Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by America's Game
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Read it again....he is saying in the short term the kids who hit puberty early have an advantage but that decreases over time as kids who grow later catch up and maybe surpass them in size and strength.


I do get it but with this early recruiting players are deemed the best in 7th 8th and even 9th grade and early puberty is the main reason for disparity at the young ages. Early puberty is no indicator of ultimate athletic ability but it does play a role on what teams these kids play on and what looks they get at an earlier age.
The whole early recruiting is really interesting because coaches are taking a risk on players that really have not fully matured. I do get talent is talent but given two players of equal talent at 14-16 but one has hit puberty 99% of the the time the one who has hit it will be better at that moment. In my opinion the early recruiting and the expansion of the sport has resulted in the overall parody of the sport. Thats why you have close games between colleges that maybe 20 years ago wouldnt have even been close. I think its not a science but pot luck when you commit a kid in 9th or even 10th.


Where is the risk. Typically the coaches are offering to pay for book money. Most of these kids have their parents paying the freight. If they turn out to be good players great. If not they ride the pine or transfer. ER is a win/win for the coaches.


Can you be guaranteed money in early recruiting? I thought that until the letter comes for your kid to sign, any amount discussed earlier may not be the same. Do coaches actually guarantee certain amount of money to a 9th grader?