If you go back and read about it, you'll find that there is not a lot of enthusiasm surrounding the previous crossflow program, mostly because of the results compared to the costs the last time it was done. I don't have all the numbers in front of me, but I was going through IFF/FTU at the time that previous wave of crossflows was going through the pipeline ('99 timeframe) and on into their first tours in ops squadrons.
The fact is, many crossflow pilots didn't end up performing as well as hoped at all stages of follow-on training (IFF. FTU, squadron MQT, etc). Some of them did great, of course (I know a couple that went on to perform well above average in the F-15E community), but statistically they did "worse" (in terms of pipeline training washouts and issues in operational units).
Most of the crossflow pilots that were my classmates and squadronmates were superb officers with fantastic officer performance records (and extremely good dudes to boot), but that didn't always continue into performance in the cockpit. It wasn't a "talent" issue with the crossflow pilots so much as it was an "experience" issue; one has to acknowledge, weather it is politically correct to or not, that there are significant cultural differences between the fighter community and other flying communities (although the bomber community is a somewhat close relative) that translate to differences in skills/airmanship in the pilots that come from those communities. What makes an aviator great in the MAF isn't the same thing that makes an aviator great in the CAF.
On the most basic level, the crossflow pilots, for the most part, were not used to being single-seat decisionmakers at much higher speeds, and much higher Gs, while hand-flying significantly more aggressive/dynamic maneuvers. Many times the core airmanship just wasn't operating well at 400 knots and pilots were just behind the jet (sound judgment, just not fast enough); sometimes a thousand hours on autopilot in the flight levels did not translate to having hands good enough for even basic admin formation work, much less more complex BFM or surface attack. This isn't unique to the crossflow folks, though; this is the same thing seen many times with ANG/Reserve fighter units that hire non-fighter guys and send them through IFF and fighter FTUs. There was a big wave of those guys about 8 or 9 years ago (mostly A-10 units at the time, but I don't remember why), and they had an unusually high washout rate, too, with some guys who did superb being the exception rather than the rule.
None the less, the end result was that there was higher attrition of the crossflow guys compared to straight pipeline students, and the fighter brass largely decided it wasn't that much of a benefit. Again, not that the crossflow pilots were idiots or anything (in fact, quite the opposite -- most of them had impressive OPRs/jobs/awards, seemed to have been superb pilots in their previous lives, and were really great dudes), but their previous flying time had given them habits and airmanship that did not dovetail into success in fighters.
All that being said, when Lorenz made the T-38 track at UPT "universally assignable" several years ago, one of the rationalizations that I heard discussed numerous times amongst AETC staff dudes was the future crossflow potential. Specifically, I heard a lot of folks talking about how F-35 was going to ramp up at some point in the mid-future, and the AF needed a T-38 trained pool of pilots who could quickly move over to train for that (remember, this is the same time period when the numbers of students going to fighters had been choked off to a mere trickle).
Remember that even in the 98/99 crossflow, only T-38 trained pilots were eligible. I don't think T-38 trained MAF pilots would be a "starting point"; I think they would be the only ones eligible.