Michael Powell writes in the New York Times: “The tragedy is that the adults in big-time high school and college basketball, despite attempts at reform and despite the presence of many fine student-athletes, exert far more energy trying to churn out wins than trying to provide an education. Young men like Frazier, who just three years ago was Brown’s top recruit, are collateral damage.”
Steve Sailer replies: “Why does the reporter assume that there’s something tragic about young Keith Frazier not getting much of an education? Is there any evidence that he would benefit from the academic life? Even if Mr. Frazier happened to be an intellectual diamond in the rough, we have to realize that because there’s not much positive correlation between basketball talent and IQ there exist a whole lot of young men who are much, much better basketball players than they are scholars. Should they be denied the opportunity to do what they are best at in life just because they lost the genetic lottery for brains while winning the height and athleticism lotteries?”
