. It is curious that with so many #1 classes they haven't won more national championships. Their 2017 class is definitely tops. They will have their work cut out for them because UNC and UCLA seem to get better classes than them in the even years and FSU kills it with International players. To me it seems like we will be looking at the usual group of 6 teams contending as usual.
Money definitely isn't an issue for a lot of their recruits. I know of several players from 2015-2017 that are getting little or no money whatsoever. Their financial aid is such that if a family makes less than $120k a year tuition is free and if they make $60k or less everything is free. They also have a prorated scale up to $200k of household income. The only real issue is that athletic aid cannot be combined with need based grants at Stanford and they don't offer academic scholarships. Quite frankly I'm impressed that they do as well as they do recruiting because you should see the look on middle class ($100k-$200k household income) parents faces when they are told that it is going to be $21k a year with a 2/3 scholarship to attend! Still a good deal for the education that you get but for those that have state school money saved up it is a huge situation.
UNC just nabbed another u-17 National Team player. Dorrance is going to have a lot of insanely talented girls riding the bench. They're loaded for years to come.
Stanford sells a lot on the "Admissions Pop...we'll get you in but we don't have athletic scholarship money" That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if there are some back room financial aid deals. Also keep in mind that Paul recruits knowing there are some kids that wont make grades for admission or will have second thoughts about whether they will be getting any PT with all of those YNT players. (this has happened multiple times in the past few years). I think the surprise to me is that the #1 and #2 rated Keepers for 2016 are both committed to Stanford along with a Youth International in the class of 2015 (and Jane Campbell is only going to be a junior)
I agree. I witnessed a junior keeper last year having a "talk" with one of the assistants because when the starting keeper went down in the game we were watching the incredibly talented Ms. Campbell was inserted in the lineup and played the rest of the game (a draw against Portland). Not a problem if the kid is a beast but for some of the more questionable and fringe YNT players then having sooo much talent on one roster could be an issue.
A couple of possible explanations for Virginia and FSU seem to do more with less. 1. Krikorian and Swanson may be better at talent identification. All these invites to national team camps start when they are young. With girls, sometimes they peak early, while others develop late. The late developers become better players, but aren't in "the system" of the various national teams. 2. Player development. Maybe, K and S are just better at talent development and matching players to the system, or the system to the players. 3. As has been pointed out, K gets a few studs from overseas. It's fine to get a few studs from overseas, but it's another things to get them to buy in to "how FSU does things" with such a hodge podge of players from so many backgrounds. 4. In soccer you can only play 11 at a time. If a coach gets 2 or 3 studs per year that pan out, and supplements that with good quality team mates that are just a notch below, he/she can win at a very high level. I must admit, I am baffled at the accomplishments of Stanford, UCLA and Duke, given the apparent plethora of 'uber talent' they collect every year. I don't include UNC in that, b/c their on-field results suggests they get the results.
You are baffled that Stanford only made it to the Final Four 6 times in the last 7 years? Obviously you don't really care about the quality/style of play. Maybe UCLA didn't win last year but I enjoyed watching them play over any other teams last year. I would agree that Duke has been underperforming for whatever reason, but at least they are not just kicking the ball, pressing, and man-marking everywhere like that one school in Carolina. I am certain you don't care about that though because "they get the results". With that said, it isn't my business to tell people what to like. Also, who said FSU and Virginia have "less" than other schools? Topdrawer??? If you're ranking these schools/players based on TD then I wish you the best. I would argue that FSU has been the most balanced and talented team in the past few years. So for anyone to say they have "less" just doesn't know much in my opinion.
It is true that various recruiting rankings are not fool proof. It is also hard to quantify just how much FSU's internationals counters the 'uber talented domestic recruits' that Stanford gets. Stanford takes advantage of their built-in advantages. FSU compensates by going for more internationals. It is hard to say Stanford has underachieved with going to CC 6 of 7 years. I reckon I expected them to hoist a couple more cups given the recruiting prowess. They may add another this coming year. I don't really know who, if anyone, is a prohibitive favorite this coming year. I won't have an opinion of FSU's chances until the fall when we find out what internationals and transfers Mark has added. Heck some may think FSU has underachieved considering the number of CC trips Mark has taken. Good luck to Stanford, UVA, UNC, UCLA and the other stud teams (sans UF. I am a Seminole fan and must draw a line somewhere) .
An update on the 2017 recruiting class... It is becoming clear that this class will not be a "strong" class. Compared to the 2016 class and the 2018's the numbers of high-accolade players is way down. (This happens cyclically due to the cycles of the U17 and U20 world cup tournaments.) At this point, the usual suspects are at the top of the heap. Stanford has the biggest haul of national team players verbally committed. (Yes, the pipeline to Palo Alto is still in good shape.) And Penn State is back in their accustomed position near the top. UCLA is third, and UNC 4th. Michigan joins the top 5 this year with an excellent class. But this all will shift around over the next 18 months. Virginia, for instance stands at 8th, but has the foundation for a stellar class if the Hoos add a few more strong players. Also, in 6 months from now, look to see schools like FSU, BC, Rutgers, and Florida add some strong players and move up to be more visible in the rankings. Of special note is Notre Dame. As I have said several times, 2017 is the nadir of their recruiting due to the timing of the change in coaches several years ago interfering with the long lead time recruiting common at present. Being 25th is not where the Irish like to be. 2018 will be Romagnolo's first class truly of her own making and as you will soon see that things are looking brighter. There are clogs at a few spots which is normal for these early preliminary rankings. (See ties at #16 and #20.) These are due to the small numbers of recruits leading to duplicated arithmetic. When more recruits are added to classes, this phenomenon decreases. Also, unlike the current class, at this stage for future classes, I do not dive into the weeds and spend time investigating each player in detail to get a more nuanced view of their strengths... I simply take the low hanging fruit of easily found accolades... which also tends to equalize players into the clogs. In any case it's all just for fun and fan interest! Top 25 2017 Recruiting class as of 2/22/16 (736 known verbal commitments) Tier I 1. 10.30 Stanford Tier II 2. 9.03 Penn State 3. 8.84 UCLA 4. 8.58 UNC 5. 8.25 Michigan 6. 8.03 Duke 7. 8.00 Virginia 8. 7.97 California Tier III 9. 7.60 Santa Clara 10. 7.53 Ohio State & USC 12. 7.30 TAMU 13. 7.17 Clemson & Tennessee 15. 6.77 Syracuse 16. 6.67 Arkansas, Virginia Tech, & Yale 19. 6.43 South Carolina 20. 6.33 Louisville, Texas, Texas Tech, & Wake Forest 24. 5.72 Washington State 25. 5.69 Notre Dame
Thanks for the work, SoccerHunter! Like football, the usual suspects are loading up every year. There has got to be a lot of 'waiting your turn' for even very talented younger players at Stanford, UCLA, UNC, given the large number of very talented prospects who've been on the teams and in the systems for one to three years already. Has to be a bit frustrating for many, even if the coach is trying to get a highish number of players in games.
It's been ten months and so I'll get out the latest recruiting picture for the 2017 Class. The usual suspects are at or near the top, but not without a bit of shuffling. The reason is that I have transferred the 2016 players that decided to play for the U20s and not attend college for the fall semester from the 2016 class to the 2017 class. This involves 5 players and 4 schools: Mallory Pugh and Marley Canales from UCLA, Taylor Otto from UNC, Brooke Heinsohn from Duke, and Savannah DeMelo from USC. The result was that these schools got a big boost to each of their class rankings. For example, UCLA got a huge boost from a mediocre class to the top of the heap, displacing Stanford which would otherwise have had the top spot for 4 years running. UNC, USC and Duke also got significant boosts into the second tier by delaying their top recruits from 2016 until 2017. The other interesting feature of this class is that it falls off sharply in quality such that I am not able to yet post a class of 50 because the scores near the bottom of that range as based on almost no data. What this means is that the final posting in next August will finally have enough data to produce a meaningful class ranking. But I will have to really dig for that data, I'm afraid. The trend is clear and the flood gates of foreign players are opening up for US colleges. The trouble for me is that it is hard to find meaningful data about them. The schools they attend may or may not publish their playing histories. Also, for what ever reason the American players in this class seem to have less of their accolades posted which will mean more research. So for now treat this list of a tentative top 40 as a trial run. There will be a lot of changes between now and next August in the bottom 25 of the list of 50. The top three tiers should be pretty stable with the exception of surprise foreign players showing up in August (eg. FSU, if all goes according to form, will corral several outstanding internationals and shoot up to Tier II, and other aspiring schools will try to get into this game too.) Cheers! Class Strength of 2017 D-I Soccer Recruits Tier I 10.73 UCLA 10.40 Stanford Tier II 9.26 UNC 9.07 Penn State 8.85 Michigan 8.68 Duke 8.63 USC 8.28 California 8.17 Virginia 8.10 Santa Clara Tier III 7.65 Tennessee 7.63 Ohio State 7.47 Texas A&M 7.17 Clemson, Texas 7.10 Arkansas 7.00 Syracuse 8.83 Notre Dame 6.82 Texas Tech 6.67 BYU, Colorado 6.53 South Carolina 6.50 Florida State, Pepperdine Tier IV 6.33 Auburn 6.20 Georgia 6.17 Alabama, Rutgers 6.15 Georgetowm 6.10 Washington State 5.67 Butler, LSU, Northwestern, UC Irvine, Washington
Whoops. Obvious typo on the above post with Notre Dame: should be 6.83. BTW, it will be interesting to see if Romagnolo will be able to add significantly to this class. This class (2017) is the last of the classes that was not fully in her control coming in. (With early recruiting being so far out, her first "fully her own" class will be the 2018s, which is a strong class for her.)
Colorado looks like they will be adding Martine Puketapu from suburban Auckland, NZ. She has been on the U-20 national team, but is now getting call-ups to the full national team. Apparently she'll be in Boulder for the spring semester.
Where does Radcliffe get the money to offer so many scholarships each year? I am assuming that most of his recruits are not paying their own way. I know that he only has 14 full scholarships to work with just like all of the others, but it seems like he is playing with 20!
A lot of the private schools have gobs of need based money. Vanderbilt I know for sure. How do you think Vanderbilt's baseball team is so good? Those schools are recruiting with 30 scholarships in many instances.