In response to Dave Telep's well-put article today about increased entitlement among young basketball players, a message board user asked earlier whether we see a difference in recruits' attitudes now (as opposed to years ago).
Yeah.
But the first thing that should be noted is that we in the media are part of it. We drive the hype train, some of us more responsibly than others.
Rankings are not new, nor do they mean all that much, but their proliferation might be one of the worst things that's ever happened to the game at the grassroots level.
Example: When Basil Smotherman was a freshman in high school , he was ranked in the top 25 in his class nationally, for no reason whatsoever. No one had ever really substantively seen him play. It was just a bunch of names thrown out there in no particular order, and Smotherman's name probably got on there based on word of mouth because A) he looked the part as an ultra-athletic then-6-4 wing and B) because he's a coach's kid and more is sometimes expected from those with the proper bloodlines, fair or not.
You can't tell me coming into high school being touted as one of the best players in the country won't affect a kid. Did it help that Big Ten colleges like Purdue were already offering him scholarships? Of course not.
(Smotherman's dad was so aware of the potential effect on his son that he kept the Purdue offer from him - and everyone else - for a year.)
The next couple seasons of high school, Smotherman grossly underachieved relative to expectation and quite frankly just wasn't that good. That is, until now, after he finally blossomed as a senior and finally earned a ranking, seemingly having gained some perspective and maturity through it all. If he's a player in college, it will be a fantastic story.
But the point is, yes, kids are more entitled now, but they're conditioned to be that way.
We're writing about them. We're pulling them aside for interviews after games, calling them and taking their picture. Again some of us are trying to do it the right, least-intrusive way we can, but there's a million of us now. There is no line anymore between media and fans. All a fan needs is a phone and a blog, which scares the crap out of compliance directors everywhere.
Media, whatever that even means anymore, is part of the problem, but so are fans. They go hand in hand. It wasn't for us, you wouldn't know who they are, and Twitter Guy wouldn't cyber-stalk them and Mix-Tape Guy wouldn't film their games for the purposes of slow-mo'ing all their dunks for the sake of, well, hype.
You go to a national park and they ask you not to feed the bears. Why? Because when you feed the bears, it changes the bears and they lose their ability to function in their natural state.
Please, Twitter Guy, stop feeding the bears.
And if the kids you're tweeting make their choice based on tweets, they're stupid and your team might be better off without them anyway.
Families are to blame also. The amount of stupid parents out there is staggering and sincerely makes me believe I'm a better parent because of it. When deciding how to raise your kids, ask, "What would Crazy AAU Dad do?" then do the opposite. Pretty simple really. It's just so hard sometimes to decipher who the adults actually are.
And, these young men are big business now.
Any big business needs staff, right?
Kids are handled more than ever now, especially in basketball, where players so often exist in their own little bubbles, much more so in basketball than in football, though in football, it's headed in that direction.
A lot of big-timers have their summer coaches or AAU coaches take care of them, or a family member, such people so often stepping in to fill some sort of void at home.
Then there's agents. I can tell you right now that from a Purdue perspective, if there's an agent or anyone else who stands to profit off a player in the picture, forget it. Purdue isn't getting that kid.
I do want to point out that the term 'handler' has been inappropriately demonized. It's not always a bad thing, despite the connotation. Some very fine people that I've come across over the years have filled roles for recruits that might be dubbed 'handler.' They are completely above board and have the player's and family's best interests in mind. People demonize AAU, but it's just like any walk of life: There are good people and bad people, and the good should not be branded by the actions of the bad.
But in recruiting at a high level, so many people who haven't earned influence bear influence and if I were a college coach, that would make me want to drink acid. Perhaps one of the flaws Purdue has in recruiting is its ability to sufficiently kiss the hindquarters - and continue to do so for years to come - of people who shouldn't matter all that much, but do.
Yes, kids are entitled by the attention they receive and a lot of cases, the people around them. But you can't escape it.
They look at their phones and find thousands of people they've never met following them on Twitter or asking to be friends on Facebook and that'll get to the kid, not to mention the fact that social media give them a platform to feed their inner-narcissist whenever they so choose.
It's really a convergence of so much crap out there now that's influencing young people. But there were egomaniacs before and entitled people before and there always will be. It's not basketball society has completely crumbled.
Kids themselves, yes, they're more entitled, but from my perspective, I'm fortunate to cover Purdue, which for the most part recruits good players who are just below that strata where things are ugliest.
But we try to be honest with you about recruits.
If a kid doesn't play hard enough, we try to tell you that, for your best interests and theirs, maybe. Expectations can be a very difficult thing and if a player can't dribble, what good does that do them for people to expect them to be able to walking in the door?
We've written some things players probably haven't liked.
Good. Maybe they need to hear it from somebody.
But back to entitlement, there's a lot of hyperbole being thrown around here too. And it seems like there's something fundamentally unfair of about holding a bunch of kids who are pretty ordinary outside of their ability to play basketball to any standard higher than their unscrutinized peers.
Things are worse than they were, yes, to where sometimes players stand out as "great kids" simply by not being a jerk. But things aren't that bad, no.
At least not yet.
Yeah.
But the first thing that should be noted is that we in the media are part of it. We drive the hype train, some of us more responsibly than others.
Rankings are not new, nor do they mean all that much, but their proliferation might be one of the worst things that's ever happened to the game at the grassroots level.
Example: When Basil Smotherman was a freshman in high school , he was ranked in the top 25 in his class nationally, for no reason whatsoever. No one had ever really substantively seen him play. It was just a bunch of names thrown out there in no particular order, and Smotherman's name probably got on there based on word of mouth because A) he looked the part as an ultra-athletic then-6-4 wing and B) because he's a coach's kid and more is sometimes expected from those with the proper bloodlines, fair or not.
You can't tell me coming into high school being touted as one of the best players in the country won't affect a kid. Did it help that Big Ten colleges like Purdue were already offering him scholarships? Of course not.
(Smotherman's dad was so aware of the potential effect on his son that he kept the Purdue offer from him - and everyone else - for a year.)
The next couple seasons of high school, Smotherman grossly underachieved relative to expectation and quite frankly just wasn't that good. That is, until now, after he finally blossomed as a senior and finally earned a ranking, seemingly having gained some perspective and maturity through it all. If he's a player in college, it will be a fantastic story.
But the point is, yes, kids are more entitled now, but they're conditioned to be that way.
We're writing about them. We're pulling them aside for interviews after games, calling them and taking their picture. Again some of us are trying to do it the right, least-intrusive way we can, but there's a million of us now. There is no line anymore between media and fans. All a fan needs is a phone and a blog, which scares the crap out of compliance directors everywhere.
Media, whatever that even means anymore, is part of the problem, but so are fans. They go hand in hand. It wasn't for us, you wouldn't know who they are, and Twitter Guy wouldn't cyber-stalk them and Mix-Tape Guy wouldn't film their games for the purposes of slow-mo'ing all their dunks for the sake of, well, hype.
You go to a national park and they ask you not to feed the bears. Why? Because when you feed the bears, it changes the bears and they lose their ability to function in their natural state.
Please, Twitter Guy, stop feeding the bears.
And if the kids you're tweeting make their choice based on tweets, they're stupid and your team might be better off without them anyway.
Families are to blame also. The amount of stupid parents out there is staggering and sincerely makes me believe I'm a better parent because of it. When deciding how to raise your kids, ask, "What would Crazy AAU Dad do?" then do the opposite. Pretty simple really. It's just so hard sometimes to decipher who the adults actually are.
And, these young men are big business now.
Any big business needs staff, right?
Kids are handled more than ever now, especially in basketball, where players so often exist in their own little bubbles, much more so in basketball than in football, though in football, it's headed in that direction.
A lot of big-timers have their summer coaches or AAU coaches take care of them, or a family member, such people so often stepping in to fill some sort of void at home.
Then there's agents. I can tell you right now that from a Purdue perspective, if there's an agent or anyone else who stands to profit off a player in the picture, forget it. Purdue isn't getting that kid.
I do want to point out that the term 'handler' has been inappropriately demonized. It's not always a bad thing, despite the connotation. Some very fine people that I've come across over the years have filled roles for recruits that might be dubbed 'handler.' They are completely above board and have the player's and family's best interests in mind. People demonize AAU, but it's just like any walk of life: There are good people and bad people, and the good should not be branded by the actions of the bad.
But in recruiting at a high level, so many people who haven't earned influence bear influence and if I were a college coach, that would make me want to drink acid. Perhaps one of the flaws Purdue has in recruiting is its ability to sufficiently kiss the hindquarters - and continue to do so for years to come - of people who shouldn't matter all that much, but do.
Yes, kids are entitled by the attention they receive and a lot of cases, the people around them. But you can't escape it.
They look at their phones and find thousands of people they've never met following them on Twitter or asking to be friends on Facebook and that'll get to the kid, not to mention the fact that social media give them a platform to feed their inner-narcissist whenever they so choose.
It's really a convergence of so much crap out there now that's influencing young people. But there were egomaniacs before and entitled people before and there always will be. It's not basketball society has completely crumbled.
Kids themselves, yes, they're more entitled, but from my perspective, I'm fortunate to cover Purdue, which for the most part recruits good players who are just below that strata where things are ugliest.
But we try to be honest with you about recruits.
If a kid doesn't play hard enough, we try to tell you that, for your best interests and theirs, maybe. Expectations can be a very difficult thing and if a player can't dribble, what good does that do them for people to expect them to be able to walking in the door?
We've written some things players probably haven't liked.
Good. Maybe they need to hear it from somebody.
But back to entitlement, there's a lot of hyperbole being thrown around here too. And it seems like there's something fundamentally unfair of about holding a bunch of kids who are pretty ordinary outside of their ability to play basketball to any standard higher than their unscrutinized peers.
Things are worse than they were, yes, to where sometimes players stand out as "great kids" simply by not being a jerk. But things aren't that bad, no.
At least not yet.
