(03-03-2014 04:04 PM)JunkYardCard Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 02:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 02:48 PM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  How much is college really going to help Andrew Wiggins?

To me, that's a good thing. The NBA needs that weed out year at a minimum (and probably needs 2 years).

The NBA has been a much better product with the one-year rule, and it would be even better with two years. I don't think three would add anything at all for the NBA.

If I'm an NBA owner, I couldn't care less what's good for Andrew Wiggins. I want what's in the best interests of my franchise. And experienced, proven players are what's best for the NBA. You never eat your seed corn.

I agree with you and Frank. Does the NBA have a practical monopoly on top-level basketball in the US? Yes - but regardless of that, they're entitled to act in the best interest of their product. I realize that it not only seems like a lifetime ago, but actually is (and more) for young people today, but there was a time in the not-so-distant past that the NBA Finals, while televised nationally, was on tape delay. History is replete with examples of businesses that were dominant at some point in time, only to make missteps that lead to their demise. Don't take my word for it - I'm sure that there are plenty of books at Borders that you can read on the topic.

The NBA effectively has a monopoly on pro basketball, but they don't have any monopoly power on pro sports entertainment. Economically, they compete with the NFL, MLB and even the NHL and MLS for the pro sports dollar. They even compete with college sports. Fans have a certain amount of money they can spend on sports entertainment. If one form of entertainment gets to costly, they will switch to another.

Granted it's not perfect competition like with commodities, but they do compete for the same pool of funds. They all have to stay on their toes.

(03-03-2014 02:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The NCAA has no power to force the NBA to do anything

The NCAA has the power to strongly discourage its teams from taking one-and-done players, even though the NBA has deliberately set up its system to encourage top players to do the one-and-done in college.

For example, the NCAA could amend its APR/academic progress rules to severely damage a team's APR for every player who fails to successfully complete at least one full year of college coursework. A basketball team that has two one-and-dones within a five-year period should have two APR "dings" that are severe enough to make the team ineligible for the following NCAA tournament.

(Why make it only one full year of coursework? Because the one-and-done players don't even do that. They barely stay eligible for the first semester, then declare for the NBA draft after the season and don't finish out the school year.)

(03-03-2014 05:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 02:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The NCAA has no power to force the NBA to do anything

The NCAA has the power to strongly discourage its teams from taking one-and-done players, even though the NBA has deliberately set up its system to encourage top players to do the one-and-done in college.

For example, the NCAA could amend its APR/academic progress rules to severely damage a team's APR for every player who fails to successfully complete at least one full year of college coursework. A basketball team that has two one-and-dones within a five-year period should have two APR "dings" that are severe enough to make the team ineligible for the following NCAA tournament.

(Why make it only one full year of coursework? Because the one-and-done players don't even do that. They barely stay eligible for the first semester, then declare for the NBA draft after the season and don't finish out the school year.)

I'd take it a step further, and make it a minimum of 3 years for anyone accepting a scholarship.

(03-03-2014 05:33 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 05:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 02:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The NCAA has no power to force the NBA to do anything

The NCAA has the power to strongly discourage its teams from taking one-and-done players, even though the NBA has deliberately set up its system to encourage top players to do the one-and-done in college.

For example, the NCAA could amend its APR/academic progress rules to severely damage a team's APR for every player who fails to successfully complete at least one full year of college coursework. A basketball team that has two one-and-dones within a five-year period should have two APR "dings" that are severe enough to make the team ineligible for the following NCAA tournament.

(Why make it only one full year of coursework? Because the one-and-done players don't even do that. They barely stay eligible for the first semester, then declare for the NBA draft after the season and don't finish out the school year.)

I'd take it a step further, and make it a minimum of 3 years for anyone accepting a scholarship.

If they make it a minimum of 3 years for anyone accepting a scholarship; then they also need to take away universities abilities to terminate scholarships year to year. Scholarships should be for a full 4 year period for every kid who accepts a scholarship, except in cases of a kid's misconduct. No more of that crap where coaches can terminate a kid after only 1 year, just because a kid is not as good as the coach thought that he/she would be.

(03-03-2014 06:07 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 05:33 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 05:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 02:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The NCAA has no power to force the NBA to do anything

The NCAA has the power to strongly discourage its teams from taking one-and-done players, even though the NBA has deliberately set up its system to encourage top players to do the one-and-done in college.

For example, the NCAA could amend its APR/academic progress rules to severely damage a team's APR for every player who fails to successfully complete at least one full year of college coursework. A basketball team that has two one-and-dones within a five-year period should have two APR "dings" that are severe enough to make the team ineligible for the following NCAA tournament.

(Why make it only one full year of coursework? Because the one-and-done players don't even do that. They barely stay eligible for the first semester, then declare for the NBA draft after the season and don't finish out the school year.)

I'd take it a step further, and make it a minimum of 3 years for anyone accepting a scholarship.

If they make it a minimum of 3 years for anyone accepting a scholarship; then they also need to take away universities abilities to terminate scholarships year to year. Scholarships should be for a full 4 year period for every kid who accepts a scholarship, except in cases of a kid's misconduct. No more of that crap where coaches can terminate a kid after only 1 year, just because a kid is not as good as the coach thought that he/she would be.

I wouldn't have a problem with that. It would make coaches much more likely to consider the type of person they are recruiting, and not just their talent. That would give kids more incentive to act in a manner consistent with a civilized society.

AAU and College basketball have been ruined by the NBA Effectively. That and the system is abused by guys like John Calipari, who pretty much encourages players to leave after a year, and treats college as just a stopover.

(03-03-2014 05:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 02:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The NCAA has no power to force the NBA to do anything

The NCAA has the power to strongly discourage its teams from taking one-and-done players, even though the NBA has deliberately set up its system to encourage top players to do the one-and-done in college.

For example, the NCAA could amend its APR/academic progress rules to severely damage a team's APR for every player who fails to successfully complete at least one full year of college coursework. A basketball team that has two one-and-dones within a five-year period should have two APR "dings" that are severe enough to make the team ineligible for the following NCAA tournament.

(Why make it only one full year of coursework? Because the one-and-done players don't even do that. They barely stay eligible for the first semester, then declare for the NBA draft after the season and don't finish out the school year.)

Do you have any statistics on that, or is that just an assumption? As I recall, in the year that Kentucky won the NC with mostly one and done players (I think one of them was two and done) they had a team GPA of 3.0. Not all talented basketball players are poor students.

(03-04-2014 08:52 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 05:31 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 02:58 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The NCAA has no power to force the NBA to do anything

The NCAA has the power to strongly discourage its teams from taking one-and-done players, even though the NBA has deliberately set up its system to encourage top players to do the one-and-done in college.

For example, the NCAA could amend its APR/academic progress rules to severely damage a team's APR for every player who fails to successfully complete at least one full year of college coursework. A basketball team that has two one-and-dones within a five-year period should have two APR "dings" that are severe enough to make the team ineligible for the following NCAA tournament.

(Why make it only one full year of coursework? Because the one-and-done players don't even do that. They barely stay eligible for the first semester, then declare for the NBA draft after the season and don't finish out the school year.)

Do you have any statistics on that, or is that just an assumption? As I recall, in the year that Kentucky won the NC with mostly one and done players (I think one of them was two and done) the had a team GPA of 3.0. Not all talented basketball players are poor students.

I don't have any stats. But when I see so many guys all over the country "graduating" in three years, and when I see what passes for college courses from on-line entities like DeVry, UofPhx, et. al., I think all of college education has been severely dumbed down from just 15 years ago. Keeping these guys eligible should be that difficult.

And that is before I even bring up the UNC debacle that has been totally covered up.

On some level, I get tired of hearing colleges complain about how the NBA's rules affect them. Boo-frickin-hoo. The NBA doesn't exist to make their lives easier. And as long as the NBA pays millions for players based solely on their basketball skills, they will attract all the great players they need, with or without colleges.

If colleges want their athletes to be students, here's a wacky idea - give scholarships only to great students who happen to be good athletes as well. Stop giving athletic scholarships entirely. If you insist on competing in the marketplace for basketball talent with the NBA, you're going to lose. They pay better.

Here is a fact of life. Students go to college to improve their career potential. Some careers take longer to prepare for than others, and some careers have a greater life span than others. Basketball doesn't take as long to prepare for as, say, nuclear engineering. And basketball players only have a few years to capitalize on their talent. So, unless schools can figure out a way to change this dynamic, they are just going to have to live with the choices the athletes they recruit make.

Is one and done really a problem around the NCAA? 7- 10 Freshmen per year have been drafted in each of the last 4 years. If you go to 2009, only 4 were drafted.

Kentucky had 4 of the 9 one and dones in 2010, 2 of the 7 in 2011, 3 of the 9 in 2012, and 2 of the 8 in 2013. In the last 4 years, Kentucky has had 11 one and dones. The rest of the NCAA has had 22 one and ones. That's an average of about 2.75 a year for Kentucky and 5.5 a year for the rest of the NCAA. Texas had 2 leave in 2011 and 1 in 2010. Duke and Kansas have each had a total of 2 freshman leave between 2010-2013. No other school has had more than 1 leave.

Kentucky is the only one who has the regular material amount of Freshman leaving. Everywhere else in the NCAA, it's not really a major issue.

(03-04-2014 01:38 PM)tribe_pride Wrote:  Is one and done really a problem around the NCAA? 7- 10 Freshmen per year have been drafted in each of the last 4 years. If you go to 2009, only 4 were drafted.

Kentucky had 4 of the 9 one and dones in 2010, 2 of the 7 in 2011, 3 of the 9 in 2012, and 2 of the 8 in 2013. In the last 4 years, Kentucky has had 11 one and dones. The rest of the NCAA has had 22 one and ones. That's an average of about 2.75 a year for Kentucky and 5.5 a year for the rest of the NCAA. Texas had 2 leave in 2011 and 1 in 2010. Duke and Kansas have each had a total of 2 freshman leave between 2010-2013. No other school has had more than 1 leave.

Kentucky is the only one who has the regular material amount of Freshman leaving. Everywhere else in the NCAA, it's not really a major issue.

You're right. It isn't one and done as much as it is early entry. Without looking it up, I'd bet there are nearly as many freshmen drafted each year as there are seniors.

(03-04-2014 01:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 01:38 PM)tribe_pride Wrote:  Is one and done really a problem around the NCAA? 7- 10 Freshmen per year have been drafted in each of the last 4 years. If you go to 2009, only 4 were drafted.

Kentucky had 4 of the 9 one and dones in 2010, 2 of the 7 in 2011, 3 of the 9 in 2012, and 2 of the 8 in 2013. In the last 4 years, Kentucky has had 11 one and dones. The rest of the NCAA has had 22 one and ones. That's an average of about 2.75 a year for Kentucky and 5.5 a year for the rest of the NCAA. Texas had 2 leave in 2011 and 1 in 2010. Duke and Kansas have each had a total of 2 freshman leave between 2010-2013. No other school has had more than 1 leave.

Kentucky is the only one who has the regular material amount of Freshman leaving. Everywhere else in the NCAA, it's not really a major issue.

You're right. It isn't one and done as much as it is early entry. Without looking it up, I'd bet there are nearly as many freshmen drafted each year as there are seniors.

On ESPN's list of top NBA draft prospects, the top 10 consists of 2 foreign players who haven't played at a U.S. college, 1 sophomore, and 7 freshmen.

(03-04-2014 02:47 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 01:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 01:38 PM)tribe_pride Wrote:  Is one and done really a problem around the NCAA? 7- 10 Freshmen per year have been drafted in each of the last 4 years. If you go to 2009, only 4 were drafted.

Kentucky had 4 of the 9 one and dones in 2010, 2 of the 7 in 2011, 3 of the 9 in 2012, and 2 of the 8 in 2013. In the last 4 years, Kentucky has had 11 one and dones. The rest of the NCAA has had 22 one and ones. That's an average of about 2.75 a year for Kentucky and 5.5 a year for the rest of the NCAA. Texas had 2 leave in 2011 and 1 in 2010. Duke and Kansas have each had a total of 2 freshman leave between 2010-2013. No other school has had more than 1 leave.

Kentucky is the only one who has the regular material amount of Freshman leaving. Everywhere else in the NCAA, it's not really a major issue.

You're right. It isn't one and done as much as it is early entry. Without looking it up, I'd bet there are nearly as many freshmen drafted each year as there are seniors.

On ESPN's list of top NBA draft prospects, the top 10 consists of 2 foreign players who haven't played at a U.S. college, 1 sophomore, and 7 freshmen.

I think it's precisely that kind of statistic which skews the perception of the problem. It isn't the number of one and dones. It's that they usually dominate the lottery picks. Very few freshmen are picked in the second round.

Wedge is right. There are only about 8 freshmen drafted each year. On average for the last three years, there were 10 sophs, 11 juniors and 19 seniors drafted. Very few people suggest that only seniors should be eligible for the draft (and, of course, the courts won't allow that).

On average only 18 players a year are drafted at an age lower than the baseball model many seem to prefer. And, as Wedge properly points out, they tend to be clustered in just a few programs, like Kentucky, Carolina, Syracuse, and a handful of others. I would point out that nobody is suggesting we have a pity party for these schools.

So, how big a problem is it, really?