Let me reframe the question...I would say 50% of the early recruits (those that committed in 8th and 9th grade) have panned out by 12th grade, then the number four years from now will be substantially lower. So of these will 25% still be strong players in college as they graduate? Maybe that is the expectation. And will that be a lower percentage than the girls coming up with later recruiting rules? Will the girls recruited earlier have higher transfer rates than the girls who commit later?
I am somewhat leading the argument...I believe later recruiting is better and more accurate. The best player on our hs team was a little under the radar as a 9th grader. She is going D1 to a mid-major lacrosse school, although a great academic school...it will work out well for this girl. However if she came up with today’s recruiting rules, she would be looking at Ivy League and Stanford as well as the top level lacrosse schools. So as we watch these transition years from early recruiting to 11th grade recruiting what do people think is better?
Of course the new rules for recruiting are better for everyone, the players the coaches and the parents. The race to land an 8th-9th grader is a pure gamble and you can see many misses evident by junior or senior year. It’s a crappy position for a coach and even worse for the player. Think about the player who took the offer as a top recruit in 8-9th only to have the rest of the pool catch up and/or surpass them, and yes this is more common than not. That is a lot of baggage to be starting a college career with. Junior year opens recruiting is definitely better for all.
