#2 Recruit talks commitment, U17 World Cup loss Is every national team player heading to UCLA?? Jeeeez
You're right. Last year, with a starting lineup full of freshman, we ONLY ranked 7th in the nation and were only a few minutes away from reaching the semi-finals. Underachieving.
Relax. You did well last year. What about the previous 5? UCLA, with the recruiting classes they consistently have, is absolutely an underachiever in recent history.
Probably depends on what you call a successful season. If the goal of the program is to help get its players to the pros, they're doing a very good job.
Is that the talent level of the player coming into UCLA or what UCLA does with the player? If you are constantly getting U17 internationals and doing nothing with them that doesn't mean the program is producing professionals, it means the talent level of the incoming players is already high.
If you're judging player development by the caliber of incoming players, then most programs that crank out a lot of pros would be held to a similar standard of already having pro potential when they got to campus. Yes, some programs develop talent better than others for pro soccer. But for the most part, the key is the caliber of the kids' talent when they get to college. Of course, there are exceptions, but it's not like players show up on campus with no shot at the pros and after 2-3 years at Akron/UCLA/Indiana/Maryland/North Carolina/Creighton/Southern Methodist/Virginia/Connecticut/Wake Forest/UC Santa Barbara turns kids with no talent into MLS caliber players.
There is a certain talent level necessary to be recruited at a UCLA, and that talent level should translate into results on the field, which it has not.
Or does it mean they got a lot of kids who peaked at the age they were picking the U17 team which is about 15 years old?