Here’s a question what do people think the hit rate of players of the current elite rosters ending up committing to a D1 program? My guess is something like:
Something like 8 or so for Madlax/Hawks/FCA.
Around 6 or so for Next Level and Crabs.
3-4 for True
1-2 for BLC and then a few/several others that are currently on lower ranked teams.
People think that is high or low? Aside from a few kids I’d be willing to bet on, hard to tell exactly who they will be, but that is my general sense of the talent level.
Having gone through recruiting with an older son in DC, here is how it has played out. Around 30 kids from Madlax, Next Level, DCE/BLC will commit to a decent D1 program (defining decent broadly). That’s been fairly consistent the last several years though individual club numbers vary. Of those 30, probably 10-12 are not yet playing on one of those 3 teams. Those kids are mostly very strong athletes that aren’t playing club at this point and maybe a few kids that are but puberty super charges them. So realistically it’s maybe 20 kids currently on those teams at most. The top 10 or so athletes spread among those teams currently will have a high success rate. Of the 50-55 other kids on the rosters, around 10 will eventually make it, but beyond the very top studs, it is really hard to predict which kids will pop because puberty and which kids will really hit the weights/wall in middle and high school is hard to predict. So unless you are a very top stud athlete, the odds still aren’t that high even for kids currently on an elite roster.
Out of curiosity how did going to a strong high school and playing later impact vs a relatively weaker school and playing earlier.
For example, Hall vs. St. Pauls
I’m in DC and don’t know the Baltimore kids nearly well enough to have an opinion on Calvert Hall vs St Pauls or anything like that. For the DC kids, I would say school seemed to matter less than club or just how you present as an athlete. Kids that show out well in the IAC or top part of WCAC obviously do well in recruiting. But most of those kids also showed well in the club/showcase context so it’s hard to tell if the school mattered or not. It certainly does not hurt to go to the top programs. But whether that makes you significantly more marketable probably depends on the player and position. I don’t have any evidence for this other than my observation, but I think that school may matter more for attack and maybe goalie than other positions. The stock of middies and defensive players rose or fell much more on how they presented in terms of size and speed on the club/showcase circuit than school in my opinion.
I suspect school matters most in terms of weeding out kids— D1 coaches are probably (I say probably as I have zero evidence of this theory) are less likely to take a chance on a sick athlete playing in Virginia or MD public schools, and dominating there, Vs a very good player/athlete at one of the elites. Just a lot more unknowns with public school competition.
Reply
Quote