Yesterday, an 18-year old kid named Darrell Scott had a bunch of men old enough to be his father...let's refer to them as "coaches"--wait, they are coaches...waiting on pins and needles, hoping that their sales pitch would work and Scott would be a part of their recruiting class.

On Wednesday, only one school accomplished that feat, and to the surprise of some nationally, but not so much locally, Scott is headed to Boulder, as the crown jewel of the Buffs' heralded class.

That said, Scott, a running back from Ventura, California, may become the most well-known student-athletes on campus shortly. That said, when was the last time a high school student who was as good in the classroom as Scott is on the field, was pursued this vigourously by any institution? I think we know the answer to that.

That said, a recent study even further drives home the point that the term "student-athlete" makes little sense.

Of the Division I players who participated in the survey, more than two out of three said they consider themselves more "athletes" than they do "students."

Numbers seem to accentuate their claim. According to the survey results:

Football players spend an average of 44.8 hours a week on the sport and less than 40 hours per week on academic subjects.

Baseball players log an average of 40 hours on their game and 32 hours on school.

Thinking that athletics trump academics is not any sort of new development, but with so much emphasis being put on the development of athletes on campus--especially those in football--how can so many projected stars with so much help and support, end up so ordinary?

I have no statistics to support this, though I would guess the top academic students who are accepted--though not recruited--to that same college, end up less famous, and possibly, a little more successful.

-"z"