Stetson Bennett And The Advent Of The Perpetual Adolescent

After a crushing 65-7 defeat by the TCU Horned Frogs, the University of Georgia Bulldogs have been crowned college football national champions. 

Beyond the questions about what this means for Big-12 football or whether the Michigan Wolverines would have given Georgia an actual challenge, another nagging question is making the rounds: The age of Georgia’s quarterback Stetson Bennett.

Chris is a longtime radio broadcaster “Mad Dog” Russo made a compelling point The NCAA is still home to the quarter-centurion. “I have a major problem with Stetson Bennett, 25 years of age, playing college football,” Russo. “I can see it for one year. Last year he won. Burrow was 23 going on 24 when he won. But 25 years of age, playing quarterback for Georgia, he should’ve left last year … What is the cut-off date? When do we sit here and watch a college athlete and say ‘you know what? This is ridiculous! … When does that get to be a joke? What is the age? Thirty?’ There’s gotta be an age where this is enough already.”

In fact, there are four NFL quarterbacks younger than Bennett who will lead their teams to the playoffs.

Granted, Bennett’s is a compelling story. Bennett’s story is only 5 feet 11 inches and 185 pounds coming out of high school, the QB’s only FBS scholarship came from Middle Tennessee State University. After starting at Georgia as a walk-on, he was red-shirted the first year. He never took a snap from the center. After transferring to Jones County Junior College, he was promoted to the position of a backup quarterback. After one season he returned to Georgia in the backup role until the starting QB’s injury gave him his shot. Bennett was named starter and won back-to-back national championships.

Phone the scriptwriter

As cool as this story is, it remains the fact that a college football player at the highest level played in college football. It seems a bit strange that a fully-fledged adult was playing against 19-year-old and 20-year old kids. Or at the very least, what was used to be an adult. 

Perhaps Bennett’s situation is emblematic of a larger social phenomenon that seems to be growing not just in this country but the First World: The advent of the perpetual adolescent. 

In 1940, only 5.5% of U.S. males and 3.8% of U.S. females went on to complete college degrees. Mark Steyn loves to remind us that the United States fought the Great Depression and won the Second World War. The hyperpower status of the United States was due to a population with an average eighth-grade education. 

Today, the percentage of Americans who have a college degree is 36% for men and 39% for women.

These numbers have meaning. For many, college is a net plus. It is especially important in STEM fields because it provides the foundation for graduate schools and competency in the workplace. But for many, college is a waste — as your barista behind the counter who holds a degree in primitive cultures and indentured servitude courtesy of student loans will attest. 

Many people believe that college’s main purpose is to delay entering adulthood.   

A more striking illustration of this trend toward extended adolescence can be found in the percentage of Americans with advanced degrees. That percentage is 13.1%, an increase from 8.6% in 2000. In addition, the number of Americans holding advanced degrees has more than doubled in recent years from 10.5 million in 2000 and 24.1 million in 2021. They went further and earned PhDs.

Data shows that such trends in delaying entry into the workforce are evident: The U.S. median age, which rose from 39.6 to 41.7 years ago to 41.7 by 2021, will reach 42.6 by 2031. 

The phenomena of the perpetual adolescent is likely to have adverse effects on the economic and social spheres. 

The longer one waits to enter the workforce and get on with their adult lives means the longer one waits to get married, start a family, and buy a home — all cornerstones of a stable society. If a person decides to start a family later than others, it will reduce the biological window for having children. 

It’s no coincidence that as Americans become more ‘educated’ They are also having fewer kids. The U.S. birthrate per 1,000 between 1950 and the present has fallen by half, from 24 to 12. 

These numbers are alarming because, although we have chosen to have fewer children, we have also dramatically increased the entitlement and social security net programs of federal and state governments. 

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid — and a myriad of literally 100 other programs — run on tax dollars. They need more taxpayers to grow and stay in the workforce as they grow.