Don't be surprised if there are some quality, experienced players NOT on Duke's roster next Fall. I can't say a whole lot more, but let's just say the coaching staff at Duke is counting on the incoming freshman class to carry them to the promised land....at least for this year. The question this raises, is this. Where's the loyalty? This is a problem, a BIG problem in college soccer. Coaches get so caught up in their recruiting class, sometimes they simply discard the older player...because the coach seems to think that the guy has already "peaked," or some other lame excuse. Kids are supposed to commit to the coach/school for 4 years, but the coach doesn't have the same commitment to the player.
This is my first post in a while, but in regards to Duke I saw one of their incoming freshman, Justin Papadakis,play yesterday for my old high school team. He is a keeper, and probably the best at that level I have ever seen. He trained at Benfica in Portugal for a year but came back because of homesickness. He is only 17. anyway, they won 5-0, but the most amazing part was a goal Justin scored off a free kick from past midfield. Unbelievable. He then added an assist off a drop kick to a front runner who one-touched it by the goalie. The kid is unreal. So, Duke is in good hands as far as keepers go, if you had any interest in Duke soccer.
This is the ACC and freshmen can help a program but they can't carry it, see UVA and UNC this past season. Coach's are afraid not to play the freshmen for fear the next national teamer will go elsewhere...loyalty, that's a laugh. Loyalty is a two way street and the best of the young players will only be in college 1-2 years any way and players who doesn't produced will be pushed aside. Welcome to college soccer.
Loyalty... some schools/coaches have it, some schools/coaches dont... some players have it; some players dont...sad but true.
Hey Geech- All I see is competition.. If the returners are working and do their jobs- then a freshman should not come in and take their spot. There will be one or two- I think Dukes keeper is in trouble!!
I agree with the competition. That wasn't what I was referring to. I wasn't trying to make a grandiose point or anything; I was mainlny just stating the obvious.
As my 2 year old daughter says whenever she hears the word Duke - "PEEEEE-UUUUUUUU" Have to train them young. She's definately a keeper.
Hey guys, whether you're a Duke fan, Duke hater, or whatever...this situation is alarming because it's happening all over. Really good players, who have paid their dues, busted their butts, etc., are being cast aside by coaches who can't see the forest for the trees. All these coaches can see, is their incoming class...to heck with the juniors and seniors. It's almost becoming like college basketball, where you have fewer and fewer upperclassmen on the roster. One guy who doesn't take that road, is Elmar at UNC. I'll say this for him...he realizes the importance of having upperclassmen. When UNC won the national championship, they had Jackson and Leetch and Yamauchi leading the way. Yeagley at IU is the same....he loves having those older guys on the team. But Duke, and so many other schools, don't get it. Maybe that's why Duke has fallen off so badly in recent years. Once again, they have a highly regarded recruiting class for next Fall, but I'll bet that once again they finish behind UNC, Maryland, Virginia and Clemson in the standings. I'm curious...do others see this happening...where teams are becoming younger and younger? Only a handful of guys are leaving early to go to MLS or Europe, so IMO, there's a trend to discard older players because coaches think they've "maxed" out their potential.
When you're comparing IU and Duke, keep in mind that a lot of those "older" IU players were actually recruited walk-ons (redshirt freshman) that contributed significantly in their 5th collegiate season, and further, most of them were never stars on the YNT scene. The difference in cost alone between Duke and IU makes the situation not entirely comparable. IU can build a team largely of tough guy role players who aren't looking for significant scholarships their red shirt, 1st, or even 2nd year. I suspect that option isn't open to Duke, who probably have to give a lot of money to get the better players in. Even at 9.9 scholarships, if you're giving a lot to freshman and sophomores, then the amount you have for seniors becomes problematic. Further, since playing time usually reflects scholarship investment, Duke is always under the gun to feature it's younger players (while IU isn't) at the expense of its older players, which can cause plenty of chemistry and continuity problems (Rennie's own abilities notwithstanding).
The other issue driving this the demise if JV squads. As far as I know, most large colleges have dropped them due to cost. So most places keep a large roster (25 or so). Given two equal players, most coaches will play the youngsters since there is a larger upside. By the same token, the jrs. and srs. who have not had much pt but are putting in the long hours at practices year round have to really ask themselves if its worth it. That is why the rosters are heavy with the younger players.
Luv, I actually noticed this trend several years back when my son started looking at colleges. Many more fresh and sophs than jr and sr. Coaches are not liars, they are recruiters. Many have become very good at nonspeak, so that you can not come back at them later. But, in fairness to the coaches, I think the limited season is the biggest problem of the trend you see. If there were more games coaches wouldn't be under the gun to give players playing time. But as it is now it is tough to keep a 24ish man roster happy. Unfortunately, many of these young men have grown up with the "star syndrome." You are the best, come play for our team, yea we'll let you play the position you want, that type pf stuff. So when they have reached the end of their soph or jr year after getting iffy PT and probably not at "their" position they have two choices in the upcoming spring season. Give the coach a reason to play them, or give the coach a reason to bench them. Many of those young men have never had to push themselves. So spring goes iffy, and that includes for many not being fit until the last game or two (which adds another problem because the player now thinks , well I played great against that last team so I showed the coach I can play, all the while the coach is thinking this kid is just going through the motions). So now, yes, the coach starts looking at the recruits coming in. In fact, look at many rosters at colleges and you will see many do not even come back their jr or sr year. I am not trying to let the coaches off the hook, you have made a valid observation. My experience though is that it is more the nature of the beast. There are very few IU's out there (believe me, Elmar's graveyard is full of guys that where put to pasture), which is a sad commentary on college soccer.
In Duke's case I can see why Rennie is casting aside the Juniors and Seniors, the team has been terrible for three years. 2000 was the last good team they had, why hang on to these guys? Loyalty? Loyalty to losing is all I see with this group. Sorry but those are the hard facts in Duke's case. Of course we can blame Rennie for bringing in the current group, most are just not up to the ACC level and many seemed to actually get worse each season they spent at Duke (ie, Jordan Cila).
Dsocc made an interesting statement, that scholarship investment usually translates to playing time. Since we've been talking about Duke, let's use them as an example. They've had some guys riding the pine the last few years on full, or 75 per cent rides. And, with only 9.9, that means you HAVE to play walk ons, or recruited walk ons. Also, some schools, like UNC, give most of their money to out of state players. Eddie Pope didn't get much at all his first two years in Chapel Hill. From what I understand, a lot of state schools do it that way. Eveyone makes great points about the demise of the upperclassmen, but I think it is the nature of the beast because the NCAA only allocates 9.9 scholarships to a fully funded program.
Terpfan, interestingto see Cila making a bit of a comeback with the Rapids. But then that is at least two different threards, style of play in college, Rennie himself as a coach.
There's too much loyalty as it is in college soccer. Once a player shows he just an average player and will always be an average player he should may way for a player who might someday be a bit better. That's the way soccer is all accross the world with the exception of the US. There is no way college can be used as a step to the pros if things like loyalty are encouraged.
Interesting thread. I always thought the conventional wisdom in soccer and other college team sports is that the team with the most depth of experienced juniors and seniors is the one that is most likely to advance deep into the playoffs. The past 3 national champions in soccer had those characteristics, as did most of the other Final 4 squads. Compare this year's Connecticut mens bball team to Duke. I had a conversation with a long time ACC coach a couple of years ago and he was lamenting the fact that the recruitment game had become so problematic -- you need leadership, experience, depth, chemistry as a team, but snaring the top talent only gives you a year or 2 if you're lucky.