Continued ranking slight disrespects USC commits and their level of play

It is clear that there is a strong bias against players who declare themselves to USC. This aspect is not something that is likely to change any time soon. Teams in the SEC tend to have a more favorable ranking, and schools like Ohio State and Michigan tend to see their value preserved well into their eventual stepping foot on campus.

Mark Bowman is one of the latest examples of this happening that Trojan fans have seen. His is one of many instances, this recruiting cycle alone, that this has played out in this manner.

Ultimately, what will make the biggest difference is how the players perform once they are college student-athletes. Seeing someone ranked high or low doesn't truly make a difference. It is still important and significant, however.

A player deserves the credit that they have earned on the field. It isn't right to see someone's value and perception lowered on a whim. This is especially true when considering how many players, while being entertained by the Buckeyes or Crimson Tide, are viewed as top prospects. Then, magically, when they announce their intention to join the Trojans, their rating takes a hit.

Needed change for USC commits

When evaluating Bowman and the other USC players that have had their rankings decreased, their play warrants being considered among the best at their position.

Perhaps there is an element of the past seasons weighing in during the evaluation, contributing toward the bias against USC commits. That too would be something that shouldn't be considered or come into play when it comes to what should be an objective evaluating system.

It's a pity that this level of bias continues to exist. This provides a chance for USC to prove doubters wrong that much more. That is one of the only silver linings that can come of this.