Class of 2014 Recruiting

As of today (or actually as of 5/23/12), there are 72 recruits listed as having committed for the 2014 class. So while things are starting to move for that class, it is WAY to early to say anything meaningful about how the the class will shape up for the various D-I college teams. This is because there are yet huge numbers of quality players who have yet to announce a commitment. The first opportunity to get any kind of a meaningful read on the best classes will be in mid September when the total number of commits is about 200. (And even that will be tentative.)

On the other hand it is interesting to note where a few of the top players have committed.

Duke's run to the College Cup finals last fall seems to be paying big dividends. The Blue Devils most recently picked up TDS #3 player, U-17 national team member Morgan Reid. Prior to that they had already nabbed #6 Imani Dorsey, U-17 pool player Ashton Miller, and top 100 Schulyer DeBree and Abagail Pyne. With 5 players with national team experience already committed, Duke is off to a fabulous start.

Always in the mix for top recruiting honors is Stanford which has already picked up two starters from the U-17 national team for it's 2014 class ranked nationally at the top of the list by TDS at 1 and 2. The Cardinal also have a commitment from U-16 national camper Jaye Boissiere, and it is a very safe bet that Paul Ratcliffe will pick up a handfull of other top talent to go with his #1 ranked 2013 class.

Cal has nabbed 5 solid 2014s with 4 of those with national youth team experience. After that it falls off rapidly. TAMU has two solid recruits as does Notre Dame. A number of teams have a bunch of 2014 recruits, but not with the credentials of the schools listed above.

But as I said above, it's way too early to make too much of who is going where in 2014. Lots can and will change.

 

It's now mid September, and the 2014 class is starting to pick up. (I fact the 2014s have now overtaken the 2013s in weekly rates of commitments.) There are now 221 committed players in this class which is 10% more than there were last year at this date. The top schools in the race for the quality 2014 talent are emerging.

Just as for the 2013 class, Stanford is well on its way to corralling the #1 class for 2014 as well. Duke is next followed by Notre Dame. Do these names sound familiar? If they don't, perhaps the next few will: California, UCLA, and TAMU. Currently, the top ten also includes Georgia, Florida State, Rutgers, and Penn State.

The way I see it, when the dust settles in the summer of 2014, Stanford will most likely hang on to the top spot, but after that, there are so may top quality prospects in the 2014 class that there will be lots of changes going down the list by the end of the year. Duke and Notre Dame will likely remain in the in the top 5 but could come close to Stanford if they picked up one of the strong uncommitted 2014s. However, it is the schools a bit further down the list who stand to make huge jumps with the addition of the remaining talent.

Below is the top 15 at this time. By early 2013, the top of the list will still be recognizable, but the addition of more talent will spread many in this list into the 20s to the 40s in rank.

The usual caveats: This is for fun; you could do better; don't take it too seriously.

1. 9.63 Stanford
2. 8.63 Duke
3. 8.08 Notre Dame
4. 7.58 California
5. 7.20 UCLA
6. 7.10 TAMU
7. 6.87 Georgia
8. 6.77 Florida State, Rutgers
10. 6.67 Penn State
11. 6.43 LSU
12. 6.33 UNC
13. 6.10 Oklahoma
14. 6.00 Dayton, S.Carolina

 

The number of committed 2014 recruits has almost doubled since September to a total of 411. In particular, almost all of the recruits (especially the top ones) who have some national team experience (ie attending a U-15 camp or more) have now committed. 9 remain uncommitted out of 59. I am aware that national team experience is a controversial as a recruiting metric, especially two years out. But at this stage (15 and 16 year-olds) it is a marker that also has some validity. While there have been some NT players that have faded, most have shown quite well in college.

The ordered list of colleges snarfing up the top recruits (see previous post) has not substantially changed since September.

Stanford, as it did for the 2013s, remains firmly on top of the recruiting hill. The Cardinal has picked off two more of the U-17 national team which will in 2014 will put on its roster at least 18 players who have national team experience of which 7 will have been regular starters on the U-17 or U-20 national teams. Duke remains at #2 with a spectacular class consisting of 6 highly touted prospects all of which have national team experience. Notre Dame remains at #3 with 7 high powered recruits, 4 with NT experience. California continues to hold the #4 spot with a string 8-member class. TAMU moved up one notch to #5 by that addition of another strong player since September.

The second 5 includes the usual suspects UCLA, Penn State, and Florida State plus Georgia, Louisville, and Rutgers (all of which were on the list in September) but now includes some newcomers Louisville. (The size of the top ten includes is swelled by ties.) Notably absent from the top 10 would be UNC for whom it might appear that scholarship money is an issue with a small class which includes a player who would have to be one of those unknown "long shots" that Anson has been turning into starters recently.

I'll take a more serious look at the 2014 class in the spring, by which the number should have swelled to the range of 700 recruits which will yield a more nuanced look, especially at the top 40 schools.

 

Woah! Good thing one can always count on Bog Soccer readers to catch errors! I MEANT to type Louisiana State University but somehow it came out Louisville. LSU has recently added top recruit Jorian Baucom (U-15, U-16, and U-18 national team camper) to go along with a Canadian U-16, two strong regional ODP players, and an ECNL all-event player for a very strong 2014 class.
Thanks for the catch, SoccerTrustee











I

 

With the total 2014 commitments in the 750 range, it is time to take another look at how the classes are shaping up.

As expected, 2014 is a "weak" class overall. This is a pattern that is getting to be somewhat predictable and I relate it to the women's U17 youth world cup cycle. There key factor at work here is the matter of the number of accolades to be had. If you are a year younger in the 2-year cycle, you are at a disadvantage competing for the U-17 national team slots against girls who are physically a year older. Consequently your name does not appear on as many national camp rosters or on the national pool list in the same proportion as the older girls. Consequently, since the latest iteration of the youth world cup schedule became stable, we will appear to have a "weaker" class of college players matriculating in the even-numbered years. Does this mean that the college classes are, in fact, less strong than the odd-numbered years? By the time graduation comes around in 2018 we will have seen, and my suspicion is that many of these girls will have developed into very strong players. Comparing this class at the same time to the 2013s, there is no question that this class does not show as well. But comparing these 2014s to the mid April scores of the 2012s and 2010s, they are right on target.

Stanford and Duke continue to hold on to the top spots each with a healthy collection of national team players. LSU added U17 Jorian Baucom to go with their New Zealand U17 international and 4 other solid players to move up to #3 while UCLA -even without a head coach- kept adding strong players to arrive at #4. Notre Dame rounds out the top 5. The rest of the top ten is usual suspects Cal, TAMU, Penn State, UNC, and (whoa! What the ...?) Pittsburgh. Yes, indeed, it seems that new coach Greg Miller has taken this ACC thing seriously and has run off and tapped three internationals to go with three strong ODP players to present a solid class for 2014. (And, BTW, when the final 2013 classes are finally announced, -I'll get my final 2013 list out in August- Pitt will look better there too.)

In the second 10, Syracuse and Colorado are prominently in stronger conferences and appear to be moving up the recruiting food chain. The SEC is also showing nicely in the 2nd ten with Georgia, Vanderbilt, Alabama, and Kentucky out classing Big 10 Ohio State and soon-to-be Rutgers.

Overall, this class is "weak" enough such that the easily available data does not allow better differentiation after the top 20. By the end of this year there will be a lot more clarity, and I'll be able to meaningfully expand the list from 40 to 50. However, the overall shape is now pretty well set with only a few major surprises yet to come.

Once again, with the usual caveats and apologies for any mistakes and thanks to CBG...

1. 9.22 Sanford
2. 8.78 Duke
3. 7.97 LSU
4. 7.78 UCLA
5. 7.65 Notre Dame
6. 7.63 California
7. 7.43 TAMU
8. 7.07 Penn State
9. 7.00 UNC
10. 6.97 Pittsburgh
11. 6.87 Georgia
12. 6.77 Florida State, Rutgers
14. 6.67 Colorado, Vanderbilt, Virginia
17. 6.43 Ohio State
18. 6.35 Wake Forest
19. 6.33 Alabama, Conn, KY, Oregon St, Syracuse
24. 6.12 William & Mary
25. 6.10 Col of Charleston, Oklahoma
26. 6.00 AZ St, AR, Dayton, IA, Louisville, Loyola Mmt, Marq, MD, Miami(F), Mich, MS St, SC, VT
39. 5.67 BC, Houston, SMU

 

Yup. I also had assumed that Brian would have lined up a stronger recruiting class in his second year with the Vols. However, the good news is that he is off to an absolutely great start for the 2015 class with Catie Cousins who is generally recognized as top ten nationally and Megan Massey who is a highly rated 5'8" high-scoring (ECNL) forward from Colorado with regional ODP experience.

 

Trustee, I absolutely agree with you and my system theoretically tries to take into account the phenomenon of weak versus strong internationals but it is flawed in practical terms insofar as I am handicapped by lack of time to do the detailed research. As you might have seen in previous posts where I explain my system, it begins to fall apart when I can not easily find (or stumble upon) good information. In these situations, I fall back on generalized categories based on what little I have in hand.

But let's take a look together at Pitt with the new information you bring to the table. First, let me say that a grade of 6.97 (if Pitt does not add to it) will eventually work out to be about #25 as more of the typically strong programs pick off the remaining talent.... Still very good, but not top ten.

The U-17 Icelandic player you mention may have to be reevaluated. She was on the U-17 national roster in the UEFA qualifying. To give you some insight, if this was an American girl playing on a CONCACAF qualifying team, she would warrant a 9 in my system. Since Iceland is not as strong, my system gives her a 7 (even though she was on the field for a 1-0 win over England last year.) You say she is on an obscure club team in Virginia and is therefor not a strong player. This may be reason to doubt her skills, but one can always have strong players on weak club teams and vice versa. I'd need more information....

The Canadian player who was in a U-16 camp in 2011 and hasn't been called up since I rated as a 6. FYI, I rate US players as 7s who have been called into a U-15 camp and then haven't been called again.

The other Canadian player got a 7 from me. She distinguished herself as a member of an Ontario select team (equivalent to a regional ODP for the US) scoring a decisive goal against Barcelona a year ago March on an international tour. She has been called up to camp with the U-20s in Canada. (And, FYI, US U-20 campers get an 8 from me.)

So you see my methodology. I do try to take into account the strength of international players as best I can. The main thing that I try to faithfully do is to be consistent with my ratings. I can't go about modifying my system or it calls into question any meaningful comparisons over time.

As I said above, Pitt will probably not be in the top ten when all is said and done with the 2014 class, but in a (numerically) "weak" year, they are surprisingly strong at the moment comparatively speaking. They are in the fourth tier of classes thus far. (Stanford and Duke are top grade. LSU, UCLA, Notre Dame, and California are in a second tier. Texas A&M is kinda by itself in a third tier awaiting others to join, and Pitt for the moment finds itself shoulder to shoulder with Penn State, UNC, Georgia, Florida State, Rutgers, Colorado, Vanderbilt, and Virginia.)

Stand by....

 

Very true. It varies all over the map. For women, making a national team is completely different based on the culture for women's sports. US has generally led the way but some of the rest of the world is catching up rapidly. Making a U-20 squad in the US, Japan, France, or Germany is at the opposite end of the spectrum from Jamaica, Ecuador, Latvia, or Cambodia. Teams from some of these countries are similar to middle of the road local club teams -but even they are well ahead of countries where religious constriction will not allow the women's sport even to be seen in public. In between you have a whole range of teams so one has to be careful about making assumptions.