Turner to target recruiting publications

[dcpony]

Associated Press
By Dave Skretta
Sunday, April 8, 2007
ANALYSIS
Recruits or commodities?
Critics say scrutiny by media and fans can ruin careers



SHAWNEE, Kan. — Blake Larsen wishes he could have been just another guy on campus.



Now a police officer in suburban Kansas City, it was only a few years ago that he was a 6-foot-7, 320-pound offensive lineman and the prized recruit of the University of Iowa. He was a Parade All-American, rated by several experts as the top offensive line prospect in 2001.

Larsen never started a game.

"It's tough to stay grounded," he said. "You're the center of attention. You start to believe your own hype."

Larsen quit the Hawkeyes' program after his junior year, one of many former high school stars whose college careers are tarnished by unfulfilled, and often unrealistic, expectations.

While injuries and academic problems have doomed many, experts and administrators increasingly say external influences -- mainly fans and the media -- are contributing to the downfall of high school athletes when they reach college.

In some cases, players develop a sense of entitlement that sets them up for failure, said Doug Gardner, a sports psychologist with ThinkSport Consulting Service in Lafayette, Calif. In other cases, athletes wilt under the pressure and scrutiny.

"A lot of young people get totally absorbed in the situation," Gardner said. "They're flattered that someone is interested in them."

R. Gerald Turner, co-chairman of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, said the attention is "dramatically impinging upon the lives of student-athletes," turning them into commodities by people "who care nothing about them other than their news value."

Turner, the president of Southern Methodist University, said there is a pressing need for recruiting reform but acknowledges there is no good way to curtail growing public interest.

"We've become very concerned with the intrusiveness of the whole process on the lives of these young people," Turner said, "as if nothing about college is of importance other than how many stars they get on their athletic ranking."

Companies such as Rivals.com and Scout.com have found a niche in recruiting coverage and are becoming the target of reformers like Turner.

By the time the football signing period ended April 1, both sites had extensive profiles on nearly every player who signed an NCAA Division I letter of intent. Most were accompanied by photographs and video clips.

The news comes at a price, though. Many athletes say they get phone calls from reporters at least once a week, often more. Letters, e-mails and text-messages are almost constant.

"There are obviously some (players) who enjoy it," Turner said, "but plenty of others and their parents are crying out for a more controlled system."

Bobby Burton, editor-in-chief for Nashville, Tenn.-based Rivals.com, argues that his Web site provides a valuable watchdog service over the sometimes seedy world of recruiting, while delivering a product fans crave.

The popular network logged 1.6 billion page views last year, and many prospects and college athletes have subscriptions. Rivals.com consistently rates as one of the "stickiest" sports sites on the Internet, according to comScore Media Metrix's measurements of the amount of time people spend on Web sites.

Patrick Crumb, senior vice president of Fox Media Interactive, which owns Scout.com, believes recruiting coverage has become mainstream. USA Today, ESPN and others, including The Courier-Journal, cover it, particularly around national signing day in February.

"We're certainly cognizant of the fact that we're dealing with teenagers and young adults," Crumb said. "But I think we're gaining quite a bit of credibility."

Not among coaches like Iowa's Kirk Ferentz, who said the attention creates "undue and unnormal pressure" on highly touted recruits that causes more to wash out than in years past.

"The exposure to recruiting is greater now than it's ever been," Ferentz said. "There's a stronger interest -- not always healthy -- but a stronger interest in recruiting than ever before."

In the recruiting class of 2002, nine of the top 100 players identified by Rivals.com didn't make it to campus. Thirty-one did not play their entire career at the school where they signed, excluding a handful who left early for the NFL.

"The pressure the outside sources put on you, expectations get real high," Arkansas coach Houston Nutt said. "We've had a lot of five stars that didn't pan out. It just seems like it's out of hand. You just have to keep up with the faith that there will be something or some legislation to rein it in."

Ray Reitz, a football coach at Pennsylvania's Jeannette High School for the past 25 years, said the attention he gets for junior quarterback Terrelle Pryor -- who has more than a dozen offers from the likes of Michigan and Penn State -- is staggering.

"The danger of society right now is kids are skipping these years, adolescent to adult," Reitz said. "There's people out there exploiting kids like this."

Cathy Larsen remembers the Internet message boards ripping on her son when he did not make an immediate impact at Iowa. Those who lauded him began to attack him.

"It's hard, because you have to live up to that," Cathy Larsen said. "He would call home and you could just tell in his voice."

Blake Larsen says he's still a success, unlike so many other high-profile recruits who flame out. Larsen earned a degree, met his wife at Iowa and landed a job he loves.

But, he acknowledges, his football career might have turned out different if not for the attention he received in high school. He considers a former teammate, Bob Sanders, who arrived on campus relatively unknown and blossomed into a star for the Indianapolis Colts.

"He's a Super Bowl champion now," Larsen said. "When they do something great, it really opens eyes. If you're already getting all the hype, it's pretty much, 'He was supposed to do that.' "

[Stallion]

there certainly should be changes. But this is so far down the list of issues the NCAA should be concerned with its silly. Who is blame for the culture of "player entitlement"-Rivals or the universities themselves?

Its a way for the NCAA to deflect criticism from the real problems that are just be brushed under the table by the NCAA like the use of street agents in recruiting process, grade washing in prep schools, unregulated, uncertified prep schools, the problems involved with AAU basketball, the unregulated concentration of players in easy majors such as basketball theory and basket-weavingto keep them eligible, the unregulated independent Foundations and Associations funneling money into universities-especially state universities which are not controlled by the universities, the lack of control by universities over NCAA money coming into athletic programs, out of control spending on athletic facilities and coaches salaries, the prolieration of "money games" between shools playing on two different levels like UT v. Sam Houston St., and what I consider an anticonmpetitive illegal cartel run by a quasi independent BCS which controls college football including TV rights, bowl games, conference affiation, the NCAA BB tournament, and the BCS championship series.

The NCAA has essentially abdicated its role to a big time professional collegiate football organization over which it retains ZERO control. Yes there should be some limits on access by recruiting services but they are protected by Freedom of Press rights which the NCAA will and can have no control over. The NCAA has no jurisdiction over publicity of players who are in high school. The NCAA DOES or SHOULD have control over college players and the NCAA abdication of its role over college players is the real indictment that should be exposed and is most responsible for the culture of "player entitlement".

The NCAA created this mess by essentially creating a professional intercollegiate football and basketball league that functions outside the realm of the universities and trational notions of fair play. Its a miracle the the Internal Revenue Service hasn't taken away the NCAA's educational institutions exemption for tax free donations to athletic programs.

President Turner no matter his good intentions will have no control over any of these issues because the NCAA is only a figurehead and does not run college athletics. The monopoly control of the BCS schools controls college athletics and each one of those issues will be determined by the BCS bloc. Until the NCAA has the balls to retake control of college athletics then its President will be relegated to complaining about stupid issues like the effects of recruiting services over college athletics. Deal with the real problems creating the culture of "player entitlement" not straw men.

[SMU Football Blog]

Well said

[EastStang]

Agree entirely Stallion. And of course the NCAA rather than dealing with these real issues attacks such important issues as: What South Carolina's state flag looks like; Whether William and Mary should have feathers on its logo; Should a white guy dressed like a native American at Florida State can plant a spear at midfield, and should a white guy dressed like a native American be permitted to dance at Illinois basketball games? Rather than be relevant in dealing with the issues of educating the young men and women who participate in intercollegiate sports and making sure that students accepted at Universities are academically eligible, they concern themselves with window dressing and count the checks payable to the University. They are about as relevant as a passed gas on a windy day. But we bear a modicum responsibility. By requiring coaches to show wins and losses and success on the field and moaning when our team loses or the super athlete goes to UT, we enable the environment where grades get washed, players skate by, and the Dexter Manley's of the world spend four years in college and no one bothers to show them how to read. Great system. Now why did Tulsa get that recruit and we didn't?

[Stallion]

BTW I'm not really criticizing Turner or those advocating change-I support those changes as long as SMU isn't one of the few following them. What I'm criticizing is that Turner and others are simply figureheads and window dressing as you say because the NCAA really does not have the power to solve the NCAAs policies. The BCS monopoly holds almost complete control over the policies of the NCAA because the NCAA ceded control long ago.

[Mexmustang]

I think all college presidents need to take a hard look at the quick verdict rendered by the President of Duke University against his three lacrosse players. Alumns of Duke should be outraged and ask for his dismissal just as quickly as he dismissed the team's coach and cancelled the rest of the team's '06 season.

Makes me ask, "what punishment was rendered to the student that forced SMU to bench our quarterback (Willis) prior to the UTEP game, and why was that not written up in the paper?" Perhaps he was simply a victim and therefore shouldn't have been punished. Regardless Willis was publicly judged and penalized before the facts were made clear.