No one posted this.
This may indeed be just the tip of the ice burg
Quote:At one major university, a sports agent arranged for a quid pro quo among Adidas, the college’s men’s basketball program and a top high school prospect in which the player’s family would receive $100,000 if he committed to the school and signed with the apparel giant once he turned pro.
At another college, the basketball team’s associate head coach accepted nearly $100,000 to steer his team’s top players to a financial adviser eager to manage their future N.B.A. riches. At a third, a top assistant set up a similar arrangement, promising to trade his access to players for bribes.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/26/sport...ml?mcubz=0
(09-27-2017 07:35 AM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]No one posted this.
This may indeed be just the tip of the ice burg
We're discussing it in the bball recruiting thread. But agreed, it could get really ugly.
Maybe we shouldn't be giving these P5 teams all this money.They are corrupt and all they do is build unnecessarily huge facilities with water slides and then pull this crap.
Maybe this will be the straw that finally makes the P5 just go ahead and call themselves semi-pro and split away from the NCAA. I'm sure this crap goes on at the G5 and lower levels too, but with a minuscule amount of money to toss around they can't compete even in cheating. If the G5 would all agree to legitimately not do things like this it could become a true amateur college sports level with actual student athletes. The P5 can just pay people to represent their schools. No classes, no worries about cheating under the table. Just pay a guy what he's worth on the open market to wear a jersey, go to practice and play ball. Call it what it is.
Terrible idea. Considering the tiny % of college BBall players that make the NBA, kids even at that level need an education to put to use when they leave college.
The preferred answer is to drop the one and done, let those who want to try pro ball out of HS do so and then figure out what they want to do with their lives if and when they don't make it, IMO
(09-27-2017 08:30 AM)jumpshooter Wrote: [ -> ]Terrible idea. Considering the tiny % of college BBall players that make the NBA, kids even at that level need an education to put to use when they leave college.
The preferred answer is to drop the one and done, let those who want to try pro ball out of HS do so and then figure out what they want to do with their lives if and when they don't make it, IMO
The NBA wants to move the age limit to 20. The players union wants it moved to 18.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spor...imit-rule/
The answer to me has always been the baseball rule. You can go pro out of high school but if you go to college, you're making a 3-year minimum commitment.
(09-27-2017 08:22 AM)monarx Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe this will be the straw that finally makes the P5 just go ahead and call themselves semi-pro and split away from the NCAA. I'm sure this crap goes on at the G5 and lower levels too, but with a minuscule amount of money to toss around they can't compete even in cheating. If the G5 would all agree to legitimately not do things like this it could become a true amateur college sports level with actual student athletes. The P5 can just pay people to represent their schools. No classes, no worries about cheating under the table. Just pay a guy what he's worth on the open market to wear a jersey, go to practice and play ball. Call it what it is.
I think the universities and the NCAA and ESPN are really missing the boat here. College sports fans are not watching because of the athleticism, they are watching for the pageantry and competition. There is no need for this kind of craziness to exist. I, and I think most college sports fans, would be just as happy watching slightly less talented players that fit the moniker of student athlete. Raise the admission standards, commit to actually educating every student, athlete or not, who arrives on your campus, and submit to enforcement of reasonable rules, and we will have as much better, much healthier NCAA.
The one and dones players are a joke. As long as this practice and rule stays they'll have problems. The truth one and done players help to keep the G5s in the game a little. The top programs spend a ton of resources and time to recruit these guys. A solid 5th year senior can give a top recruit a run
So you are suggesting an across-the-board set of admission standards, applicable to every NCAA school? So UNLV and W&M would have to have the same admissions criteria? How could that possibly work?
(09-27-2017 08:37 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-27-2017 08:30 AM)jumpshooter Wrote: [ -> ]Terrible idea. Considering the tiny % of college BBall players that make the NBA, kids even at that level need an education to put to use when they leave college.
The preferred answer is to drop the one and done, let those who want to try pro ball out of HS do so and then figure out what they want to do with their lives if and when they don't make it, IMO
The NBA wants to move the age limit to 20. The players union wants it moved to 18.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spor...imit-rule/
The answer to me has always been the baseball rule. You can go pro out of high school but if you go to college, you're making a 3-year minimum commitment.
My apologies for clogging up recruiting thread, so I will move here.
I like this idea as well. I would settle for 2 year commitment.
(09-27-2017 08:30 AM)jumpshooter Wrote: [ -> ]Terrible idea. Considering the tiny % of college BBall players that make the NBA, kids even at that level need an education to put to use when they leave college.
The preferred answer is to drop the one and done, let those who want to try pro ball out of HS do so and then figure out what they want to do with their lives if and when they don't make it, IMO
Agree. Before one and done, there was still cheating, but the game and quality of play was much better without one and done. And by quality of play, I mean teamwork. Obviously one and done provides for a big showcase in
individual talent that can overwhelm better
teams with less talent. I prefer college basketball to the NBA because it historically has been a better team sport. I don't want to watch an 18 year old LeBron James or Kobe Bryant playing against normally developing 18-22 year olds. They should be able to go straight to the NBA, where they are ready to compete and where they can make their money legally.
(09-27-2017 08:37 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-27-2017 08:30 AM)jumpshooter Wrote: [ -> ]Terrible idea. Considering the tiny % of college BBall players that make the NBA, kids even at that level need an education to put to use when they leave college.
The preferred answer is to drop the one and done, let those who want to try pro ball out of HS do so and then figure out what they want to do with their lives if and when they don't make it, IMO
The NBA wants to move the age limit to 20. The players union wants it moved to 18.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spor...imit-rule/
The answer to me has always been the baseball rule. You can go pro out of high school but if you go to college, you're making a 3-year minimum commitment.
A three year commitment will only raise their price for the bribery. Let them go to the NBA, IMO.
(09-27-2017 09:03 AM)DaBigBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The one and dones players are a joke. As long as this practice and rule stays they'll have problems. The truth one and done players help to keep the G5s in the game a little. The top programs spend a ton of resources and time to recruit these guys. A solid 5th year senior can give a top recruit a run
That was true up until the transferring got out of control. Now the problem is it is very difficult for any G5 (or mid-major) program to hold onto any of those 5th year seniors that can give the one and dones a run. Aside from Gonzaga, the mid-majors have really done jack in the tournament lately. They've won games, but no real sustained runs.
What's up Stansbury? It won't be too long before that guy is in the flames.
(09-27-2017 09:29 AM)757ODU Wrote: [ -> ]What's up Stansbury? It won't be too long before that guy is in the flames.
No doubt!
There is a difference, IMO. If a kid spends 4 years at a school and graduates, he's free to go in my book. He honored his commitment and achieved what was expected of him.
Though, you could argue these coaches know guys that will be one and done.
The answer, IMO, comes from the development of players. Can the NCAA figure out a way that allows the kids to develop better than them sitting on the bench for 2 years in the NBA? Will the NBA ever stop taking extremely young/high risk kids? I would imagine the failure rate is extremely high. If there was a way that the NCAA better prepared players for the league (sort of the intention of the D-League), then it would be beneficial for each side.
Personally, I love college basketball. I enjoy watching teams that don't have crazy 1 and done talent, but play as a team in a system....it's really the reason I enjoy college basketball so much. I will put Harvard on and watch before I watch Duke for the most part. Yesterday was a great day for true college basketball fans.
Is it wrong for me to speculate that perhaps one reason ODU didn't hire Keats was the potential involvement in one of the several UL scandals? The search firm it hired had some pretty well-placed contacts given their personal history and background. Not accusing, just wondering.
And, yes, I'm told WKY is on the short list, at least with the NCAA.