I don't know if this is a decent idea or not...because i literally spent all of 5 minutes thinking about it in the shower.  No idea if it's feasible, or attractive to other coaches, but it seems like it would be easy to implement and may help lower and mid level teams at each level without seriously hindering the top level teams.  

1. GENTLY tweak players so that there are a few less players at either extreme of starting talent and more in the middle.

2. Get rid of low potential entirely, except for free throw shooting.  I believe every college athlete should be able to improve at least 7 points in any given skill if they are good enough to play college ball.  Average = 7-17, High = 18+.  Maintain high-high, low-high structure.

I think this helps because:  The top teams, particularly at D1, but at other levels too since they are often clustered in top conferences, have a lot more money to spend on recruiting and are able to scout more states and spend more money on the top players with the most high potentials.  This move would gently trend a few of those low-high's downward just a bit.  Yes the top teams would still get some boost from not having any low potential areas, but the players they recruit often don't have as many of these anyway, and even if they did they are in skills they aren't overly concerned about developing.

Obviously this helps the lower and mid level teams quite a bit more because they can afford to spend money on players that they like and take a risk.  If they don't get the player they want, they can still recruit nationally, even without scouting, and pick up another player late in recruiting and be confident that the player won't be a complete and total bust because they'll get at least 7 points in every category. 

Anyway just the base for an idea that like I said, came to me in 5 minutes in the shower....but figured I'd throw it out there for people to discuss, if it's even worth discussing