College sports are getting harder and harder to stomach.
Lack of a level playing field in recruiting and TV revenue, unbalanced application of the rules against cheating institutions, player welfare issues and value sharing, stupid new rules like this proposal.
Pro sports are becoming more and more appealing by the minute.
The 1 and dones make a mockery of college. They basically have to attend class fall semester and thats it. I am 100% on board with colleges doing whatever they can to get that straight. The NBA needs to either make kids stay in 2 years or take them out of HS. If the NBA doesn’t make those changes then the college game has to look out for itself. As I said I think they should be required to stcik around three years. Coming out of HS you have a choice try to go pro or sign up for 3 years. Would bring stability to the college game. If the NBA decides they want to put an age restriction in, then that is their business. Personally I think they should utilize the D league more effectively and sign any and every HS player to a D league squad and let them get called up. That would stabilize college basketball, promote academics with a 3 year requirement while still providing a pro option to HS kids without putting kids on NBA rosters that arent ready yet.
NBA has definitely dropped the ball with the NBDL imo. It makes no sense (other than financial) for each team not to have a dedicated team that they can truly use as a developmental program similar to the minor league baseball system.
Heard Wes Durham on ESPN 730 this afternoon and he said no way this happens. Mentioned Jennings and Mudiay going overseas and that a reinstitution of freshman ineligibility would result in that becoming the norm for prep elites - high school to Europe etc then the NBA.
How do you compel them to stick around for 3 years?
Do they sign a real contract for services whereby the school owns the labor of that player for three years like a pro contract?
Wouldn’t that make them pros?
And what if the kids wants to transfer and the school will not release him from his contract?
Sounds like a legal mine field to me.
They have been able to drop the ball because the colleges and foreign pros provide them with plenty of talent for nothing.
Maybe that’s what the cartel 5 are after. Maybe they want to push the elites out of college basketball unless they are their for an education… Yeah I know. This is the cartel 5 we speak of.
None of which changes the fact that if a college player has a chance to leave school for big money playing NBA hoops they are gone.
clt is concerned about the future of college sports.
Was reading some other boards and someone brought up this might be a way for the cartel to increase scholarship numbers, further widening the gulf between P5 and G5.
That is worrisome.
The push for Freshman ineligibility is a result of the push to pay players. I also think there is a faction that wants to return some of the integrity to the student-athlete idea (but its mostly about money).
I think it will be an excellent rule change for college athletics. No 1 and done player is going to sit out a year to play a year, they will play overseas. I then think it creates an opportunity to expand the NBLD into a true minor league system instead of a league full of 4 year guys who aren’t good enough to play in the NBA.
This.
Watch a G5 win the title with a bunch of one and dones and you will see them back track very quickly.[/quote]
You guys need to realize that if something like this happens, a G5 can’t win the title because they won’t be in the tournament.
Everything they are doing is to separate the P5 from the G5. If there are different rules for different conferences, then there will be different divisions and different tournaments.
The conference expansions, paying student athletes, increasing scholarships and now redshirting freshmen, is all being done to separate the gap between the P5 and G5.
[quote=“Charlotte2002, post:29, topic:29420”]The push for Freshman ineligibility is a result of the push to pay players. I also think there is a faction that wants to return some of the integrity to the student-athlete idea (but its mostly about money).
I think it will be an excellent rule change for college athletics. No 1 and done player is going to sit out a year to play a year, they will play overseas. I then think it creates an opportunity to expand the NBLD into a true minor league system instead of a league full of 4 year guys who aren’t good enough to play in the NBA.[/quote]
In theory I think it’s a good idea too. On the surface it will appear to be helping student athletes.
But in practice I think it’s a bad idea because no one outside of the P5 is going to support it. The P5 will then say “Bye bye”.
All of this consternation is a result of our failure as a society to address the real elephant in the room.
Why are we giving college scholarships to people for athletics?
[quote=“Gassman, post:32, topic:29420”]All of this consternation is a result of our failure as a society to address the real elephant in the room.
Why are we giving college scholarships to people for athletics?[/quote]Good question and part of a larger discussion.
Anyway, if there were to be a return to freshman ineligibility, does that also mean a return to JV squads for those players? As far as I know, UNC-CH is the only institution in North Carolina that still has a JV men’s basketball team, albeit a non-scholarship one in its current configuration. And since we’re talking football here as well, would we see the return of JV squads on the gridiron as well? Plus where is the money going to come from for all that? Try raising student fees on that one!
This issue seems to have lawsuit written all over it, especially as concerns right to work. Not sure how any college or pro sports organization can make a compelling argument that a prerequisite for employment in the NBA, NFL, etc., is at least two years in college, with the first of those spent as an ineligible athlete.
Going to be interesting to see how all this plays out. Pro sports like baseball and soccer are all in good shape with solid minor leagues, while basketball is getting there with the NBA-DL (though better in the days of the now-defunct CBA - no thanks to Isiah Thomas on the latter!).
That ol’ saying “Be careful what you wish for” really seems apt here.
[quote=“Gassman, post:32, topic:29420”]All of this consternation is a result of our failure as a society to address the real elephant in the room.
Why are we giving college scholarships to people for athletics?[/quote]
do you think that about Engineering, Education, Business, etc as well?
[quote=“hootie, post:34, topic:29420”][quote=“Gassman, post:32, topic:29420”]All of this consternation is a result of our failure as a society to address the real elephant in the room.
Why are we giving college scholarships to people for athletics?[/quote]
do you think that about Engineering, Education, Business, etc as well?[/quote]
No.
[quote=“Gassman, post:35, topic:29420”][quote=“hootie, post:34, topic:29420”][quote=“Gassman, post:32, topic:29420”]All of this consternation is a result of our failure as a society to address the real elephant in the room.
Why are we giving college scholarships to people for athletics?[/quote]
do you think that about Engineering, Education, Business, etc as well?[/quote]
No.[/quote]
Not sure I feel that way about athletic scholarships either. Just throwing it out there for discussion.
I really like college sports and that’s going away without scholarships.
Just feel like something is just wrong with the whole setup.
No idea how to fix it.
I asked earlier in thread and not sure it was answered. I’m confused, why would the G5 or big 5 want one and dones? Isn’t having Okafor good for duke or wiggins for Kansas or Kentucky … And by good I mean $$$. Only small sucky schools that don’t make the ncaa tourney in 10+ years would be in favor of this right? Or is it that there is 10 teams not in favor who get the one and dones and then the rest of the ncaa for it?
I think part of it is an attempt to fight Callipari.
As far as the it being good for the schools in terms of money, a lot of those schools would still get the same amount of $$$ because the player is still going to play for them. They’ll just do it one year later. I don’t think it will mean every great player will automatically go pro out of HS because they still couldn’t go straight to the NBA.
Lastly, I believe it’s just the opposite that the “lower” schools will be in favor of it. I assume by redshirting freshmen that it will mean an increase in scholarships, which means more costs for those schools. Which the lower schools would be against. It also could mean a longer term of eligibility for the athlete(5 years, instead of 4). Which would mean even more cost for the school.
Just to play the contrarian, let’s do away with all scholarships. Why should my tax dollars be given to someone to go get an engineering degree while I have to pay for my kids to go to school?
I’m getting double dipped. Just saying…
[quote=“hootie, post:39, topic:29420”]Just to play the contrarian, let’s do away with all scholarships. Why should my tax dollars be given to someone to go get an engineering degree while I have to pay for my kids to go to school?
I’m getting double dipped. Just saying…[/quote]
What is the purpose of college sports at all?
When you get down to it scholarships, like sports, should be enriching the experience for everyone on campus. Bringing in someone on an academic scholarship, athletics, needs based or any other one is designed to create a more well rounded student body. The fiscal conservative in me says I had to pay my way, everyone should have to pay their own way. The human in me can acknowledge the value for both the student body and for society to create avenues for a variety of individuals to attend college and both the short term and long term benefits of such actions.