Dude I'm reading your posts. And I don't know how challenging the rules came into the argument. I pointed out examples of players who are arrogant and classless whom their fans love, and you immediately went into the fact that they didn't challenge the rule. Either you care about him challenging the rule or you don't, you're the one who keeps bringing it up. And you keep saying that you don't want him to challenge the rule, did you not write that. That's arrogant, you don't want him to challenge a rule denying his earning ability because of whatever reason is arrogant. That's a life decision as much as a football decision, and Maurice Clarett shouldn't care what you think or any other fans think about that.
while i don't know if he paid for it or not, he has a minor league contract with the Dodgers i believe (or at least did) and isn't even on scholarship b/c he's paying his own way through school (at least someone told me that).
It entered the discussion when I brought it up to support my belief that he's a disrespectful, inconsiderate, and selfish induhvidual. I immediately mentioned the fact that they didn't challenge the NFL rule re: draft eligibility because in response to my response re: the rule in the sequential flow of posts, you had brought up those names. I supposed that you brought up those names to bring to light the similiarities they have with MC re: this thread. The fact of them not challenging the NFL rule was brought up, immediately at that, was to demonstrate that bringing up those names does little to support any view re: this thread. Originally posted by coma in response to a pgabriel post asking something coma had stated in a previous post [SIZE=-3] My beef is not about him 'making the most money [he] can.' It's about the lack of respect he has. As for the NFL rule, I agree, if a team wants to draft him, so be it. My beef there is that I don't want to see it. Why not? Not because I want to deny him his millions, but because I don't want to see an overly inexperienced football player out there on Sundays. [/SIZE] Why can't he wait a year? He's afraid in that year, he'll get more coaching that will further his game? He's afraid that he'll do well, and increase his draft position, resulting in more money? I guess he's Maurice Clarett, more special than anyone else that has ever played in the NFL. Who cares about the integrity of the game or the basis for the rule. It's all about Maurice Clarett. Apparently, MC doesn't care what anyone thinks and that's the problem.
What does the rule have to do with the integrity of the game, what does it have to do with respecting the game??? All I see is an administrative rule. Banning steroids has to do with the integrity of the game. A guy playing pro football at nineteen has nothing to do with the integrity of the game, as far as I'm concerned but maybe you can enlighten me. If he can't compete because of some rule that has no basis, in our legal system, then the fact that the rule exists is what is damaging to the integrity of the game. Denying anyone's ability to compete at the highest level of their profession is damaging to the integrity of the game. And just because others have followed that rule, why is it so disrespectful to challenge it?
The 'game' per se is more than just the on field rules. The NFL 'game' is about world class competition. This is where the BEST players in the world play football. This rule protects the integrity of the 'game' by instilling a minimum requirement. Why there's a need for a minimum requirement is what the laywers will battle out in court. Aside from the legalites of the ruling, requiring being at least three years removed from high school implies at least three years of college coaching. More coaching equals better prepared player. Better prepared player ensures better competition within the 'game.' Whether or not MC can live up to that level of competition is another discussion. For argument's sake, let's say MC would rush for 1000 yds if he were allowed to play in the NFL next year. But, by challenging this rule, it could potentially open up the door to others who aren't as good as him. Then what? The level of competition in the NFL will be lowered. Of course teams could simply choose not to draft them, but then what happens to the player? He loses eligibilty for that year. Take a look at the NBA today. The majority of players drafted out of high school usually take a few years to make an impact for their team. This lessens the effect the draft has on a team. That's why Stern is trying to change the NBA draft eligibility age limit to 20 years old. It increases the chances of a draft pick immediately helping out his team. That in turn increases a lottery team one year to becoming a playoff team the next. It makes it harder for current champs and other dominant teams to continue to outclass other teams. The final result of this is better competition. By preserving this rule, you ensure that the draft is one of the most important and effective offseason events in the game. By not acknowledging this fact, and disregarding the implications of not having this rule, is disrespecting the 'game.'
That's a nice argument, but its the general manager's responsiblity to pick quality players. In the case of the NBA, instead of taking all these players who are clearly not ready, what has the NBA done, gone overseas. These situations tend to balance themselves out. Its not Maurice's responsibility to save these general managers from themselves picking players who don't belong.
How would the NFL rectify a situation similiar to that the NBA has re: underdeveloped players coming out of high school? At what cost? Years of poor competition and decreased markets? Of course not, he has no responsibility except to himself obviously. That's why there's no way this rule is going to change. Simply trying to overturn this rule is why we're having this very discussion.
Look this is the last thing I will write as far as players coming out early, The NFL is a totally different situation from the NBA, MLB, or NHL. There is no way players will be drafted out of High School. As good as Cedric Benson was coming out of High School, do you think he would have been a first round draft pick. Maurice Clarett is a special situation, and even he wouldn't be drafted high out of High School. Football players have to get bigger and stronger, and their bodies have to fully mature before getting out on the professional gridiron. Its a moot point. There will be no epidemic.
Sigh. You are missing the point. It's too bad that that was 'the last thing [you] will write as far as players coming out early.' The situation between the NFL and the NBA are obviously not the same. However, if the NFL does away with the rule in question, the impact of the draft, or lack thereof, would be the same between the NBA and the NFL. I'm glad that you recognize why high school players shouldn't be drafted into the NFL. But, rules are inclusive. You can't just make an exception for every Maurice Clarett that comes along. Lastly, of course there will be no epidemic, that's why the rule is in place. edit: I took out the part re: moot points.
Legally what right does the NFL have to say a player can come out when he's 3 years out of highschool rather than 2? I think the rule will be struck down (just because the otehr pro sports would allow a 19 y/o to be drafted) but it would take alot of money/time to strike it down. Even if Clarett started his lawsuit today I don't think anything would be sorted out by next years draft.
Dude your whole last post was about how the rule is in place to protect the NFL from inferior talent. I countered that point by saying there will not be an epidemic of players being drafted too early. You agreed with that point, what did I not comprehend. Was that not the point of your last post.
It's the agreement the league has with the NFLPA. Trust me, the NFLPA does not want to lower the requirements for draft eligibilty.
And that has nothing to do with integrity. Just pointing that out. As a matter of fact, them fighting the rule would be against the integrity of the game, because they would be trying to keep out players whom they feel general managers would replace them with because the gm's might think they're better. In other words, they would be trying to keep out better players.
Known commodity vs. unknown potential. When this gamble is allowed to take place, that's when you increase the chances of decreasing overall competition. I see your point, and it's a good one, but when you are dealing with probabilities, you go with what has the most weight, which is the known. The NFLPA fighting to keep the rule in place does not interfere with the integrity of the game, it does the exact opposite.
Consider that Marcus Allen probably didn't call MC directly and say, "Let's hook up". There could be a multitude of reasons as to why this meeting didn't take place, including Claretts negligence. Let's not jump to conclusions.
There is also no rule saying that someone can't walk right out of high school and go work for IBM, but IBM is not forced to hire them. Why should the NFL and NBA be forced to allow an 18 year old to work for them? A high school graduate cannot sue IBM to force them to hire him.
It protects the NFL from having to take on inferior talent. 18-year old kids are not ready for the rigors of pro football. Most NFL draft picks stay at their school a full four or five years in order to bulk up and learn their position. Clarett is a total ignoramous and I wager he has played his last set of downs for the Suckeyes.
That's exactly how it didn't happen. The meeting was setup via his coach. Also, it's no fun not to jump to conclusions.
