2015 D3 Season: NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

[chelseafc30]

Also below is a link to the USSDA commits on signing day, you may be able to see if your school recruited any of these players by searching for your schools name. I know that not all schools publish a "recruiting class press release," so this may be of interest and/or help.

http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-boys/ussda-college-commitments/

[PaulNewman]

Chelsea, thanks for that link.

Counted 5 for Kenyon.  1 from NY, 2 from Washington state, 1 from NC, and 1 from TX.

Correction -- 6 for Kenyon (3 from Washington state).

[Corazon]

Chelsea, thanks for that link.

Counted 5 for Kenyon.  1 from NY, 2 from Washington state, 1 from NC, and 1 from TX.

Correction -- 6 for Kenyon (3 from Washington state).

Unreal. 6 Academy commits for a D3 school in one recruiting class is unheard of. Not all clubs have reported, so it is possible there are more.

Some may recall, I did sort of call this about a year ago.  My prediction wasn't so popular back then.

[Nutmeg]

Not that uncommon anymore for stronger programs...Tufts has been getting many ussda recruits over the past few years....

[deutschfan]

I believe the number of USSDA players should be the first metric in evaluating a class.  The divide between high school and Academy keeps getting greater as the Academy starts grabbing younger players and the players realize that fewer and fewer coaches are attending high school or non-Academy club games.  Geographics is also important.  Some soccer rich states like CA, TX, and FL do not have a large number of D3 programs.  If you look at Mt. Saint Vincent's roster for example they have recruited a large number of quality players from CA.  Given its relative obscurity, that is great work by the coaching staff.  Finally, while very few D3 recruits have Top Drawer rankings, some do and the coaches covet them.   

[Nutmeg]

I believe the number of USSDA players should be the first metric in evaluating a class.  The divide between high school and Academy keeps getting greater as the Academy starts grabbing younger players and the players realize that fewer and fewer coaches are attending high school or non-Academy club games.  Geographics is also important.  Some soccer rich states like CA, TX, and FL do not have a large number of D3 programs.  If you look at Mt. Saint Vincent's roster for example they have recruited a large number of quality players from CA.  Given its relative obscurity, that is great work by the coaching staff.  Finally, while very few D3 recruits have Top Drawer rankings, some do and the coaches covet them.

It's certainly a good starting point for analysis purposes....yes, many good players are not ussda players, but on a general analysis basis, I have to agree it should be the first metric...

[Ommadawn]

It's important to look not only at the number of DAP players a school brings in, but also the quality of those players.  A closer look at the Kenyon group, for example, shows that only 1 of the 6 players was a starter on his DAP team and 2 of the 3 players from WA were not even on the roster at the end of the season.  I understand that reserves on DAP teams can be very strong players, but they may not have the same impact that a group of starters might have.  Nevertheless, it will be exciting to see the recruiting efforts of Kenyon and other schools that landed multiple DAP players come to fruition.

[PaulNewman]

It's important to look not only at the number of DAP players a school brings in, but also the quality of those players.  A closer look at the Kenyon group, for example, shows that only 1 of the 6 players was a starter on his DAP team and 2 of the 3 players from WA were not even on the roster at the end of the season.  I understand that reserves on DAP teams can be very strong players, but they may not have the same impact that a group of starters might have.  Nevertheless, it will be exciting to see the recruiting efforts of Kenyon and other schools that landed multiple DAP players come to fruition.

Couple of thoughts...

I'm one who thinks the emphasis on the USSDA, as applied to D3, is very overrated.  The vast majority of the top-tier USSDA players will go D1.  If academic prestige is an issue, there are D1 options for that type of student-athlete.  This means that for the pool of USSDA players strongly considering D3 the vast majority of them will significantly overlap with the top end of non-USSDA players.  There will always be an exception or two, but as a rule of thumb top end DAP players who can be impact players at a top 50 D1 program won't be choosing a D3.

The article that was linked suggests that the clubs themselves (and not the individual players) put out their lists of college commitments.  What is pointed out about the Kenyon recruits above likely parallels USSDA D3 recruits in general.  All 3 of the Wash State players listed were on the roster (and did play) in the Fall of 2014.  We don't know if one of them suffered an injury, or if one or more decided not to play in the Spring after wrapping up a college choice.  I did notice that the two not on the Crossfire roster later in the season had played for cross-town rival Seattle Sounders at U15/U16.  Perhaps they moved due to playing time issues, but they were not new to playing at the USSDA level.

I'm sure the list in the article is far from comprehensive.  That said, 6 is still 6.  I don't believe any other school had more than 2.

And in anticipation of jabs about the Kenyon assistant coach, he is a smart, engaging guy.  He also was a NCAA Division 1 striker whose father played professionally for Manchester United.

[WilltheMan]

It's important to look not only at the number of DAP players a school brings in, but also the quality of those players.  A closer look at the Kenyon group, for example, shows that only 1 of the 6 players was a starter on his DAP team and 2 of the 3 players from WA were not even on the roster at the end of the season.  I understand that reserves on DAP teams can be very strong players, but they may not have the same impact that a group of starters might have.  Nevertheless, it will be exciting to see the recruiting efforts of Kenyon and other schools that landed multiple DAP players come to fruition.

Couple of thoughts...

I'm one who thinks the emphasis on the USSDA, as applied to D3, is very overrated.  The vast majority of the top-tier USSDA players will go D1.  If academic prestige is an issue, there are D1 options for that type of student-athlete.  This means that for the pool of USSDA players strongly considering D3 the vast majority of them will significantly overlap with the top end of non-USSDA players.  There will always be an exception or two, but as a rule of thumb top end DAP players who can be impact players at a top 50 D1 program won't be choosing a D3.

The article that was linked suggests that the clubs themselves (and not the individual players) put out their lists of college commitments.  What is pointed out about the Kenyon recruits above likely parallels USSDA D3 recruits in general.  All 3 of the Wash State players listed were on the roster (and did play) in the Fall of 2014.  We don't know if one of them suffered an injury, or if one or more decided not to play in the Spring after wrapping up a college choice.  I did notice that the two not on the Crossfire roster later in the season had played for cross-town rival Seattle Sounders at U15/U16.  Perhaps they moved due to playing time issues, but they were not new to playing at the USSDA level.

I'm sure the list in the article is far from comprehensive.  That said, 6 is still 6.  I don't believe any other school had more than 2.

And in anticipation of jabs about the Kenyon assistant coach, he is a smart, engaging guy.  He also was a NCAA Division 1 striker whose father played professionally for Manchester United.

I would agree completely with this post.  Remember also that the age group coming in still grew in the game as the USDAA was coming into existence.  These lads will still compete evenly as they have since they were 12, labels aside.  As a side note, I am surprised looking at the current U18 and younger players in the DAP--- the play doesn't seem as good as the past few years.  One national level trainer I respect suggested to me that there is less depth.  The high level club system has been hurt badly by DAP causing less young players to get better training.  Where the original DAP teams could just pick the cream of a broad developed group that had sorted itself out by U16/U18 the piping of younger kids is hurting the overall pool.  The gap my be growing between DAP and non and indeed this may be a way to measure incoming classes more and more in the future.  I fear the gap is growing for the wrong reasons, ah the law of unintended consequences.

[Nutmeg]

It's important to look not only at the number of DAP players a school brings in, but also the quality of those players.  A closer look at the Kenyon group, for example, shows that only 1 of the 6 players was a starter on his DAP team and 2 of the 3 players from WA were not even on the roster at the end of the season.  I understand that reserves on DAP teams can be very strong players, but they may not have the same impact that a group of starters might have.  Nevertheless, it will be exciting to see the recruiting efforts of Kenyon and other schools that landed multiple DAP players come to fruition.

Couple of thoughts...

I'm one who thinks the emphasis on the USSDA, as applied to D3, is very overrated.  The vast majority of the top-tier USSDA players will go D1.  If academic prestige is an issue, there are D1 options for that type of student-athlete.  This means that for the pool of USSDA players strongly considering D3 the vast majority of them will significantly overlap with the top end of non-USSDA players.  There will always be an exception or two, but as a rule of thumb top end DAP players who can be impact players at a top 50 D1 program won't be choosing a D3.

The article that was linked suggests that the clubs themselves (and not the individual players) put out their lists of college commitments.  What is pointed out about the Kenyon recruits above likely parallels USSDA D3 recruits in general.  All 3 of the Wash State players listed were on the roster (and did play) in the Fall of 2014.  We don't know if one of them suffered an injury, or if one or more decided not to play in the Spring after wrapping up a college choice.  I did notice that the two not on the Crossfire roster later in the season had played for cross-town rival Seattle Sounders at U15/U16.  Perhaps they moved due to playing time issues, but they were not new to playing at the USSDA level.

I'm sure the list in the article is far from comprehensive.  That said, 6 is still 6.  I don't believe any other school had more than 2.

And in anticipation of jabs about the Kenyon assistant coach, he is a smart, engaging guy.  He also was a NCAA Division 1 striker whose father played professionally for Manchester United.

I know of at least 3 ussda players who could have played D1 and were offered spots but chose a DIII school for soccer. They are still playing and have done extremely well...

[Nutmeg]

Being a fan of Wheaton, Elliot Borge and Marshall Hollingsworth from the Chicago area were recruited for D1. Tufts also has a ussda kid from Chicago that was in the same boat.

[chelseafc30]

Being a fan of Wheaton, Elliot Borge and Marshall Hollingsworth from the Chicago area were recruited for D1. Tufts also has a ussda kid from Chicago that was in the same boat.

You also can't forget about D1 transfers that play on good D3 teams. I'm not too sure how many D1 players transfer to D3 each year but those players were also obviously recruited for D1 teams. That's not saying that all D1 transfers make the sort of impact at the D3 level that might be expected but it's still something to note.

[PaulNewman]

Wheaton (Ill), Messiah, Calvin, etc are a little different in that they may attract some D1 talent because of a higher calling.  That said, there is a huge difference between getting offers at bottom 150 D1s where a kid is going to fighting for his life for serious playing time, and going to a top 50 D1 as a legitimate impact player.  I'd be curious to know where the Tufts Chicago-area kid drew real D1 interest.  If he was that good, one would think Duke, Stanford, UVA, UNC, Michigan, Notre Dame, Boston College, etc would be reasonable options from an academic point of view.  Transfers from D1 to D3 I think sort of speak for themselves.

And of course I forgot about the Ivies.  A kid who qualifies academically and believes he can be a starter at an Ivy rarely is going to pick even the most academically prestigious D3s.  How many D3 players might arguably make a D1 roster (with marginal prospects for real playing time) is of course an entirely different question.

[Nutmeg]

Wheaton (Ill), Messiah, Calvin, etc are a little different in that they may attract some D1 talent because of a higher calling.  That said, there is a huge difference between getting offers at bottom 150 D1s where a kid is going to fighting for his life for serious playing time, and going to a top 50 D1 as a legitimate impact player.  I'd be curious to know where the Tufts Chicago-area kid drew real D1 interest.  If he was that good, one would think Duke, Stanford, UVA, UNC, Michigan, Notre Dame, Boston College, etc would be reasonable options from an academic point of view.  Transfers from D1 to D3 I think sort of speak for themselves.

And of course I forgot about the Ivies.  A kid who qualifies academically and believes he can be a starter at an Ivy rarely is going to pick even the most academically prestigious D3s.  How many D3 players might arguably make a D1 roster (with marginal prospects for real playing time) is of course an entirely different question.

I was replying to your statement that a vast majority of ussda players go D1. Now, I am confused because I think you have changed your standard bringing in the bottom of D1 programs for comparison. Notwithstanding, kids often get D1 offers where coaches say they may not play until junior or senior year. That often happens with top D1 programs when u have honest coaches. Now, comes along a Bowdoin, Amherst or Tufts and the coach says you'll play all 4 years. Do u go to Virginia or North Carolina or Dartmouth and wait to get a possible chance to play or do u go to Amherst and play all  4 years. This is how those choices are made...

[PaulNewman]

Nutmeg, please re-read what I posted.  I referred to the vast majority of top-tier USSDA players going D1.  Regarding the rest I think you may be confused.  The vast majority do not turn down legit opportunities to play D1 at academic powerhouse schools in favor of D3s.  This may be true for a few who are offered a roster spot at a D1 but minimal chances to actually play.  The choices tend to even out and may result in going D3 when the alternative choice is a lower end D1 (and by lower that could be either athletically or academically or both).  In short, top-tier USSDA players who will actually be real players at the UVAs, Dukes, and Notre Dames aren't going D3.  And, FWIW, players who are told they won't be playing until junior or senior most likely won't be playing, period.  By that time more high level recruits have come in.  If you're not getting serious time by sophomore year (and this applies to many D3s as well), you're most likely out of luck.