he could play right away. Their recruiting would suffer if they made all their players go somewhere for two years, so saying that all schools would do it isn't realistic.

As far as why they discourage LDS players from going, I think that depends on the school, the coach and the position of the player.

Some schools (like USC) have so many big time recruits they turn away, that they essentially say if you go on a mission there is no guarrantee you have a scholarship when you get back. This isn't because they think missions hurt players, it is because they can replace that player with someone just as talented and don't want to deal with the hassle of saving a scholarship.

But the idea that schools are discouraging missions and pulling scholarships, is overblown in my opinion. Very recently Oregon, Stanford and UCLA have all let LDS players go on missions and return. Most schools do, only a few of the really elite schools don't. In Stanfords case they lost an elite QB prospect because they let him go, which is one more reason that schools may discourage their players from going.

Missions hurt skill position players, but there is no evidence at all that it hurst OL and DL, and in fact I think most would say it helps. I have even heard former BYU players and coaches acknowledge that it helps certain positions but hurts others.

All of this is why I actually think the average age of the team is an important point to emphasize. Despite perception, we are only about 1 year older than everyone we play against, which isn't that big of a deal.