PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Article on Recruiting at a Young Age


HuskerFan86
02-10-2003, 12:50 PM
Fast-breaking toward youth

BY JENA JANOVY
WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER

Josh Dotzler was an eighth-grader when the college recruiting letters started arriving.

They weren't high-pressure recruiting pitches or scholarship offers. Just letters from coaches who wanted to introduce themselves, say a few nice things about their basketball programs and let Dotzler know they'd been watching him.

Funny. He hadn't even suited up for a high school game.

Abby Henry is getting the letters now. She's a 14-year-old eighth-grader at Riverside Middle School in Oakland, Iowa. The letters are from coaches who just want to introduce themselves, say a few nice things about their programs and let Abby know they're watching her.

Again, not a minute on the high school hardwood.

Welcome to the new world order of college recruiting.

This rite of passage once was reserved for the most elite high school athletes, a time for the top juniors and seniors to bask in the attention of college recruiters. Now, coaches are beginning to identify talent at a younger age, sometimes as early as the seventh grade.

Athletes are beginning to make college choices earlier, too, as Dotzler did. The sophomore point guard for Top 10 No. 6 Bellevue West became the youngest player to accept a scholarship offer to Creighton University when he gave his oral commitment on Jan. 27 to Bluejay Coach Dana Altman.

It's not that high school juniors and seniors are being passed by for the sake of youth. Indeed, juniors and seniors remain the primary focus of recruiters. And it's not as if seventh-graders are receiving scholarship offers.

But across the country, particularly the highly competitive athlete markets on the East and West Coasts, some coaches are racing to see who can make a connection with the next generation. The next Kirk Hinrich or Diana Taurasi.

The trend is not universally welcomed by coaches, parents and athletes. Some fear the attention creates too much pressure on young athletes and can produce unreasonable expectations and eventual disappointment.

Others, however, say the prospect of earning a college scholarship is worth it, that such a carrot is great motivation to work hard and improve. Keep it in perspective and an athlete will learn the value of hard work and dedication needed to achieve a goal.

Besides, for more than a decade, colleges and universities have been inviting junior high students interested in science, mathematics, engineering, music and art to attend summer workshops and camps tailored to their interests.

"I think recruiting at a younger age is probably better," said Henry, the 5-foot-6 shooting guard for Riverside. Her goal is to play Division I basketball.

"If I know people might be looking at me at a younger age, it motivates me to keep working harder so when I'm older I might have a chance to go to college on a scholarship," she said. "It's not too young to start thinking about college."

Henry is considered one of the top young players in the area, along with eighth-grader Kelsey Woodard, the younger sister of Creighton freshman and 2002 All-Nebraska captain Kristi Woodard; and eighth-grader Brooke DeLano, a 6-1 post player from Bennington.

Omaha Central guard Crystal Howard, now a junior, began getting recruited as a sophomore, and Millard South freshman Yvonne Turner undoubtedly is on college coaches' radars.

South Sioux City product Katie Robinette, now at Iowa State, attracted even more interest.

In one of the most high-profile battles for a junior-high recruit, some of the nation's elite women's basketball programs are in hot pursuit of a 13-year-old Delaware girl, Elena DelleDonne. The seventh-grader already has received letters of interest from Duke, Penn State, Villanova, Delaware and defending NCAA national champion Connecticut.

On the boys side, Cortney Grixby, now a junior at Omaha Central, had major-college athletic scholarships worth a quarter of a million dollars in hand before he turned 16 a year ago. He'd been offered full rides in two sports - from Nebraska, Colorado and Iowa in football and Nebraska again in basketball. His younger brother, Ronnell Grixby, now a seventh-grader, already is being talked about as a prospective Division I scholarship athlete.

And there are more and more stories of area boys making early college choices. Along with Dotzler, there's Roy Enright, who committed to Nebraska his sophomore year at Omaha Burke, and Adam Haluska, who committed to ISU before entering his sophomore year at Carroll, Iowa.

Creighton Women's Coach Jim Flanery said the trend is "a little overboard."

"It allows the schools with the most resources another advantage because they can get out and watch those kids," he said, "and I think it puts too much pressure on kids at too young of an age."

Nebraska Women's Basketball Coach Connie Yori called the trend a "conundrum."

"You just don't know ethically at what age you are going to say that's too young," Yori said. "Unfortunately, we've gotten to this stage where it is getting really quite early. In some circumstances, there are still good players out there who aren't being recruited until their senior year or the summer before. But the more elite players are getting more attention early.

"So where do you draw the line? Do you start picking out two athletic parents and start recruiting out of the womb? . . . I figure when we get to the state where we're recruiting seventh-graders, then I think I'm in the wrong profession."

NCAA recruiting rules take effect when a student enters ninth grade or plays on a high school team as an eighth-grader. There's nothing to bar contact before that.

For now, Henry puts the letters in her dresser drawer at home.

"They just say what's been going on in the past for their basketball teams and they ask questions about my school and my favorite subject and how tall I am and what position I play," she said. "I filled out the question sheets and sent them back. I like bigger programs, like Duke and Tennessee, but I want to stay closer to home, so I like Creighton and Nebraska. It's exciting to get them."

HuskerFan86
02-10-2003, 01:03 PM
I don't have a problem with identifying and recruiting talented young athletes when they are high school freshman and sophomores, but sending recruting letters to 7th and 8th graders is a little crazy.

I have seen players like Josh Dotzler and Yvonne Turner and they are incredible, but they still have a lot of maturing to do before they are ready for D-1 basketball.

Programs like UConn and Duke to sending letters to a thirteen year old can't be good for the kid. Doesn't Texas Tech identify talented played in Texas at a very young age too.

What are everyone's feelings on recruitng at such a young age?

Like Connie said, "So where do you draw the line? Do you start picking out two athletic parents and start recruiting out of the womb?"

If this trend continues, breeding superior athletes won't seem so crazy twenty years down the line...

[This message has been edited by HuskerFan86 (edited 02-10-2003).]

schooner2
02-10-2003, 01:18 PM
Well, this article sites an example of a sophomore receiving a scholarship offer. That's pretty extreme. Would definitely have to think offering someone younger than this is absurd. But to send letters of interest to 7th-graders just to introduce themselves - that's not bad.

Keep in mind the NCAA keeps a very tight rein on the recruiting process. In home visits don't even start till quite late in the process. But, if a school can get a kid to come to a basketball camp - then the school can talk one-on-one with a kid - even if the kid is quite young like a 7th grader.

In one of Coach Coale's radio shows she talked at length about this and that they don't even start identifying prospects until they are about 15 years old. And it would take an extremely rare athlete that is also close by (like Oklahoma City) for them to go see a 9th grader. But traveling to AAU events seem to be restricted to 15-18 year olds.

Camps are the big plus. Getting kids to come on campus voluntarily and let the coaches view their skills and work ethic over a several day stretch -- that helps tremedously.

Press
02-10-2003, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by HuskerFan86:
[B]Doesn't Texas Tech identify talented played in Texas at a very young age too. B]

Yes, they do. Coach Sharp has mentioned that she started watching Valek (Purdue) Ayers, Ritchie and Jackson play when they were 11 and 12 years old, with the West Texas Flyers.

I also understand she started recruiting Adrianne Ross (Hobbs, NM) at a very young age as well.

I think showing the kids interested is fine, but offering them scholarships at that young age is a bit premature. Of cousre, if Sheryl Swoopes has a daughter anytime soon, I'm sure Coach Sharp would offer her while still in the delivery room, but can you blame her? http://hoopscoop.net/ubb/smile.gif THe chances of her kids being good players is pretty good.



[This message has been edited by Press (edited 02-10-2003).]

Row6Seat10
02-10-2003, 02:47 PM
It's the almighty dollar thats behind early recruiting.

Pressure to win makes a coaching staff do whatever it takes to get a jump on the next coaching staff to get the best kid available. With higher coaches salaries athletic directors expect the coach to win. In some instances boosters expect the same thing.

When Sanderford was here at Nebraska he made a base salary of $130,000 he never proved he could get the job done so his base salary never increased. Yori signed a base salary of $164,000. They both got incentives to win national titles of at least $50,000.

I believe it happens in every sport. The more you win the more dollars come into the school. With increased costs of running athletic programs, its getting down to win at all costs. Even if it means to start recruiting a kid right out of elementary school.

Jennifer
02-10-2003, 03:10 PM
You know, even with all the advances of women's sports in the last 10-15 years, I don't think I'm a fan of what organized sports in general have become, and the recruiting kids at a young ago goes along with that.

What's happened to letting kids be kids and just play and have fun? It's all become to serious--'win at all costs'. Yeah, I can see colleges wanting that (winning=$), but in youth leagues?
I witnessed a 4-5 year old soccer game this weekend. Some of the parents were just going nuts on the side, hollering at their kid as if they were playing in the World Cup. Then the kid comes out, and they are all over him about what he needs to do next time. The poor kid looked miserable.
Just from what little I've seen, things have changed a lot since the 80's/early 90's when I was involved in organized sports. Yeah, we did have a few of those fanatic parents, but all in all it was a fun environment. It just doesn't seem that way anymore.

ChipperF1
02-11-2003, 11:56 AM
"Yeah, we did have a few of those fanatic parents, but all in all it was a fun environment. It just doesn't seem that way anymore.

I agree with that and working with kids in sports for most of my adult life, I've seen it.

To me, its going downhill because of the way our culture has changed. We've always wanted to find great athletes, but it used to be you cast the net wide, everybody gets a chance to play and if you found a gem, you work with the gem, but not at the expense of the experience.
Nowadays, its more about in your face and who is #1 and who is the star. Its less about the honor of competition and sportsmanship. Its less about "picture day" and having a jersey and being a part of a team or being brothers and sisters on the fields of friendly strife.
When I was a young lad, we would hear stories of the East German and Soviet sport machines. How the DDR and the USSR would target talent and they'd be moved away from familes and put in special schools and we would blanche in horror.
Now, we're doing the same things here. The only difference is instead of service to the State, this is service to the Swoosh.

I think "elite youth athletics" have their place, but I also feel at times they are part of the problem. So many programs are switching up from recreation and teaching the game to talent creation. Look how many "everybody plays" leagues are dropping. The number of places were you are cutting 10-year-olds. In my mind, that's obscene. There is a time for that level of competition, but we're pushing that to earlier and earlier ages. In my mind, that's one reason why we are losing kids who want to play, because we've made it too cutthroat too soon.
We've gotten to the point now were everybody is concerned to the next level to a point where we are scouting nine-year olds and counting them out before they've begun to explore the type of person they are going to be. It's bad enough that we do this vulgar culling in our classrooms in our country, but on the playing fields, too. I was coaching in summer rec basketball league last summer. A girls team, ages 9-11. We weren't a good team, in fact we were a small version of this years Nebraska team. Not a lot of gifts, really didn't know the game. Needed tons of fundamental work. But it was fun because they were learning. That's the important thing at that age.
After one game, I was talking to some folks, parents and such. And one parent, who coaches an AAU team and his daughter played in our league said, "very few of these kids will do much at the next level."
I was taken aback by this. I retorted. "At this age, the next level is the next birthday."
He went on to talk about high school prospects and how he feels that kids have to show something relatively young, etc. Outside I was keeping cool, inside I'm seething because this is a person who lacks a fundamental understanding of young people. Young people grow and change. All human beings grow and change.

A lot of this goes back to adult, parents, and coaches and their own agendas. I rends my heart as a person who loves sports and kids to see a situation like the recent LeBron James unpleasantness, because know you'll have an army of lookie-loos, sneaker pimps, and electronic eyes looking for the next one to that borders on pedophilia. And my profession is part of problem, too. I'm not talking about the occasional profile on a prodigy by some local sportscaster. That isn't a bad thing, as long as it not taken to excess. But the over-the-top things I've seen recently? We only exacerbate the issue.
The good thing is, those people are in the minority. Jennifer, all is not lost. There are plenty of people with perspective and values in youth sports and God bless 'em. Its more that the bad apples tend to hog the microphone. However, I do agree and the kids are saying something missing the fun is missing because some folks take it too far.

As far the early recruiting goes, that somewhat sick. A college recruiting a kid at 13? That's a little much. It may be the competitive enviroment, but to me there is so much development as a person and as an athlete to do. To me even offering scholarship when a kid is a sophomore is a bit of a red flag to me. I say keep contact, but also give the kid room to grow. If your program has dealt with a person respectably, you will still have a high place with the student-athlete, naive as that may sound. There is more of this going on, but I worry about how far are we going to go and how far are we willing to go? The colleges are taking a page from the high schools. Your average high school coach has been railbirding many a Pop Warner game for decade trying to steer the kids their way. I don't have a problem with it, but at times it goes too far afield.

Five things I always tell parents the first day of practice about their kids future.

1. If your kid is a star, enjoy it. He could be on the bench next year.
2. If your kid is on the bench. Encourage. Remember Michael Jordan was once cut, too.
3. "The Next Level" is your kids next birthday.
4. Your kid isn't as good or as bad as you think they are. Meet Triumph and Disaster and treats those imposter just the same.
5. If your worried about your kid getting a scholarship so much MAKE SURE THEY DO THEIR HOMEWORK EVERYNIGHT. If your kid can read, write and rithmetic, his or her jump shot won't matter.

Point to ponder: Colleges are spending all this resources on trying to recruit kids to play ball at earlier and earlier ages. Yet Gifted and Talented programs in many of our schools are the first ones cut when we need to balance books in this country.

It's a thing that makes me go "hmmm".




[This message has been edited by ChipperF1 (edited 02-11-2003).]

MsProudSooner
02-12-2003, 12:20 AM
We've all seen middle school 'phenoms' who were terrific centers because they were 5'8" in 6th grade. Two years later, everyone else has caught up and passed them and they are no longer 'phenoms'. That doesn't even take into accout the girls and boys whose hormones kick in and they lose interest in sports completly.

They need to be able to be kids. If they have the desire and talent, the coaches will come calling soon enough.