It's monumentally stupid to require kids to stay in school an extra year. It's your right as an American to make the best possible life for yourself. It's the rare person who can be a millionaire at 18. If you're that person, that hats off to you, and go make that paper. So what if the dude bombs after two years or so. He's a hell of a lot richer, and you can ALWAYS go to college if you really have that desire. Like most people, I had to go to college, and I would go back and relieve those 4 years all over again if I could. They were unbelievable. I've never had so much fun, and I made friends for life. I'm a far better man for having gone. BUT I'll be lucky if I earn more than a few million in my entire life. Ultimately, Millions of $$$ (and potentially set for life)>>>>>>college
Oh I understand that. I would probably use the same example against alcohol and gambling age based restrictions. Not really a legal argument, but more of trying to point out the (what i feel) absurdity of restricting a basic American right based on "immaturity".
I don't think it's funny saying it benefits the players at all. All your points can be countered - obviously the argument can be laid down on both sides. I also agree that it benefits the NCAA and NBA, but I also see benefits for the kids as well. To me, it's win-win-win. I understand the points against, I just don't agree with them. I dont base my argument on strictly dollars and cents like you seem to have - there's more important things in life than whether or not you make a millions today or two years from now. The NBA shouldn't be responsible for babysitting - NCAA a slavemaster? In the old days, just about every great player paid their dues and learned their lessons in college, and went on to have incredible careers. The only difference now is you have people corrupting that system by whispering promises of millions to these young players.
The 2 year rule is great for the NCAA, probably good for the NBA, and crappy if you are supremely good or talented at basketball, and for their familes of those persons. Think about the players who would have been drafted at 18 based on talent and gotten guaranteed contracts at that time but if they had to wait for 2 years would have gotten injured or exposed as not all that great (e.g., Gerald Green, or think of all the blue chipper high school recruits whose hgihest status is before they play college ball). Such a policy is terrible for them and their familes. Let us also remember the NCAAs don't allow for any sort of immediate compensation to the player/his family--and even if you went to secure your own shoe deal or what not on your own forbids it, and doesn't allow for injury insurance policies (e.g., Beasley or Rose can't go get a 5 mil catastrophic injury insurance policiesl to play 1 one more year in college). I basically see it as unAmerican. A sport with legal protections that in effect allow it act like a monopoly to stifle the most talented in order to protect the interests of older players and other aspects of their collective/colluding businesses. Why not just leave it to the teams to decide if two years of college make guys better players or not. That is much more in the spirit of America. Now I do have some more pragmatic suggestions. Why not let any prospect if under 20 years of age declare for the draft where they are a special 1st round draft eligible status only. (If they don't get drafted where they get a guaranteed contract--round 1, they can withdraw before round 2 and keep NCAA status). Why not have the NCAA/NBA work together so that if you stay a least 2 years (or maybe 3) before being drafted the NBA agrees to fund college for that player until degree completion (say a 10 year window). The reason such approaches like this probably won't be considered (incentives for the young men and their families) is the powers in this situation are basically NCAA, NBA and existing union players--though I am sure there are some well intentioned among them who actually want to help young players live well and develop, in the end they all basically exploit the younger guys.
Of course you have the right to play professional basketball if you were good enough and other wise qualified to play. Why wouldn't you?
Given their draft history, and what will happen in this upcoming draft, they seem to be indicating that these players in question are qualified to play in the NBA. Otherwise they wouldn't draft them when they are eligible.
This is good cause that means all the good tall people that Rick Barnes recruits can actually not leave so we can get make it to the Final Four.
Why not leave it to the teams to judge talent/potential? Isn't competition among alternative modes of business and innovation what America prides itself on?
The problem is that too many teams are afraid of passing up on a KG or Lebron when sometimes they end up with a Kwame.
You know, for like back when players played their full college term and came out more mature and NBA ready in the 70's and 80's When half the league was coked up. And even more of them gone through all their money and now currently broke, after college gave them the smarts to succeed... How come the Yi Jianlians and Tony Parkers can start balling in pro leagues at 16 but the NBA is considered different? Also, why does the NCAA have to be consided the official minor leauges of the NBA? If they can do it somewhere else they should. 90% players dont care a lick about college anyways.
No but it is hard to argue that 18 and 19 yr old are not qualified to play in the league when teams are voluntarily drafting these players.
The Gerald Green scenario is interesting because it is also possible to flip the argument the other way in regards to him joining the NBA straight from High School. Of course he got substantial sums of money in recent years by being in the NBA as opposed to playing in college for several years. With him now being released .....................he has no Bird Rights to parlay into a higher income in the immediate future. He will likely be playing Summer League so he can get a Training Camp invite. With him hoping to get a Training Camp invite, it is doubtful he will be able to demand MLE type of money this summer. Even if he does make a NBA roster, he is likely going to be closer to making the respective minimum salary on a short term contract than on a longer term contract that would put him in a position to gain Bird Rights and a potential Monetary Bonanza in the future. Under the college route scenario, it is possible that he could have really bloomed and been a great success in the NBA because he would have been ready for it rather than the struggles that he has gone through so far. Of course it is possible that he could have gone to college for several years and been relegated to being an Undrafted Free Agent. So he possibly came out ahead by joining the NBA out of High School and being relegated to the fringe at a relatively early age. For players like KG, Kobe, TMac etc that are at the top.......coming out early was definitely good. For Gerald Green and others that don't hit the Superstar level, it becomes much harder to evaluate the longterm merits of joining the NBA early.
I thought college was for people who wanted to be there it is obvious some players do not plan on going by skipping class and barely showing up....why let them linger for two years, when they are talented enough to be in NBA....lI don't see harm in that. Over the last 10 years, some of the best players league did not go to an American university. Most are straight of high school or foreign imports: Kobe, T-Mac, Garnett, Howard, Nowitzki, Amare, Yao, Lebron, Jefferson, Lewis, Durant and etc. Those are probably 12 of the best 16 players in the league. What's the point, it is not the NBA's fault the NCAA can't keep their players...that's their own fault. They already know certain aren't going to stay in school or have no reason to be there. I think people should stay in school and get an education, but still you can always get an education....you can't always get a million dollars. If I were in those players' shoes I wouldn't think two seconds about ....and head to NBA. I do not see what the big deal is in letting a young man decide to play man's game; I can understand in Football, because they're not physically ready yet and haven't learned all of nuances (way to run a defense or offense) it takes to become a decent football player. Basketball is not quite as complicated, but you can be more effective.
Agreed....college is not going to give you some kind moral conscience, you learn that from your community and/or family unless you go to a kind of private or military type college....you are not going learn how to be a better citizen necessarily....and you can still get into as much trouble as you would in your 1st year in the NBA. These are grown men we are talking about....they're not 12 and 13 year olds.
eh, the best thing for the NBA would be to establish a larger NBDL - and then adopt the drafting strategy of MLB. You don't have to declare yourself eligible, all high school seniors are eligible but if you don't choose to go pro, or get drafted - you have to spend three years in school. If you aren't going to allow youngsters in the NBA, I don't understand why you're going to force them to go to college. Michael Beasley is not going to go to K-State for a year and decide to become a vet. His career is going to be in professional basketball. It benefits him to go to college, in that he's able to raise his profile and get a bigger shoe contract after the draft. But that's only if he's one of the big stars in college and can get name recognition. I'm pretty sure neither Jerryd Bayless or Eric Gordon are going to walk into a multi-million dollar shoe deal because of their years at Arizona and Indiana. As far as helping these players be good enough to make it in the league, that year doesn't help all that much. They're faced with hours of school work every week and there are restrictions on how much he can be coached. Let's consider the case of Gerald Green, and what would be most beneficial for him. 1) Goes pro straight from high school : Gets guaranteed multi-million dollar deal, sits on the end of the bench, probably doesn't get a lot of coaching, does well in dunk contests, gets cut eventually. 2) Goes to college : Plays with players closer to his age and maturity level, good chance to be the focal point of the team he plays for, gets nothing if he gets hurt, will receive coaching and strength and conditioning training - but only a limited amount, will have the distraction of going to athlete classes in things he has absolutely no interest in and likely will not benefit him. 3) An actual minor league : Gets the big guaranteed money, plays with players closer to his age and maturity level, will be the focal point of his team, will get as much coaching and S&C work as he can stand, will be more suited to the style of the professional team because he's worked on it for a few years.
Does anyone have a problem with the age requirement in the NFL? Or the 35 year age limit for the office of US President? Some jobs have age requirements; everyone will hit them eventually.
