NBA discussing age limit increase

[HoustonCuse]

Somebody needs to do an anlysis of the value of the media exposure afforded to players at high major programs. Seeing a D League game is more difficult than hackinginto NORAD. Players at programs like Syracuse are lavished with national media attention for months and they have a chance to be stars in one of the top 3 or 4 most valuable sports TV properties in the country. The value of the exposure is off the charts - put it this way, CBS paid $11 billion dollars (Dr. Evil pinky) for 14 years of showing commercials during this thing. A player like Tyler Ennis is afforded the chance to be the star attraction of the actual games for 4 years. And that is just the NCAA tourney. ESPN and several other newer sports networks just about devote 100% of their non-NFL airtime to these guys for several months.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

About F T.

Screw the kids again. They get a one year scholarship, the renewal of which they cannot rely upon, or they can go to the developmental leagues, with crap coaching, minimal pay (relative to their professional counterparts and likely no signing bonus.)
Just let them do what all other non-football or basketball athletes can do: essentially go pro when they want to. Don't give me the baseball crap. Baseball players can go when they are our of HS, at any time if they go to Community College, or 3 years of a 4 year college or age 21. NHL rules: Players who turn 18 by September 15 and are not older than 20 by December 31 are eligible for selection. In addition, non-North American players over the age of 20 are eligible. A North American player who is not drafted by the age of 20 is an unrestricted free agent. All non-North Americans must be drafted before being signed, regardless of age.
Or, if you are going to restrict them, make the college scholarships a 4 or 5 year contract, and make sure that the school actually educates the kid in a meaningful major.

There are 2 inherent differences between football/basketball and hockey/baseball. The first 2 have college farm teams which make millions and are dominated by African American men. These have the largest barriers to entry of the professional ranks while providing free labor to college athletic departments. The second 2 make little to no money for colleges, have established farm systems for training, are much easier to enter the professional ranks, and are dominated, in the US, by white men.

 

[RandygoCuse]

I believe they also get free room and board as NBDL players.

Didn't know that. thanks

 

[sufandu]

Screw the kids again. They get a one year scholarship, the renewal of which they cannot rely upon, or they can go to the developmental leagues, with crap coaching, minimal pay (relative to their professional counterparts and likely no signing bonus.)
Just let them do what all other non-football or basketball athletes can do: essentially go pro when they want to. Don't give me the baseball crap. Baseball players can go when they are our of HS, at any time if they go to Community College, or 3 years of a 4 year college or age 21. NHL rules: Players who turn 18 by September 15 and are not older than 20 by December 31 are eligible for selection. In addition, non-North American players over the age of 20 are eligible. A North American player who is not drafted by the age of 20 is an unrestricted free agent. All non-North Americans must be drafted before being signed, regardless of age.
Or, if you are going to restrict them, make the college scholarships a 4 or 5 year contract, and make sure that the school actually educates the kid in a meaningful major.

There are 2 inherent differences between football/basketball and hockey/baseball. The first 2 have college farm teams which make millions and are dominated by African American men. These have the largest barriers to entry of the professional ranks while providing free labor to college athletic departments. The second 2 make little to no money for colleges, have established farm systems for training, are much easier to enter the professional ranks, and are dominated, in the US, by white men.

I think you're overstating how bad kids have it. Rarely are scholarships pulled for anything other than serious rules violations. When a coach tells a kid he's not going to get any playing time, they transfer willingly because they want to actually play. If we guarantee them 4-5 year scholarships, do we have to guarantee them playing time too? Would they still be allowed to transfer? In regards to education, no college kid gets more of an opportunity to succeed academically than high level athletes. The schools have a vested interest in keeping them academically eligible. That's why they get all the tutoring and structure with mandatory study halls.

It all comes down to this. An employer has the right to establish entry level criteria as long as it is not racially, ethnically, or religiously biased. It's why I was required to get a college degree, obtain clinical experience (that I had to pay for), and pass a licensure exam. It's why, when you look at any number of job postings, they have "experienced required" in them, and most of them pay far less than the NBA. If these kids don't want to provide "free labor" to colleges while they wait to reach the entry level age of their sport, they can work at Walmart or Burger King while working on their game in their spare time. In fact, if more of them did that, they may appreciate their monetary and celebrity status more when they got it.

 

[DeGrozz]

Requiring players to stay for three years seems a little much. I don't see any reason why the next Kobe Bryant, Lebron James or Dwight Howard should have to spend a year in college.

What I would like to see is pretty simple:

1 - Institute a rule that allows players to either (a) enter the draft immediately after high school or (b) go the NCAA/Euro route for at least 2 years
2 - For any player not out of high school for at least three years trying to enter the draft (players right out of HS, or players trying to enter after their 2nd year of college) be evaluated by an independent panel of scouts to get an honest assessment of where they could fall in the draft. This would prevent someone like a Vander Blue from being taken advantage of by an agent by being told "you're early 2nd round" and then going undrafted.

As to point 2 - I think it sounds a little more complex than it is. You're going to have 40 or 50 underclassmen declare early. about half of them will be pretty obviously ready (like MCW, Zeller, Porter, etc last year). That only leave 20 or 25 players left to evaluate.

I think making the rule three years will hurt college hoops in the long run. Players will start smarting up and realize that making a USD equivalent of a couple hundred thousand bucks a year and up in Madrid, Barcelona, Milan, or Beijing will help out their personal situation a lot more than taking a team to the final four three years in a row.

 

[sufandu]

Requiring players to stay for three years seems a little much. I don't see any reason why the next Kobe Bryant, Lebron James or Dwight Howard should have to spend a year in college.

What I would like to see is pretty simple:

1 - Institute a rule that allows players to either (a) enter the draft immediately after high school or (b) go the NCAA/Euro route for at least 2 years
2 - For any player not out of high school for at least three years trying to enter the draft (players right out of HS, or players trying to enter after their 2nd year of college) be evaluated by an independent panel of scouts to get an honest assessment of where they could fall in the draft. This would prevent someone like a Vander Blue from being taken advantage of by an agent by being told "you're early 2nd round" and then going undrafted.

As to point 2 - I think it sounds a little more complex than it is. You're going to have 40 or 50 underclassmen declare early. about half of them will be pretty obviously ready (like MCW, Zeller, Porter, etc last year). That only leave 20 or 25 players left to evaluate.

I think making the rule three years will hurt college hoops in the long run. Players will start smarting up and realize that making a USD equivalent of a couple hundred thousand bucks a year and up in Madrid, Barcelona, Milan, or Beijing will help out their personal situation a lot more than taking a team to the final four three years in a row.

Here's one of the reasons they want to extend it for everyone though. They're trying save themselves from themselves. Because everyone is drafting on potential, it's hard to know exactly who to say is ready and who is not. If the professional scouts make mistakes on young athletic guys that don't pan out, independent talent evaluators will too. For every Lebron or Durant that's obvious, there are 3-4 guys that GM's are willing to reach on, because they're scared they'll pass on someone great. They want to reduce their risk, and it's their business, so it's their right.

 

[Alsacs]

If the NBDL can offer salaries in the 50k to 100k range then kids could choose to go college or play in the NBDL until they were 21 years old.
I like Jason Whitlock's idea better.
http://msn.foxsports.com/collegebas...tes-can-work-if-you-follow-these-steps-041013

Here’s my project/proposal for Adam Silver, the NCAA and the NBA players association. This proposal is strictly for men’s college basketball. It’s a yearly $60 million proposal that should be split 50-50 between the NBA and the NCAA.
Step 1: Get the NBPA to agree to change the draft eligibility requirements to four years after you graduated from high school or age 22.
Step 2: The NBA starts the NBA Summer Internship Program, which is a one-month program that includes basketball instruction, classes about the NBA, professional athletics and life skills. This program would be paid for by the shoe companies and a TV network that would broadcast a small handful of games from the Summer Internship Program.
Step 3: The NBA and the NCAA — through scouting, recommendations and high school academic achievement — identify the top 100 high school seniors entering college basketball. Enroll those 100 players in the NBA Summer Internship Program that pays them $100,000 each. The players would receive half the money in two checks received at the start of each semester. The other half would be invested conservatively by the NCAA/NBA and given to player upon the completion of his four years of eligibility.
Step 4: The initial 100 class will be trimmed to 75 when they become sophomores. All college basketball sophomores at any level will be eligible to apply for the NBA SIP. The NBA and the NCAA — through scouting, recommendations and academic achievement as a college freshman — will identify the 75 sophomores. They will be ranked 1 to 75 based primarily on their NBA prospects but also on their academic achievement. The top 25 sophomores will be paid $175,000. The next 50 will be paid $125,000. Again, they’ll receive half of their money in two checks at the beginning of each semester. The other half of their money will be invested conservatively by the NCAA/NBA and given to the player upon the completion of his four years of eligibility.
Step 5: The following year the NCAA/NBA will identify 75 juniors using the same criteria. Everything will remain the same except the top 25 juniors will earn $275,000 and the next 50 will get $225,000.
Step 6: The senior class will be trimmed to 50. The top 25 receive $500,000 and the next 25 receive $350,000. Everything else remains the same.
By Year 4 of my system, there are 300 basketball players — 100 freshmen, 75 sophomores and juniors and 50 seniors — enrolled in the NBA SIP. That’s a payroll right around $60 million. It’s a bargain for the NBA and the NCAA. Instead of having unprepared, no-passionate-fans kids tying up space on an NBA roster, NBA owners would get 22-year-old TV stars and superstars entering their league. The NCAA and its television partners would get ratings-driving stars in their sophomore, junior and senior seasons.
College coaches wouldn’t lose their leverage over their best players. They would get kids incentivized to embrace the academic process and coaching because academic achievement and recommendations would play a role in whether a player could enroll in the NBA SIP. A player would be very reluctant to transfer because he wouldn’t be eligible for the NBA SIP during the year he sat out as a transfer. If a player ran into academic trouble and needed summer school, it would prevent him from participating in the NBA SIP.
The kids would benefit because the best players would earn $1 million over four years and half of it would be conservatively invested and given to them as they entered the workforce. They would also benefit from the chance to mature on a college campus.
Obviously, this plan would need to be refined and safeguards would have to be put in place to protect the athlete. I’d make the athletes sign an agreement forbidding them from taking out any loans (or co-signing) during their four years in college. No credit cards, either. You would want a wall to protect them from themselves and predatory lenders.
As for the non-NBA prospects and role players? I say grant any Division I player who doesn’t qualify for the NBA SIP as a junior or senior a fifth year of playing eligibility and one year as a full-time traditional student. That’s right. Six years of school. Many of the athletes arrive on campus academically unprepared. Why not give them two extra years to catch up? And why not give the prepared ones, two years to work on a graduate degree?
As much as I regret not playing football my fifth year at Ball State (and I deeply regret it), the chance to spend one year as a legitimate full-time student has paid off for me tremendously. I worked for the school newspaper and actually made good grades. All of these athletes, particularly at age 22 or 23 when they might appreciate it, deserve one year on campus solely as a student.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I think you're overstating how bad kids have it. Rarely are scholarships pulled for anything other than serious rules violations. When a coach tells a kid he's not going to get any playing time, they transfer willingly because they want to actually play. I know of one kid PP pulled the scholarship for, due to inability to play. There was going to be trouble up on the Hill until the kid got an academic scholarship. If we guarantee them 4-5 year scholarships, do we have to guarantee them playing time too? Would they still be allowed to transfer? If released. sure. It would operate just like a normal contract. I can't wait until someone gets the transfer rule thrown out ala the old baseball reserve clause. In regards to education, no college kid gets more of an opportunity to succeed academically than high level athletes. The schools have a vested interest in keeping them academically eligible. That's why they get all the tutoring and structure with mandatory study halls. Keeping them eligible is not the same as educating them. I know as well as almost anyone could know, that Kentucky told one of its recent recruits (who did not attend there) that he would never have to take an exam. Athletes are discouraged from (sometimes not allowed by coaches) from taking difficult majors or classes that interfere with practice. They often are given false grades just to stay eligible. The factories don't care about the education, just the wins.

It all comes down to this. An employer has the right to establish entry level criteria as long as it is not racially, ethnically, or religiously biased. I think (and Constitutional law was never my favorite) that a good argument could be made that the policy is having a disparate impact on African American players. (I understand the difference between private action and state action. I invite our Constitutional scholars to chime in.) It's why I was required to get a college degree, obtain clinical experience (that I had to pay for), and pass a licensing exam. So your job requires a state license, which requires certain educational milestones to be met. That is public policy set by your state to protect your clients by providing certain minimal standards. Athletes are not licensed by the state nor is there a public interest in restricting their access to the job based upon meeting minimal qualifications.
It's why, when you look at any number of job postings, they have "experienced required" in them, and most of them pay far less than the NBA. There is no experience requirement. It is an age/time constraint requirement. The individual employers do not require any waiting, it is the entire industry. If an individual club said we only draft guys with 3 years of college at a high level because we don't want to develop players, that would be completely different than a whole industry imposing those standards. It's a market restriction that serves no legitimate purpose other than to restrict the labor pool. If these kids don't want to provide "free labor" to colleges while they wait to reach the entry level age of their sport, they can work at Walmart or Burger King while working on their game in their spare time. So, they should be free to work anywhere except at the top of their profession, regardless of their abilities. In fact, if more of them did that, they may appreciate their monetary and celebrity status more when they got it. Why do you or anyone else care if they appreciate money or celebrity status?

 

[The Governor]

Good question, they're bypassing this by allowing you to play in D-League whenever you want. D-League teams can sign with no age restrictions while NBA gets a 20 year restriction which is just a +2 to current restriction they have in place already.

Players can already go straight to the D League.

 

[sufandu]

If the NBDL can offer salaries in the 50k to 100k range then kids could choose to go college or play in the NBDL until they were 21 years old.
I like Jason Whitlock's idea better.
http://msn.foxsports.com/collegebas...tes-can-work-if-you-follow-these-steps-041013

Here’s my project/proposal for Adam Silver, the NCAA and the NBA players association. This proposal is strictly for men’s college basketball. It’s a yearly $60 million proposal that should be split 50-50 between the NBA and the NCAA.
Step 1: Get the NBPA to agree to change the draft eligibility requirements to four years after you graduated from high school or age 22.
Step 2: The NBA starts the NBA Summer Internship Program, which is a one-month program that includes basketball instruction, classes about the NBA, professional athletics and life skills. This program would be paid for by the shoe companies and a TV network that would broadcast a small handful of games from the Summer Internship Program.
Step 3: The NBA and the NCAA — through scouting, recommendations and high school academic achievement — identify the top 100 high school seniors entering college basketball. Enroll those 100 players in the NBA Summer Internship Program that pays them $100,000 each. The players would receive half the money in two checks received at the start of each semester. The other half would be invested conservatively by the NCAA/NBA and given to player upon the completion of his four years of eligibility.
Step 4: The initial 100 class will be trimmed to 75 when they become sophomores. All college basketball sophomores at any level will be eligible to apply for the NBA SIP. The NBA and the NCAA — through scouting, recommendations and academic achievement as a college freshman — will identify the 75 sophomores. They will be ranked 1 to 75 based primarily on their NBA prospects but also on their academic achievement. The top 25 sophomores will be paid $175,000. The next 50 will be paid $125,000. Again, they’ll receive half of their money in two checks at the beginning of each semester. The other half of their money will be invested conservatively by the NCAA/NBA and given to the player upon the completion of his four years of eligibility.
Step 5: The following year the NCAA/NBA will identify 75 juniors using the same criteria. Everything will remain the same except the top 25 juniors will earn $275,000 and the next 50 will get $225,000.
Step 6: The senior class will be trimmed to 50. The top 25 receive $500,000 and the next 25 receive $350,000. Everything else remains the same.
By Year 4 of my system, there are 300 basketball players — 100 freshmen, 75 sophomores and juniors and 50 seniors — enrolled in the NBA SIP. That’s a payroll right around $60 million. It’s a bargain for the NBA and the NCAA. Instead of having unprepared, no-passionate-fans kids tying up space on an NBA roster, NBA owners would get 22-year-old TV stars and superstars entering their league. The NCAA and its television partners would get ratings-driving stars in their sophomore, junior and senior seasons.
College coaches wouldn’t lose their leverage over their best players. They would get kids incentivized to embrace the academic process and coaching because academic achievement and recommendations would play a role in whether a player could enroll in the NBA SIP. A player would be very reluctant to transfer because he wouldn’t be eligible for the NBA SIP during the year he sat out as a transfer. If a player ran into academic trouble and needed summer school, it would prevent him from participating in the NBA SIP.
The kids would benefit because the best players would earn $1 million over four years and half of it would be conservatively invested and given to them as they entered the workforce. They would also benefit from the chance to mature on a college campus.
Obviously, this plan would need to be refined and safeguards would have to be put in place to protect the athlete. I’d make the athletes sign an agreement forbidding them from taking out any loans (or co-signing) during their four years in college. No credit cards, either. You would want a wall to protect them from themselves and predatory lenders.
As for the non-NBA prospects and role players? I say grant any Division I player who doesn’t qualify for the NBA SIP as a junior or senior a fifth year of playing eligibility and one year as a full-time traditional student. That’s right. Six years of school. Many of the athletes arrive on campus academically unprepared. Why not give them two extra years to catch up? And why not give the prepared ones, two years to work on a graduate degree?
As much as I regret not playing football my fifth year at Ball State (and I deeply regret it), the chance to spend one year as a legitimate full-time student has paid off for me tremendously. I worked for the school newspaper and actually made good grades. All of these athletes, particularly at age 22 or 23 when they might appreciate it, deserve one year on campus solely as a student.

I like it in theory. I'm just not sure there's anyway to be objective about the evaluations. If you're kid 101 you're pissed.

 

[Alsacs]

I like it in theory. I'm just not sure there's anyway to be objective about the evaluations. If you're kid 101 you're pissed.

Oh well, If your kid 101 it doesn't mean you can't work butt off and be one of the top 75 after their freshman year. I don't think all college athletes should get paid either.

I agree this idea has flaws, but something has to get done IMO. Unless the NBDL offers decent salaries kids won't play there. I like the idea all college athletes can be given a 5k stipend a semester, and the university can sell autographs/jerseys of the players and the players can be paid for those autograph sessions. Also, sell the video game rights to EA Sports and split some of those profits with the basketball and football players.

 

[RF2044]

Oh well, If your kid 101 it doesn't mean you can't work butt off and be one of the top 75 after their freshman year. I don't think all college athletes should get paid either.

I agree this idea has flaws, but something has to get done IMO. Unless the NBDL offers decent salaries kids won't play there. I like the idea all college athletes can be given a 5k stipend a semester, and the university can sell autographs/jerseys of the players and the players can be paid for those autograph sessions. Also, sell the video game rights to EA Sports and split some of those profits with the basketball and football players.

The point is, determining those 75 is subjective as hell. What about big men who take longer to develop, but are still highly coveted by the NBA? What about players who go to big programs and have to sit / wait their turn, versus those that don't?

Lots of subjectivity, no matter how objectively you try to set the system up.

 

[The Governor]

Oh well, If your kid 101 it doesn't mean you can't work butt off and be one of the top 75 after their freshman year. I don't think all college athletes should get paid either.

I agree this idea has flaws, but something has to get done IMO. Unless the NBDL offers decent salaries kids won't play there. I like the idea all college athletes can be given a 5k stipend a semester, and the university can sell autographs/jerseys of the players and the players can be paid for those autograph sessions. Also, sell the video game rights to EA Sports and split some of those profits with the basketball and football players.

You'll need more than decent salaries. College players already get a stipend around $800 a month, they get Pell Grants, if the live off campus they get the on campus housing cost paid to them, and they don't pay taxes. They get better coaching, facilities, and most importantly more exposure than NBDL players. NCAA players don't have it nearly as bad as some of you make it out.

Side note, they are well fed and Shabazz was lying. The NCAA just regulated when you could feed them which was 3 meals a day plus snacks after games and practices. They even get a $45 per diem for road games or being on campus when school is out.

 

[sufandu]

You're correct in that my profession required state licensure, but you ignored the point that many other professions that don't, still require experience whether it's in entry level positions or internships. I disagree with your statement that the NBA is an entire industry. It's not. It's one employer with multiple branches, and it can add or subtract a branch if it sees fit. Some guy didn't just start the Miami Heat and then apply for admission to the NBA afterword. The NBA decided they wanted to expand and added a team in Miami. That is also why the PA negotiates with the league and not each individual team. There are other basketball leagues available for players to play in. They may not be on the NBA's level, but not every computer company is Apple either. Age requirement versus experience is semantics. I also disagree that the age requirement is simply in place to reduce the labor pool. As I said in another post, it exists so the scouts can reduce risk with talent evaluations. The idea that the rule impacts one race over another doesn't change the fact that it's not aimed at one and not another. Cody Zeller had to wait just as long as MCW. Your points about academics are good, and I'll have to take you at your word with the examples. That speaks to a larger problem that isn't resolved by letting guys go straight to the NBA.

Why do I care whether they appreciate their money or celebrity? Because I'm the consumer, and if I think a guy is a jerk because he thinks he's better than others, when the reality is he was lucky enough to be born with genetics that make him taller, stronger, and faster, I don't care to watch him play. It's the same reason I don't watch anything about the Kardashians.

 

[Alsacs]

You'll need more than decent salaries. College players already get a stipend around $800 a month, they get Pell Grants, if the live off campus they get the on campus housing cost paid to them, and they don't pay taxes. They get better coaching, facilities, and most importantly more exposure than NBDL players. NCAA players don't have it nearly as bad as some of you make it out.

Side note, they are well fed and Shabazz was lying. The NCAA just regulated when you could feed them which was 3 meals a day plus snacks after games and practices. They even get a $45 per diem for road games or being on campus when school is out.

Give the players scholarships check, give the football, basketball, and any other sport which generates a profit an additional 5k stipend, give the basketball/football players a portion of the money they used to make from EA Sports for NCAA Football/Basketball games. Have each university allow their players to sell their IP rights for $$$ and have autograph sessions.

The only athletes that deserve $$$ are the revenue producing sports. The other sports programs are subsidized by the football and basketball revenue. Women's basketball and softball could argue they should get some compensation from the TV their sports generate, but honestly I am sure its peanuts compared to football and men's basketball.

 

[sufandu]

Give the players scholarships check, give the football, basketball, and any other sport which generates a profit an additional 5k stipend, give the basketball/football players a portion of the money they used to make from EA Sports for NCAA Football/Basketball games. Have each university allow their players to sell their IP rights for $$$ and have autograph sessions.

The only athletes that deserve $$$ are the revenue producing sports. The other sports programs are subsidized by the football and basketball revenue. Women's basketball and softball could argue they should get some compensation from the TV their sports generate, but honestly I am sure its peanuts compared to football and men's basketball.

The problem with the athletes being paid for IP rights and autograph sessions has more to do with recruiting being a level playing field than anything else. Imagine how much boosters would pay for a kid's autograph. It wouldn't take long for recruits to know exactly which school has the deepest pockets.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Rather than the NCAA writing checks to athletes, I'd rather just let the athletes sign endorsement deals immediately upon turning 18.

People should have the right to profit from their own identity. Honestly, I believe this should be considered a modern inalienable right.

 

[Alsacs]

The problem with the athletes being paid for IP rights and autograph sessions has more to do with recruiting being a level playing field than anything else. Imagine how much boosters would pay for a kid's autograph. It wouldn't take long for recruits to know exactly which school has the deepest pockets.

I would have the Universities buy the kids autographs and then sell them at their gift shops/bookstores etc. Their are ways to have it done on the level. I get your point though. I mean boosters right now are how John Calipari is able to pay the luxury tax at Kentucky each year.

 

[moqui]

But if you play for a major program that is always on national TV and getting solid coaching/development why would you give up the showcase for that?

because if you are Andrew Wiggins, for example, your D League salary is inconsequential - you sign your Nike deal, you get some local endorsement deals in your home town, etc.

Guys further down the food chain can sign with management groups who offer them advances against their NBA deals, etc.

As it gets more talent, the D League gets more TV time on the ever growing number of sports channels, eventually gathering nearly as much exposure as the college game does now.

If the NBA goes through with this, it doesn't save the college game - it deals it a body blow

 

[Cheriehoop]

because if you are Andrew Wiggins, for example, your D League salary is inconsequential - you sign your Nike deal, you get some local endorsement deals in your home town, etc.

Guys further down the food chain can sign with management groups who offer them advances against their NBA deals, etc.

As it gets more talent, the D League gets more TV time on the ever growing number of sports channels, eventually gathering nearly as much exposure as the college game does now.

If the NBA goes through with this, it doesn't save the college game - it deals it a body blow

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=6490719

 

[IthacaMatt]

As is, why would a really good player go to college for 3 years instead of earning at least a decent salary in D league? Can develop your game either way and why not get paid to do it? It also would seem that NBA teams, having invested more in their D league team players now, might be more willing to bring up rising D talent vs. talent from 3-year college kids, in theory. Agree with others that this won't happen and some 2-year compromise eventually will.

To get a degree from a good college.

 

[IthacaMatt]

because if you are Andrew Wiggins, for example, your D League salary is inconsequential - you sign your Nike deal, you get some local endorsement deals in your home town, etc.

Guys further down the food chain can sign with management groups who offer them advances against their NBA deals, etc.

As it gets more talent, the D League gets more TV time on the ever growing number of sports channels, eventually gathering nearly as much exposure as the college game does now.

If the NBA goes through with this, it doesn't save the college game - it deals it a body blow

I don't think so. Talent will develop. Teams will have more continuity, leading to better teamwork, better quality of play, if lacking a handful of the top end athletes. The NCAA will still be a bigger stage than the D League. What this will do is wipe out JUCO ball. There's no reason to go JUCO to qualify if you're good enough to make a D League team.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Oh well, If your kid 101 it doesn't mean you can't work butt off and be one of the top 75 after their freshman year. I don't think all college athletes should get paid either.

I agree this idea has flaws, but something has to get done IMO. Unless the NBDL offers decent salaries kids won't play there. I like the idea all college athletes can be given a 5k stipend a semester, and the university can sell autographs/jerseys of the players and the players can be paid for those autograph sessions. Also, sell the video game rights to EA Sports and split some of those profits with the basketball and football players.

I think the stipend should be $100/week, which is closer to $4K. Nice round number, not too much, not too little. Plus a round trip ticket home once a year. I think it's important that you dole it out to them, too, and not give it to them in a lump sum, so they don't go to a casino, or buy a pound of pot to sell, stupid stuff like that.

 

[Dave85]

Screw the kids again. They get a one year scholarship, the renewal of which they cannot rely upon, or they can go to the developmental leagues, with crap coaching, minimal pay (relative to their professional counterparts and likely no signing bonus.)
Just let them do what all other non-football or basketball athletes can do: essentially go pro when they want to. Don't give me the baseball crap. Baseball players can go when they are our of HS, at any time if they go to Community College, or 3 years of a 4 year college or age 21. NHL rules: Players who turn 18 by September 15 and are not older than 20 by December 31 are eligible for selection. In addition, non-North American players over the age of 20 are eligible. A North American player who is not drafted by the age of 20 is an unrestricted free agent. All non-North Americans must be drafted before being signed, regardless of age.
Or, if you are going to restrict them, make the college scholarships a 4 or 5 year contract, and make sure that the school actually educates the kid in a meaningful major.

There are 2 inherent differences between football/basketball and hockey/baseball. The first 2 have college farm teams which make millions and are dominated by African American men. These have the largest barriers to entry of the professional ranks while providing free labor to college athletic departments. The second 2 make little to no money for colleges, have established farm systems for training, are much easier to enter the professional ranks, and are dominated, in the US, by white men.

Explain to me what you mean "dominated by African American men" because they just look like men to me.

 

[pfister1]

Requiring players to stay for three years seems a little much. I don't see any reason why the next Kobe Bryant, Lebron James or Dwight Howard should have to spend a year in college.

What I would like to see is pretty simple:

1 - Institute a rule that allows players to either (a) enter the draft immediately after high school or (b) go the NCAA/Euro route for at least 2 years
2 - For any player not out of high school for at least three years trying to enter the draft (players right out of HS, or players trying to enter after their 2nd year of college) be evaluated by an independent panel of scouts to get an honest assessment of where they could fall in the draft. This would prevent someone like a Vander Blue from being taken advantage of by an agent by being told "you're early 2nd round" and then going undrafted.

As to point 2 - I think it sounds a little more complex than it is. You're going to have 40 or 50 underclassmen declare early. about half of them will be pretty obviously ready (like MCW, Zeller, Porter, etc last year). That only leave 20 or 25 players left to evaluate.

I think making the rule three years will hurt college hoops in the long run. Players will start smarting up and realize that making a USD equivalent of a couple hundred thousand bucks a year and up in Madrid, Barcelona, Milan, or Beijing will help out their personal situation a lot more than taking a team to the final four three years in a row.

Players should be able to be drafted out of High School. They should be able to try to go pro whenever they want.

As to #2 why create some strained ridiculous evaluation construct? You already have it, its called the draft. Players should not forfeit their eligibility simply because they were drafted. The whole idea that they have to renounce their eligibility to be eligible to be drafted is really sort of an ultimate screw job by the NCAA. Basically the NCAA is working in concert with the NBA and saying we'll make things more certain for you by eliminating the possibility that you draft a kid and he then chooses to play another year of college ball.

You could even allow the kids to go to controlled workouts if you want to, without impacting their eligibility. There is no reason that they need to sign with an agent prior to being drafted and making a determination that they want to sign.

Why make the whole thing harder than it has to be? I understand why the NBA wants it that way....teams have a hard enough time selecting productive players. Add in the possibility that the player you select might return to school and you'd really see the NBA GMs scramble....but why should all the risk be on the kids' backs.