My alliance is the Elite Donators. It may not be the most original or inspiring name, but until the update it seemed to attract a decent number of folks. Now, we don't even show up if you search for "elite" or "donators".
I don't know how to tell alliance rank if you're not in the top 100, which we aren't, but I suspect we're not even in the top 500. We aren't an alliance of power players. We're not shooting to top the in-game alliance boards or the unofficial world war boards. My vision for our alliance is pretty simple: when allies request troops, they should get good ones without having to wait too long. It's surprisingly difficult to get this to happen consistently, and requires a fair amount of pruning. People join and then never request or donate ever, or request and request and never donate. In any free to play game there's a lot of churn and this one is no exception, so even formerly-reliable allies frequently go inactive for one reason or another. Without a constant infusion of new players, it's easy to drop below the critical mass of people requesting and donating needed to keep the alliance viable.
You guys have access to metrics and information that I don't, but it seems to me that routing people towards well-populated, active alliances is likely to provide a more satisfying experience than shunting them into small alliances where their troop requests may go unanswered for hours or even days. People who care about such things know which the top alliances are, so the big guys will probably always have a pretty easy time finding recruits. It's the modest, mid-tier alliances like mine that this change really hurts. If you want to encourage new alliances, maybe flag alliances that are relatively new and active as up-and-comers and let people search specifically for those? But in the meantime, please reconsider the change to the alliance search so that you don't inadvertently starve a bunch of active, vibrant alliances of the recruits they need to keep going.