The flaw in this, and with USSF's thinking, is that it wrongly assumes there is one best path for everyone. Sure, many will become marginally better if they skip HS and train with their club all year, but they can do that anyway. But forcing kids to skip HS if they want to play high level comp soccer just drives many kids to do something else because training 4x a week for club just isn't a lot of fun for most girls, who have better things to do. Not all HS programs suck, and there can be significant value for many kids playing HS even beyond getting a little recognition and joy out of the sport every once in a while. Playing HS almost invariably forces an elite comp player to be more assertive than playing club since they will inevitably be "the man", for example. And is likely to keep a lot more kids playing soccer and for longer than they would otherwise. Telling an 8th grade girl that their HS sports career is over before it began if they want to play soccer just means many kids will play some other sport. Like I have said many times, the only advantage the US has over other countries is that far more girls play the sport and for longer, and everything US Soccer does to deter anyone from playing the sport only helps level the playing field.
Another flaw is the assumption that more foreign players will overwhelm the college ranks. The reality is no one is getting any better, and there is absolutely no evidence that the rest of the World is closing any gaps. The WNT is the most dominating, and over the longest period of time, it has been in its entire history. When France gets better, Japan gets worse. When England gets better, Sweden gets worse. Worrying that foreigners will soon take all the college slots from our American girls is more than a little xenophobic, and there is nothing to support the proposition that the U.S. is falling behind.
That said, the WNT will soon start to fail, but not because kids play HS, and because of the biggest flaw in your argument, which is that the DA is generally better equipped to make an impact college player. That is true on the boys' side, but only because the DA wiped out the competition and the entire competitive landscape, so the only decent players must play DA. By default that makes them better equipped to be impact players than those who don't play DA. However, those impact college players (and all players produced in the DA) are worse overall than what the U.S. was producing pre-DA. The overall quality of boys youth players has declined significantly compared to the pre-DA era, and that cannot be reasonably disputed. After more than a decade of the DA, the MNT couldn't qualify for the WC, couldn't beat Trinidad and Tobago, and the new crop of players just got humiliated by Mexico. Sure they tied Uruguay, but without Suarez, Cavani, Godin, or anybody really. The current state of men's soccer is the worst it has ever been in the U.S., mostly because the US hasn't produced anyone who can play during the DA era. Even the mighty Pulisic can barely find the field for Chelsea. The DA system prohibits so many kids with potential from being able to play soccer at a high level even if they wanted to. Kids quit because it's too expensive, or too time consuming, or they can't impress HS cheerleaders, or the time commitment negatively impacts their grades, or they can't play football, or whatever the reason. The one thing USSF fails to understand is the only thing that can make a better soccer country is to have more kids play it, more often, and for a longer span of years. Everything abut the DA does the opposite of that.
Number of official club games for SW teams seems to close enough to the same for whether SW DA (24 league + 9 showcase games) or SW ECNL (22 league + 9 showcase games). There is then the postseason for both to be added to these totals where applicable.
