If you haven't heard, yet another player is thinking of making the jump from the NCAA to the NBA. Brandon Rush of Kansas went to mull things over with Coach Self about him making the multi million dollar jump to the next level. I see the conversation going like this:
Coach Self: "So, how can I make living in the dorms, eating bad food, and making little to no money seem more appealing than a huge NBA and shoe contract along with other endorsements that will give you financial stability for the rest of your life?"
Rush: : "You can't. But I am going to make a big deal out of talking to you to make it look like I am making an educated decision. This way I will get drafted and I won't have try for the first half of the season. If I get drafted by a garbage team, I won't have to try at all!"
Coach Self: "Ok, good talk. See you out there."
Is this dramatic? Yes. Is this far from the truth? Let's hope so.
The NBA took one step closer to making things right. With the age limit, it forces kids to go to college for a year. Initially, a great step. A closer look reveals its a big marketing scam. Bobby Knight came out and said that it was a terrible rule. He made the point that a kid never has to set foot in a college classroom if he doesn't want to. Look, he enrolls, doesn't go to a single class his first semester...put on academic probation. Then does the same thing the next semester and is academically in eligible. Thus, the player coasts into the NBA draft while his academic advisers are chasing him down.
Am I old fashion and think that every kid should go through all 4 years of college, get a degree, and then go to the NBA? Yes. Would this help them with managing themselves and the huge amounts of money they are about run into? Absolutely. Is this reality? No.
The new NBA rule is simply in place for the NBA to let the NCAA market big name players at no cost to the NBA. Look at how much hype Durant and Oden had! David Stern and the NBA don't care about these kids lives they care about increasing the demand for their product. A product which has been down in the recent past.
Let's look at what my solution would be. We took baby steps and got the age limit in place. Let's get another year out of it. Make kids stay 2 years instead of 1.
Benefits you ask?
1. Increase the popularity and competition in the NCAA game. This will help everyone. It helps the NCAA because now it has a better product.
2. It helps the NBA because the kids are getting better experience before coming to the pros.
3. It helps the kids because they are getting two years of hard work and discipline before going to the morally bankrupt NBA. Ok, that was extreme, but stick with me here.
4. It helps the fans because then we get TWO YEARS of Oden/Durnat hype and you get some legit basketball being played by college teams (i.e. Florida the past two years, can you imagine those guys coming back one more year?!)
How is this not good? Even as I write, it makes more sense. Drawn backs? People could get hurt. This is a problem, but if this is the only problem, why wouldn't we consider this?
Brandon and Bill, if you are reading this out in Kansas, buck the trend. Stick it out Brandon. You will have taken the road less travelled and it will make all the difference.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Yeah, I'm with you on that one. A few points to further back up what you wrote:
-Guys who have the talent to leave school early and make the jump to the NBA are not paying a dime for college, not a penny. All of them receive financial aid and grants. Sure it's not millions, but they're not losing any money either and they are considered men among boys on campus.
-The big injury is a legitimate argument for leaving school early. However, say Kevin Durant decides to come back for another year, there is no way he can't get a pretty significant insurance package to cover him financially should he tear his ACL or whatever.
Two years in college would greatly improve both the NBA and NCAA basketball, I don't think anyone can deny that. I think the NBAs decision is money driven and they're a business and are entitled to do so.
I recall when the rule was first made people complained up and down about it for about one week and then that was it. I don't remember seeing an interview with Oden saying how much he hated being in school and how he was having trouble paying the bills.
Collison from UCLA must have read this blog. He is staying at UCLA. I think our readership is growing!
I used to think like you guys, and I certainly appreciate a college education as much as anyone, but I see things differently.
If I'm 19 years old, and I've got a chance to setup myself and my family for life, I'm going to take it. By doing this, you accomplish a few things.
1. you start making money sooner, and you don't have the college injury risk (I don't think there's an insurance package available that remotely compares to an NBA salary).
2. You have an opportunity for a longer career. For example - doesn't it seem like Garnett has been in the NBA forever? That's because he has. However, he's still only 31 years old, yet he's played 12 seasons already with a few more good ones in him.
3. What's the point in cruising through college for 3 more years, just so that you can say you have a degree (most likely in communications)? I just don't feel like you'd be learning that much. "Having a college degree" never made anyone better at managing their money. Being smart helps. Taking a few of the right classes might help (maybe).
4. They don't owe anything to their colleges. Their colleges don't owe anything to them. Both parties are fully aware of what they're getting out of it. For the record, non-basketball players don't get criticized for dropping out of school after two years (even those that are on scholarship). Hey - it's not great to drop out of college, but we shouldn't claim that college players owe the schools anything just because they were handed scholarships.
5. I just don't buy the "it's better for the game of college basketball" argument. Unfortunately for those of us that love college basketball, individual players have no particular commitment to "making the college game better".
Ultimately, as soon as people graduate college, they are free agents. They have a wide open market ahead of them, and the smartest thing to do as a free agent is to take a minimal salary (enough to cover room and board, food, education) that lets you learn the game of basketball and allows you to mature appropriately. However, as soon as you think it becomes a better deal for you to jump somewhere else, you should have the right to do it. Guys do this all the time when they jump from JCs to NCAAs, and we don't make a big deal out of that.
Baseball has done this for years. No one really laments the weak college baseball system. Maybe college basketball is dying. I love college basketball, but maybe we have to let it go.
Lastly, there are plenty examples of guys who jumped to the pros and sucked. Marcus Taylor (MSU) is the prime example. He sucked and is an idiot. I believe that most of the guys that make this jump to the pros are big enough idiots that they don't belong in college to begin with, and they wouldn't have made anything of themselves if they had a full college education and degree anyway.
Read this: http://moneyplayers.typepad.com/blog/2006/11/going_pro_or_st.html
I don't see how you can deny that this is better for college basketball. How does that make any sense? If Durant is in college, college basketball is more fun to watch, if he's not, it's not. I guess that could be true just to people like me who have only a passing interest in CBB.
There is a real possibility that maybe CBB is on it's way out. It's main popularity was built in an era when freshman weren't even allowed to play on a varsity team. Times have changed and maybe the game needs to change.
Mr. Lincoln,
I hear what you are saying, but the problem with your post is that you are not looking at it from the correct perspective. The NBA decides its age limits, thus, you need to look at it from Stern's stand point primarily and then look at it from the player's standpoint.
Points 1-4 are 100% true and valid. I don't know if I would even argue any of it. If you truly think that having people like Oden/Durant/Noah etc. don't make CBB better, then you are completely out of your tree in regards to point 5.
From an NBA standpoint, if you have the college players stay 2 years, it is possible to get a much better picture of who is good and who isn't. All the while getting the free hype. This way, if there are players that are sandbagging or not getting the playing time , the hope would be that would get ironed out prior to them coming in. Also, this gives them some lessons in accountability for classes and teammates, a good life lesson. This is something that you might be on board with but since you don't see a value in an education, you might not put a lot of stock in accountability either. Not sure on this.
Your tone has a certain air of entitlement flowing through it. It sounds like you come from the the school of thought that Latrell Spreewell comes from in regards to making money for your family. I am sure you will next argue that the rookie salary contracts should be limitless because you need to provide for your baby's mamma or put food on the table.
Post a Comment