Would a viable minor league basketball league be good for NCAA Basketball?

[texascpa]

I'm sorry, but nobody is going to give Trevor Cooney 100k to play for them.

Without the melos and durants, college sports become much less popular and valuable. Then there won't be a need or ability to pay players. The goal should be to get money as far away as possible, otherwise it will get to the players.

I think college sports has more of a personal attachment for people, particularly alumni. Look at the Division III St. Johns vs St. Peters game in Wisconsin - 33K fans. People will continue to be drawn towards their college teams, so money will still be involved.

 

[Col. Bleep]

Unless the system changes as a result of the current scandal, there would likely be a greater opportunity for individal players to capitalize in college basketball than a minor league basketball system.

One of the reasons college & universities are such big business is that many have an automatic fan base. University of Texas has over 50,000 students. School-pride (and state-pride) alone would bring an automatic fan base to their basketball team that would be greater than what any Austin TX minor league basketball team would bring.

Right.
College sports in cities without major league teams have a natural passionate fan base.
Austin is a great example but it's now a fairly large city in terms of population.
Look at places like Syracuse and Spokane and Boise and (yes) Louisville.

But what we've seen unfold this week is just the tip of the iceberg.

The major problem to reform is that there's SO much money involved...mostly TV $...that counters interest in cleaning things up.
But there still may be a major upheaval.
Maybe paying players and essentially making college teams even more of the "minor league" they are now.
Maybe decoupling college teams from the college.
Something's gotta give...especially as more schools, more people and more sports get exposed.

 

[texascpa]

But 3 stars aren't going to turn a team around overnight. They take time to develop. The 5-star and high-end 4-stars come in, start and succeed as freshmen.

In any event, the more something is illegal, the more shady gets done in the dark. Turn the lights on and that goes away.

Remove the 5 stars and all you have left are 3 and 4, and the story is different. That's my point.

 

[Fly Rodder]

The other alternative to a minor league is just blow the thing up and let teams sign 16 years and send them to their respective academies like the European and South American/Caribbean kids.

The schools get in trouble because they're kind of pushed into this mess by professional leagues not wanting to deal with the headache.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Blow up one side of that relationship and it's no longer viable. There isn't some requirement that college sports has to be in bed with professional sports.

I agree - that's why I personally think colleges have to be selective, mandate 3 year commitments at the least, the goal should be an education not just a minor league showcase for NBA ambitions and then mean it.

 

[RandygoCuse]

No.

Minor league baseball works because its about gimmicks and going outside in the summer.

College basketball works because of passion and connections to your school.

I wouldn't care one iota about a local minor league basketball team while basketball, football, hockey, soccer seasons were going on.

You need a connection and college is that.

The other reason minor league baseball (and to some extent hockey) works is because they aren't competing with college sports the way basketball and football do.

 

[Townie72]

If you de-couple the SU basketball team from the University, what do you have?

It becomes part of a minor league and brings to mind the Eastern basketball League (EBL).

 

[Townie72]

Jay Bilas said today that the NCAA and it's attempt to manage college basketball reminds him of what occurred during Prohibition.

Prohibition was rooted in idealism. So too is the NCAA with it's view of student athletes.

But as with Prohibition, there Billions of Dollars involved in college basketball. In both these cases, the Government and the NCAA created a situation where it bad behavior naturally occurred. When there are hundreds of thousands of dollars to be made, you can expect there to be people in the system cashing in.

Bilas thinks that you can eliminate a lot of these problems by paying the players.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Jay Bilas said today that the NCAA and it's attempt to manage college basketball reminds him of what occurred during Prohibition.

Prohibition was rooted in idealism. So too is the NCAA with it's view of student athletes.

But as with Prohibition, there Billions of Dollars involved in college basketball. In both these cases, the Government and the NCAA created a situation where it bad behavior naturally occurred. When there are hundreds of thousands of dollars to be made, you can expect there to be people in the system cashing in.

Bilas thinks that you can eliminate a lot of these problems by paying the players.

Personally, I don't agree with him.

How does that stop someone still from seeking outside $? Do you pay the stars, with the starting 5 getting more or pay them after the fact according to minutes played? Points scored? Or maybe one equal stipend for every player , but what about geographical adjustments for cost of living, (should St John's players get more than SU's) , how about all the other sports, bands, cheerleaders and as Retro pointed out, how about grad students involved in actual research who don't benefit the payoff from their labor? What about walk-ons? Think of the arguments, jealousies, and issues between players , effect on coaches, perhaps strategy? Increase, decrease minutes of players - how will they think it affects their worth, should it?

It will be fans and students paying for it - bet they'll have a vocal say how much a player is worth or not worth. Who pays the taxes for all of it? Where does this discretionary college disbursement come from? What gets decreased? Why would Bilas think that $ solves the issue of greed, always wanting more? Doesn't work even for CEO's - is enough ever enough for many people?

I say put a percentage each year from a player's individual jersey number sales, autograph sales etc during their tenure into a trust payable after they leave. That's it besides the spending money. Or just give me all the money and I will keep it safe and promise to be fair.

 

[CarolinaCuse]

Personally, I don't agree with him.

How does that stop someone still from seeking outside $? Do you pay the stars, with the starting 5 getting more or pay them after the fact according to minutes played? Points scored? Or maybe one equal stipend for every player , but what about geographical adjustments for cost of living, (should St John's players get more than SU's) , how about all the other sports, bands, cheerleaders and as Retro pointed out, how about grad students involved in actual research who don't benefit the payoff from their labor? What about walk-ons? Think of the arguments, jealousies, and issues between players , effect on coaches, perhaps strategy? Increase, decrease minutes of players - how will they think it affects their worth, should it?

It will be fans and students paying for it - bet they'll have a vocal say how much a player is worth or not worth. Who pays the taxes for all of it? Where does this discretionary college disbursement come from? What gets decreased? Why would Bilas think that $ solves the issue of greed, always wanting more? Doesn't work even for CEO's - is enough ever enough for many people?

I say put a percentage each year from a player's individual jersey number sales, autograph sales etc during their tenure into a trust payable after they leave. That's it besides the spending money. Or just give me all the money and I will keep it safe and promise to be fair.

I agree in that I don't necessarily agree with Bilas. I don't think you can ideologically pay student-athletes their perceived value. I've worked in higher ed my whole life (and was a collegiate athlete myself) and you can't hide from the fact that the foundation of athletics at colleges and universities is because it has value to the person/player. They grow and develop from playing. Secondly, their sports contribute to the community and culture of a school. This is why public institutions typically have such a greater advantage than private institutions in this day and age.

It is REALLY unfortunate that the culture has changed to such a degree that there are tons and tons of money being made... at non-profit organizations... that are tax exempt... because at the root, they are established for the betterment and education of the student. I don't think a player can receive a percentage of individual jersey number sales (e.g, how would you quantify which "44" wearer received what percentage for Cuse football); but, I do think that an individual should be able to profit from his/her likeness. But I agree Cherie, I don't think greed can be solved with more greed.

 

[OttoMets]

... I don't think greed can be solved with more greed.

Bingo. Money is the problem, it's not the solution to a problem.

 

[Scooch]

Bingo. Money is the problem, it's not the solution to a problem.

And if that is the case, then the only solution is to completely abandon the current construct. Tinkering around the edges won't work because as long as colleges are generating tens of millions of dollars due to football and men's basketball then corruption will occur. If people really want a solution then colleges need to get out of the athletics business entirely, or the playing of games cannot be allowed to generate media, attendance or licensing revenue.

 

[jncuse]

I think there is a workable solution that benefits both sides.

It appears the NBA is finally pushing hard on creating a D-League that actually improves prospect development. I think they would be keen on bringing in first round draft prospects into the league as well, and compensate them highly to improve the visibility of their league? Will they able to incorporate a method to make it all work with players who are already drafted or minor league veterans. Will their continue to be a push from teams, NBA offices, key owners like Mark Cuban. So it may or may not get done.

If that got done, would that hurt the NCAA? Net-net, maybe a bit not much. There is certainly a hardcore fan element that watches the NCAA purely to follow draft prospects. You see them on NBA message boards. Those would be lost. But fans of college teams, at this point would appreciate the additional stability and familiarity. What makes the NCAA work is the brand of the school and the natural base of supporting fans. That will still exist. The blue bloods would still get the best 3/4 year players.

 

[retro44]

Personally, I don't agree with him.

How does that stop someone still from seeking outside $? Do you pay the stars, with the starting 5 getting more or pay them after the fact according to minutes played? Points scored? Or maybe one equal stipend for every player , but what about geographical adjustments for cost of living, (should St John's players get more than SU's) , how about all the other sports, bands, cheerleaders and as Retro pointed out, how about grad students involved in actual research who don't benefit the payoff from their labor? What about walk-ons? Think of the arguments, jealousies, and issues between players , effect on coaches, perhaps strategy? Increase, decrease minutes of players - how will they think it affects their worth, should it?

It will be fans and students paying for it - bet they'll have a vocal say how much a player is worth or not worth. Who pays the taxes for all of it? Where does this discretionary college disbursement come from? What gets decreased? Why would Bilas think that $ solves the issue of greed, always wanting more? Doesn't work even for CEO's - is enough ever enough for many people?

I say put a percentage each year from a player's individual jersey number sales, autograph sales etc during their tenure into a trust payable after they leave. That's it besides the spending money. Or just give me all the money and I will keep it safe and promise to be fair.

If the basketball players want to get paid and I am sure it will be a lot more than what 98% schools can afford to pay them,then make them pay to attend that school.

The networks throwing the big money at schools,leagues and the NCAA is the biggest problem and will be the toughest hurdle to overcome.

 

[retro44]

I think there is a workable solution that benefits both sides.

It appears the NBA is finally pushing hard on creating a D-League that actually improves prospect development. I think they would be keen on bringing in first round draft prospects into the league as well, and compensate them highly to improve the visibility of their league? Will they able to incorporate a method to make it all work with players who are already drafted or minor league veterans. Will their continue to be a push from teams, NBA offices, key owners like Mark Cuban. So it may or may not get done.

If that got done, would that hurt the NCAA? Net-net, maybe a bit not much. There is certainly a hardcore fan element that watches the NCAA purely to follow draft prospects. You see them on NBA message boards. Those would be lost. But fans of college teams, at this point would appreciate the additional stability and familiarity. What makes the NCAA work is the brand of the school and the natural base of supporting fans. That will still exist. The blue bloods would still get the best 3/4 year players.

HA...College teams are paying more than the D-League and the schools treat them like royalty,so cutting into the bottom line of NBA owners is not at the top of any list.

 

[jncuse]

HA...College teams are paying more than the D-League and the schools treat them like royalty,so cutting into the bottom line of NBA owners is not at the top of any list.

The NBA has no issue spending additional money on player development if they think it will help them. In the past the thought was that it is silly as the NCAA does just as good a job. Free development. But many people no longer think this way, which is why they are now revisiting things.

The NBA can certainly find a way to pay more than NCAA teams. This is a priority of Adam Silver and there is a committee looking into it, as many NBA executives feel they can develop elite players better outside of the NCAA. Now whether that is the ultimate conclusion is unknown. They certainly want to improve the value they are getting from the D-League.

Here is a simple scenario that the NCAA would find hard to compete with.

Step 1 - High School Draft to get in the D-League -- the 30 players are each paid $200,000 in their first two years.
Step 2 - NBA Draft Eligible after one year in college or one year in D-League - each player drafted from the D-League gets an additional $1,000,000 bonus.

Say 15 players are drafted from the D-League in one year. That is a shared cost of $700,000 per team for the year. Given that elite draft prospects will make the D-League a more viable TV product, they will be able to recover not all but some of the costs. But if they truly believe they are developing these kids player that is a small cost to pay. They have some work to do on the D-League as a whole, since many teams are not yet committed. But in my mind, if a high schooler got drafted by the Toronto Raptors and played for their D-League team, they will develop better than going to Syracuse or any NCAA program.

 

[IDOC]

I have said for years that there should be two new professional leagues, NFL & NBA "light". This would be for athletes with no real ambition to obtain a meaningful college degree but have a goal of reaching the "big leagues ". The max time in the new leagues would be 4 years.
While the college game may not have the same quantity of top athletes, the competition would be equal and the pressure to take on a player who is not college material or just has no interest in college would end.

 

[moqui]

p5 conferences could sponsor a minor league in which the teams are affiliated with the schools and feature a mix of kids who play for pay and those - including walk ons - who play for tuition. there would be a salary cap and a set structure of salary slots. the team would still call itself the syracuse orange but strictly speaking it would not be a college team. signing a guy like darius bazley to a 1b salary slot and then watching him blow up into a 1a player would be a real coup.
of course this means exiting the ncaa and march madness as we know it

 

[Townie72]

p5 conferences could sponsor a minor league in which the teams are affiliated with the schools and feature a mix of kids who play for pay and those - including walk ons - who play for tuition. there would be a salary cap and a set structure of salary slots. the team would still call itself the syracuse orange but strictly speaking it would not be a college team. signing a guy like darius bazley to a 1b salary slot and then watching him blow up into a 1a player would be a real coup.
of course this means exiting the ncaa and march madness as we know it

How would this "affiliation" work?

Would the University own the franchise?

Would the University just be the team's landlord?

I can't see how this works. Because "strictly speaking" it's a pro team.

 

[moqui]

How would this "affiliation" work?

Would the University own the franchise?

Would the University just be the team's landlord?

I can't see how this works. Because "strictly speaking" it's a pro team.

yes, the universities would own the teams and operate them as semi-pro franchises, using their established brands and appealing to their established fanbases. the latter makes it viable as a startup minor league

 

[Townie72]

yes, the universities would own the teams and operate them as semi-pro franchises, using their established brands and appealing to their established fanbases. the latter makes it viable as a startup minor league

Their revenues would then be taxable, right? And all the labor laws would apply, right? And the players would be allowed to unionize, right?

In addition to this, would SU and others field their own teams for real students under rules like they have in DIII??

Don't get me wrong. I don't disagree. But I don't think the universities would go this route unless there was extreme pressure.

But at least it gets us away from this "student-athlete" insanity that everyone knows is an outrageous lie.