I found the census data on populations of the states, by age groups. At the lower age groups, the census breaks the numbers down by five year increments: 0-4, 5-9, 10-14, 15-19. My preferred age group would have been 7-17, but the census data don't provide those numbers. I decided to use 5-9 and 10-14, which covers a 10 year expanse and probably is fairly representative of what the numbers would be (proportionally) for pre-college youth even though not exactly right. I could have included 15-19 except that I was concerned about the effects of part of that group already being in college or post-high school and having moved around. I doubt not counting that group makes a significant difference. Along the way, I did find out some interesting things: Utah has a much higher percentage of children than other states. I guess that shouldn't be a surprise. The District of Columbia has a much, much lower percentage of children. Again, that shouldn't be a surprise. Florida's percentage is low, near the bottom, but not as far removed from the other states as one might think. I redid my calculations using the states' youth populations in the 5-14 age group rather than the states' total populations. So, in this post and the next are tables like my previous ones, the first based on rosters for Division I's top 125 teams and the second based on rosters for the top 225 teams. The tables do not take playing time into consideration, which could be done but would be about a three-month project. They are not for where the "ultra-elite" players come from. When thinking about the states, a way to characterize a state's data is that "This is the state's number of players, in relation to the state's number of children, that the state's club programs and/or school programs or that club programs in nearby areas of adjoining states are developing to the point that they are on X teams' rosters." The data do not cover, at all, players that are not playing Division I soccer. They do not cover players playing for teams in the bottom third of those playing Division I soccer. The top 125 table pretty much covers the major conferences' teams, although a few of those conferences' teams are not in that group. The top 225 teams are a much more diverse group. Etc., etc., etc. Take it for whatever you think it's worth.
And, as long as I'm at it, here are the numbers of players from the different Canada provinces and from other countries on the rosters of the top 125 and top 225 Division I teams:
What interests me here is multiple references to the quality of high school soccer. I cant speak for the East Coast, but here out in the west, it is widely acknowledged that HS Soccer is CRAP. Most of the girls participate in HS soccer as more of a social program. In general, most HS teams are made up of four or five good club level players then filled out with Rec league and multi sport athletes. My daughter plays in the most competitive league in Northern California and, many believe, the country. Her Club team would have finished in the top third when she was a Freshman compared to the teams in HS with all seniors. There is a reason why College coaches don't scout HS soccer often
Same for the Midwest. Bad, Bad soccer. In my state, 4-5 players from top clubs generally gets you a pass to the final four. Significant drop off in talent (even if it is considered D1 talent) once you go beyond the state's top few teams.
With all due respect, you are comparing apples and oranges. The best club teams are drawing players from across an entire metropolitan area (or beyond, in the case of Eclipse Select in IL). Most public high schools are limited to the players who reside within the boundaries of their district. High school teams composed in that manner will not contain as many elite soccer players as their club counterparts. That does not necessarily mean that HS soccer is crap or that it is useless.
No disrespect taken. I totally agree with every point you make...up until the last statement. My kid plays in an excellent HS league that is comprised of many VERY good club players. The problem is that those usually are about 4-5 per team. When a kid that plays at a high level squares up against a kid with little skill, only one thing comes out of it. Kid with little skill gets beat multiple times then starts Hacking. Kid with skill goes down in a ball of flesh and sustains injuries that linger for months. Happens in every High School league I have ever watched. Thus....High School Soccer is CRAP
Glove Stinks, I completely disagree with you. I am involved with both HS and Club. The injuries the HS team I follow had this year all occurred during their the club season. No injuries to this talented HS team in season but it played without several talented players who were lost for the HS season because of injuries during club. The HS soccer I watch is high level. Of course not every team is good but the top 15 in the state are legit. I also live in a state that allows open enrollment so the team I follow is loaded with top club players.
Fair Enough...I think your instance is the exception to the rule. That said, I would never encourage a talented kid to not play HS soccer which some club coaches do. Its fun to watch my kid play against her club teammates in a scrappy match finished off with hugs after the game. Its still CRAP though