Most of my experience has been with women's recruiting and I have to wonder if there are differences with the men's recruting approaches versus the women in the super leagues. For our Arsenal teams we often had recruiters from all levels at many matches (we always played against Atlanta area teams so that helped). Different level recruiters came to different matches, especially tourneys. However, all seemed to choose certain specific matches and the D2's were always more direct and agressive than the D1's (because of rules I suspect). Two years ago, we sent one of our seniors to D1 play and one to D2. Three others had offers but did not want to play in college (they were certainly good enough). Last year, of our seniors, we sent seven girls to play in college, three to D1, two to D2, one to D3, and 2 to NAIA. That said, almost each of these girls were approached in different ways for their recruiting. Some preferred D2 over D1, some NAIA over NCAA.
I must admit that I am worried that the very high level soccer for women in SC is being primarily pushed to supply mainly D1 players. Very good, some would argue even better, soccer is played at D2 levels. Very often D2 schools offer full scholarships while D1's probably average from 25% to 45% if any at all. I know of girls who turned down 100% scholarships at large prominent D2's because they wanted to attend a certain D1 and either not play, or play for reduced or no scholarhips. Conversely, I know of girls with D1 offers who wanted to only go to D2 schools, and accepted D2 offers. Are the super teams for men geared towards D1 play only? How many male players at this level seek D2, or D3, play? Is this what is planned for the women as well? This OK but it really needs to be said that this is the purpose. Will a parent pay for this level of play and the travel costs if their extremely good player wants to attend a smaller school? I support the super teams but, for girls especially, will the concept exist that you must play for these teams to play D1 only?
