The News Herald (Willoughby, OH)
Star system in recruiting should be barred
Recruiting of high school athletes, especially in football and basketball, is an industry that makes a whole lot of people a whole lot of money.
It’s reasonable to wonder, though, about human cost — as in the whole lot of stress the hype part of it can yield in the short and long term for athletes.
This is a concept that will never be used because it’s too hard to break habits and it’s far too easy to implement, so of course it would meet resistance.
Take a stopwatch and time the 40-yard dash, cone drill and shuttles until the battery dies. Pull out a tape measure for vertical jump, broad jump, height and hand size until it can no longer recoil.
Count off reps on bench press until hoarse. Watch games until a hard drive and monitor overheat. Rank athletes on those variables if you must.
Just get rid of one unsightly and grossly unnecessary recruiting element: For the sake of high school athletes and families and coaches, fan bases and colleges from sea to shining sea, eliminate the star system for good.
Take those stars and chuck them out the door with enough trajectory that they clear the block across the street and land on an eight-lane highway, on which they can be pulverized by an oncoming stampede of 18-wheelers and cement mixers.
The star system isn’t a positive for an athlete if it’s ultimately and largely off-base. And if it is, stars are a stigma.
Being a five-star recruit has no gray area. It means pundits, scouts and coaches were right, that an athlete has once-in-ageneration drive and talent, or it means a legacy of curiosity — why didn’t they match the hype, and where did it all go wrong?
And for every five-star recruit, there are thousands more who aren’t but ultimately wind up showing they should have been judged more astutely in retrospect after a sterling college career or for the fortunate few in the pro ranks of their craft.
Excuse a bold idea, but athletes should be afforded the chance to sink or swim on their own merit. Let their talent, heart, maturity and desire dictate what direction they go.
If they succeed or fail, underachieve or overachieve, let them do it without some ill-advised and silly star system that clearly serves no one well.
To hammer home the point of how much of an inexact science stars can be, I analyzed the ESPN 150 college football recruiting rankings from 2010 to 2014.
ESPN is far from the only offender, and it’s not as if the hard-working people who compile lists are trying to get it wrong.
But if you have a better chance of finding gold bars buried in your backyard than striking gold with a correct estimation on a five-star recruit, why even bother?
In those five years of ESPN 150s combined, there were 63 supposed five-star recruits. Of those 63, 13 wound up All-Americans in college and 11 were first-round NFL draft picks. There were two conference players of the year and one Heisman Trophy winner (Derrick Henry).
But for every Jadeveon Clowney or Myles Garrett, there were dozens more who barely made a dent, whose careers in college or later in the pros were more like fading stars than five stars. Then there’s the recruits who made stars look silly for the better.
Luke Joeckel was the No. 2 pick in 2013 out of Texas A&M and the 2012 Outland Trophy winner. Granted, his NFL career hasn’t gone to plan, but the Arlington (Texas) senior was deemed the 83rdbest player in his 2010 class. Before making a national splash at Louisville, QB Teddy Bridgewater was No. 143 among the nation’s seniors in 2011.
Raiders wide receiver and former Alabama star Amari Cooper barely cracked the top 50 in 2012 at No. 49, like Bridgewater coming out of Miami Northwestern (Fla.)
Joey Bosa had 51 tackles for loss and 26 sacks at Ohio State before being taken third overall by the Chargers in 2016. Three years prior, there were allegedly 55 players better than the Fort Lauderdale St. Thomas Aquinas (Fla.) defensive lineman.
Stars hurt more than they help, especially when they set a bar of expectation that, for whatever reason, can’t be reached.
When we place college and pro athletes on a pedestal, their skill and work ethic make them deserving of that attention. But it can get to a point at which that scrutiny is alarming.
When high school athletes are treated like raw meat with a perception-driven star system that is not interpreted well by those knowledgable and many more who are not, it can border toward creepy.
A whole lot of money should be a lot less important than a whole lot of athletes whose lives would be improved minus stars — teenagers who should be taught that you get a fair shot at anything as long as you’re willing to pay the price to achieve your dreams.