Computer science degree requirements often have a rigid pre- and corequisite structure, which can impede a student’s progression through a degree and in particular can add one or more semesters to degree time to completion, particularly for those students who need to retake a course that serves as a prerequisite to many other courses and for students who are not calculus-ready when they enter university. In this paper, we present the results of a comparative analysis of curricula before and after a major structural revision. The first curriculum adheres to the conventional rigid prerequisite structure, while the second emphasizes student choice and multiple pathways through the degree. No changes were made to the course content/outcomes between the two versions. Employing curricular metrics such as complexity and centrality, we examine the degree progress of 3010 students over a six-year period. Specifically, our investigation looks at the impact of reducing curricular complexity on student attrition from and attraction to the CS major. The new curriculum, with a 60% reduction in curricular structural complexity, showed both increased retention of students over the old curriculum (67% to 98%) and an increase in the number of students converting from undeclared to computer science (44% to 69%). Our findings demonstrate that reducing curricular complexity need not compromise program rigor and can benefit students by providing greater flexibility and ensuring earlier exposure to (and therefore retention in) CS.