Evils of Recruiting 14 year olds

[bags27]

almost sounds obscene, doesn't it?

I have a feeling an article on this subject was posted recently. Maybe not this one:
The impact of early recruiting on players and coaches

Young women recount the enormous physical and mental toll of aspiring to be D-1 athletes before their time.

I've said that no college coach or team should be allowed any contact with an athlete until she completely 10th grade. I read someone else on the BY say not until she finishes her 11th grade season. Whichever.

 

[UConnNick]

While I completely agree that HS sophomores and younger players shouldn't be part of the recruiting process, there's unfortunately no way for any athletic governing body to enforce any rules which would prohibit the conduct.

It's impossible for the NCAA to enforce most of its arcane rules as it is, with only something like 44 employees on its enforcement staff. That's why the rule Kelvin Sampson and Jim Calhoun violated has been removed from the NCAA rulebook. It's unenforceable, and it's the exact same rule being considered here.

Sadly, in the vast majority of cases, the NCAA's enforcement actions are strictly reactive. They only investigate when schools get ratted out by other schools, or by the media. I'm sure most folks on this forum recall Pat Summitt's misguided accusations against Geno just because she couldn't stand the thought that he beat her out to get Maya Moore. That's the only way most NCAA investigations happen. 44 people can't effectively police over 1,000 member institutions.

The schools all know it, so implementing new rules would just create a whole new rash of cheating, which would mean the practice doesn't stop, it just goes underground, which might be even worse. As it is, none of it is binding, so the rationale for not implementing new rules will be the non-binding aspect.

Until such time as the schools remove the economic pressure on their coaches, who are all worried about keeping their jobs, this situation will continue to get worse, not better, with no effective remedy.

 

[bags27]

While I appreciate these thoughts about the lack of realistic enforcement, the larger point, perhaps, is that if it were made illegal, at least it won't be public. Coaches won't hang around 14 year olds; 14 year olds won't tweet friends: "hey, I just got a scholarship offer from the University of X and a date to the 9th grade social at the same time!" These won't solve the problem but it will have at least a chilling effect on its public discussion and then on the obvious public pressures. Occasionally, the NCAA will decide to do its job and erratically punish someone--just enough to keep people mostly honest. The kids need to grow up a bit unobserved, I think.

 

[UcMiami]

I think this line sums it up!
You're not good enough, her mother told her. You need to try harder!

Nothing to do with coaches - if you got parents like that you have an issue and it can be about sports or school work or popularity - just about anything.

Part of this is the participation trophy syndrome extended the age of rejection later into life - at some point someone has to be cut from the team, some one has to lose, and the longer you put off the pain doesn't really change the issue - would you rather she gets to 17, discovers she isn't talented enough because she didn't get pushed earlier, and now she is paying her own way and maybe getting to walk on for some team.

 

[UConnNick]

While I appreciate these thoughts about the lack of realistic enforcement, the larger point, perhaps, is that if it were made illegal, at least it won't be public. Coaches won't hang around 14 year olds; 14 year olds won't tweet friends: "hey, I just got a scholarship offer from the University of X and a date to the 9th grade social at the same time!" These won't solve the problem but it will have at least a chilling effect on its public discussion and then on the obvious public pressures. Occasionally, the NCAA will decide to do its job and erratically punish someone--just enough to keep people mostly honest. The kids need to grow up a bit unobserved, I think.

The NCAA's efforts to "erratically punish someone", which is the present status quo, is a corrupt process by definition because the entire institution is corrupt and morally bankrupt. It serves as no deterrent to cheating.

Every single major college athletic program cheats in some manner, either willfully or due to lack of knowledge or understanding of the byzantine labyrinth of nonsensical NCAA rules. The odds of any individual NCAA signatory institution getting caught are about as slim as winning at the roulette wheel. If any of them were concerned about getting caught the present system wouldn't be as broken as it is.

Even if they do get caught, there are certain schools that know the fix is in for them. All you'd accomplish by establishing rules is the rich will get even richer because they know how to work the system and get away with it.

 

[UConnNick]

I think this line sums it up!
You're not good enough, her mother told her. You need to try harder!

Nothing to do with coaches - if you got parents like that you have an issue and it can be about sports or school work or popularity - just about anything.

Part of this is the participation trophy syndrome extended the age of rejection later into life - at some point someone has to be cut from the team, some one has to lose, and the longer you put off the pain doesn't really change the issue - would you rather she gets to 17, discovers she isn't talented enough because she didn't get pushed earlier, and now she is paying her own way and maybe getting to walk on for some team.

This is a prime example of what Jim Calhoun referred to in his first book as "whack job parents." As a former youth league and junior HS coach, I've always loved his characterization of these folks. I grew up in a city surrounded by them.

 

[bags27]

Well, all parents (certainly yours truly!) are whack jobs. That's the definition of parent in Webster's. So, if a parent pushes a kid and puts a lot of pressure on them, that's a bad thing. Of course, a lot of kids look back and attribute their success to that. And parents who nurture and understand their kids get blamed by their kids later for pushing them harder. Let's face it: there's no right or wrong way, no guarantees, just love.

So, I don't put so much blame on parents who spend 24/7 worrying about their kids. But it's certainly right to blame coaches who spend 24/7 worrying about their jobs by putting undo pressure on those kids. They're not their kids: leave them alone!

 

[Jmul760170]

almost sounds obscene, doesn't it?

I have a feeling an article on this subject was posted recently. Maybe not this one:
The impact of early recruiting on players and coaches

Young women recount the enormous physical and mental toll of aspiring to be D-1 athletes before their time.

I've said that no college coach or team should be allowed any contact with an athlete until she completely 10th grade. I read someone else on the BY say not until she finishes her 11th grade season. Whichever.

This is something a family I'm very close with is beginning to experience 1st hand.
Recruiting letters before their child has even gotten out of jr high.
I'm excited for the opportunities that are sure to come in the future, but I hope their is a check and balance system in place to protect the child from feeling this kind of pressure.

 

[UcMiami]

Well, all parents (certainly yours truly!) are whack jobs. That's the definition of parent in Webster's. So, if a parent pushes a kid and puts a lot of pressure on them, that's a bad thing. Of course, a lot of kids look back and attribute their success to that. And parents who nurture and understand their kids get blamed by their kids later for pushing them harder. Let's face it: there's no right or wrong way, no guarantees, just love.

So, I don't put so much blame on parents who spend 24/7 worrying about their kids. But it's certainly right to blame coaches who spend 24/7 worrying about their jobs by putting undo pressure on those kids. They're not their kids: leave them alone!

Agree it is a minefield being a parent.
But do you want teachers to lay off as well? And HS coaches? I just think being a kid is a minefield as well, and we as a society are trying to pretend there is some magic formula that perfectly can shepherd every child through to adulthood - at the moment that formula seems to be to remove all stresses - everybody gets to participate and gets a trophy, everybody gets presents at a birthday party, teachers can't fail students because they then have to fill out all sorts of forms to justify the failure (and then get docked pay if to many kids fail in their school), etc.

But most of us thrive under some stress and need it to reach our potential. Most of us learn from failures and need there to be consequences to our actions - we can't just hit the reset button on the game console in real life. Not to get too 'political' but one problem with the theory of communism is that guaranteeing survival to all removes the imperative to actually work for it. And moving the experiential learning process further up the age curve is in my view not really helping. And it is happening at the same time we are moving the competition for 'places' down to pre-school level and the systematic process of learning down to that level as well.

 

[bags27]

Thanks UcMiami for these thoughtful comments. I'm not saying that folks should lay off. Kids need to learn that there are consequences to decisions about how committed one is to a goal. Ideally, it should be done gradually, but, to all lives "stuff happens." Along the way and in a highly unpredictable manner, parents, coaches, teachers, and peers teach these things to us, and, when out in the work place, bosses and the crushing forces of the global economy make sure we know them.

There is an extremely small subset of youngsters who are D-1 athlete aspirants. To get to that place, it is often true that parents really push those kids. Sometimes because the parents believe that the kids really want to achieve that status and the parents are just helping them to fulfill those dreams. Sometimes, parents are more motivated by their own desire for prestige or for the assurance of a free college education for their kids (which may be selfish or, if parents have no money, altruistic).

In the insanity of sports culture in our society (where, say, the NFL was actively suppressing evidence of C.T.E., or where individual athletes risk their health through various illegal drugs, or where--and I've witnessed this--amateur athletes cheat when absolutely nothing is at stake), the easiest place to at least lower some of the stress is to protect the very youngest of these athletes from whatever pressure we can. We can't stop parents from being parents; and, who is to say what a good or bad parent is? But we can simply say that coaches can't have contact with athletes until they've finished the 10th grade. It's the lowest of the low hanging fruit.

 

[Alydar]

But we can simply say that coaches can't have contact with athletes until they've finished the 10th grade. It's the lowest of the low hanging fruit.

Ok, so college coaches can't contact these young players. Coaches will just use indirect methods, like using HS coaches, and more importantly, AAU coaches. AAU is where the talent is concentrated. So how long would it take till college progams start offerring "honorariums" to the elite AAU coaches to steer players to their schools? I wouldn't be surprised if some of that isn't going on already but if coaches were denied contact the practice would certainly increase.

To think that simply making a rule solves any problem ignores reality. As long as there is an incentive to attracting top athletes their schools, people at those schools will find ways to get their message to the athletes.

 

[bags27]

Ok, so college coaches can't contact these young players. Coaches will just use indirect methods, like using HS coaches, and more importantly, AAU coaches. AAU is where the talent is concentrated. So how long would it take till college progams start offerring "honorariums" to the elite AAU coaches to steer players to their schools? I wouldn't be surprised if some of that isn't going on already but if coaches were denied contact the practice would certainly increase.To think that simply making a rule solves any problem ignores reality. As long as there is an incentive to attracting top athletes their schools, people at those schools will find ways to get their message to the athletes.

Right, Alydar. I think we covered that point above. No one is foolish enough to believe it would be a panacea. No one thing is going to change a culture. Just because some people get away with murder doesn't mean we shouldn't outlaw murder. Keeping coaches away may somewhat reduce--not eliminate--the pressure. I think the argument against this position needs to show what the harm would be to 14 and 15 year old athletes if coaches are not allowed to contact them, and then to argue that that harm is greater than the current situation.

In the original article that we've been discussing, here is a quotation:
Penn lacrosse coach Karin Brower Corbett wants the NCAA to ban all recruiting contact until a high school athlete's junior year.
I take from this that she, at least, believes it would do some good.

 

[Alydar]

Does a law keep you from murdering? People follow laws they agree with. Just making a rule banning contact will do nothing but move that contact underground and into indirect and highly corruptible ways. It will also require enorcement and the cost of that enforcement.

Sorry, but I have a huge problem with the idea that making laws solves anything.

 

[bags27]

Does a law keep you from murdering?....I have a huge problem with the idea that making laws solves anything.

Right: you and I have very different views on the construction of civil society, so we agree to disagree.

 

[cabbie191]

This is a prime example of what Jim Calhoun referred to in his first book as "whack job parents." As a former youth league and junior HS coach, I've always loved his characterization of these folks. I grew up in a city surrounded by them.

There's "whack job parents" as Calhoun referred to, and then the ultimate "whack job parent" as found in Texas. This is the 25th year anniversary of the Texas mom who hired a hit man to kill a cheerleader's mother so her own daughter could have a spot on the team. Wanda Holloway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The pressure on kids to perform has always been there.

When my two girls were growing up and trying all sorts of activities, ranging from music to the arts to sports, our parental rule was if you decided to join an activity/team, you had to give it your best shot and a full year or season before dropping out. I was insistent on this in particular because after reaching adulthood, I regretted that my parents made it too easy for me to disengage from activities if I didn't like them - which usually meant I found them too challenging.

On the other hand, though my kids were and are very talented young women, it was clear that they weren't of the caliber to be offered scholarships on anything other than academic ability, so we never felt any external pressure to push them further.