It's an honest question as I'm not trying to hit any poster or athlete with strays It just seems to me that it's pointless to complain about pro athletes choosing super teams versus being a struggling superstar when their entire athletic history is based on the former.
What 4 or 5 star recruit is going to a struggling program by choice just so they could be the man? If a 4 or 5 star recruit has the option to play (not sit on the bench) with other 4 or 5 star recruits and win championships he's taking that chance 100% of the time.
The entire AAU system is based on super teams.
Parents ship their children off to private schools known for athletics or move to different school districts just so their children can play on stacked teams.
But nobody in here complains when their college is ranked in the top 10 for recruiting.
I believe competitive balance is a myth that doesn't really exist outside of professional leagues.
At what point do we admit that we create the mentality that goes into creating super teams every recruiting season? You can't legislate against it after these athletes have seen it work for them over the past 10-15 years of their lives.
it's getting ridiculous. I mean 3 of all-american 1st team are going to Duke next year. this is the norm now. but at the same time I can't blame them. Thats probably the only time these players have the freedom to choose who they want to play with. most of the time though, it has more to do with friendship and chemistry than choosing the easier path to win a championship. In the NBA on the other hand, winning is what drives star players to join other star players. 