I was watching that video on Youtube and Bob Knight mentioned that in college basketball, players should be required to stay three years but that there should be no restriction on age to enter the NBA Draft, similar to MLB.

I would add that players should be required to spend their first year in the NBDL. Here's why I think it would be beneficial to all parties involved:

-With rare exception, most of these high level programs with high level recruits are not about all or in some cases anything academia. This would both save the time and money of the schools and the players involved.

-The level of play and familiarity of the players in college basketball would improve tremendously. We could actually get used to knowing the names of the players again.

-Coaches wouldn't have to deal with so much turnover.

-The NBA wouldn't have to waste so much money on projects and could even create contracts based on player performance which could keep underperformers in the NBDL beyond a year.

-The level of play would improve in the NBA as well. More seasoned vets would come out of college to the NBA under that system.

-The players who don't want to go to school still have a way to play professionally and get paid out of high school in the US.

What say you?

The NBA and NFL should be drafting top amateur talent out of high school and sending them to league funded developmental/minor leagues.

But we both know they don't want to pay for that.


Why did the NBA put the age restriction on in the first place? I'm guessing whatever caused that wouldn't be any different today.

They have the NBDL now, they can actually stash those out of high school players now, unlike 20 years ago when Kevin Garnett first came out.

I have certainly gone all around on this issue. It's hard for me to express any opinion that doesn't boil down to a selfish desire to have more excellent players in the college game I like to watch.

But if Jabari Parker, Andrew Wiggins, Jahlil Okafor et al had never set foot on a college campus, is it likely I would have noticed any difference? No more than it did when Kobe Bryant or LeBron James went straight to the pros.

As things now stand, the NBA gets to refuse to admit players until they have been out of high school for a year. They can do this presumably because this is a matter that was collectively bargained. But what if the NBA and the Union were to collectively bargain that players have to wait three or four years before they can be drafted? Would that survive a court challenge? I doubt it. Then again, I'm not a lawyer,

What argument can the NBA make that rationalizes why a player with NBA talent who is 18 years old should not be allowed to play, but one who is 19 can? Is it because Bryant, James, Kevin Garnett, Moses Malone and others showed that it was harmful to them in some way? We can try all we want to craft some system that keeps a few players from having the same freedom to earn a living the rest of us enjoy. We can even rationalize how it "helps" those young men in the long run. But all those arguments would just be a load of crap designed to makes us feel justified in acting selfishly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eligibility..._NBA_draft

Quote:However, the influx of high-schoolers caused considerable controversy. When the NBA and its players union negotiated a new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) in 2005, NBA Commissioner David Stern publicly called for a higher age limit of 20, stating that he wanted the league's scouts and general managers out of high school gyms and that too many young urban Americans incorrectly saw the NBA as a sure path to fame and financial security.

The players were against it then. Stern wanted 20 years old and the compromise was 19, which has of course led to the one-and-done players.

In 2011, the players wanted 18 and the owners wanted 20. Again.


Guess what, now players are saying ... yep, get rid of it - and owners are saying ... yep, move it up to 20.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/124279...orney-says

Quote:"Capitalism means that if you're 17, 18 years old and you're a geek and you want to drop out of college and invent Apple or something else, you can do it," Kohlman said. "In this country, you can do that. And there's nothing stopping you from doing it. If you're an unbelievable blues singer at 17, 18, 19 years old, you can go out and make a fortune."

Lastly, players can sign with the NBA DL right out of high school, now. The age limit is 18. But they go to high major DI programs because the competition is better, I think.

(04-02-2015 03:04 PM)ken d Wrote:  I have certainly gone all around on this issue. It's hard for me to express any opinion that doesn't boil down to a selfish desire to have more excellent players in the college game I like to watch.

But if Jabari Parker, Andrew Wiggins, Jahlil Okafor et al had never set foot on a college campus, is it likely I would have noticed any difference? No more than it did when Kobe Bryant or LeBron James went straight to the pros.

As things now stand, the NBA gets to refuse to admit players until they have been out of high school for a year. They can do this presumably because this is a matter that was collectively bargained. But what if the NBA and the Union were to collectively bargain that players have to wait three or four years before they can be drafted? Would that survive a court challenge? I doubt it. Then again, I'm not a lawyer,

What argument can the NBA make that rationalizes why a player with NBA talent who is 18 years old should not be allowed to play, but one who is 19 can? Is it because Bryant, James, Kevin Garnett, Moses Malone and others showed that it was harmful to them in some way? We can try all we want to craft some system that keeps a few players from having the same freedom to earn a living the rest of us enjoy. We can even rationalize how it "helps" those young men in the long run. But all those arguments would just be a load of crap designed to makes us feel justified in acting selfishly.

I couldn't care less about having elite talent in college basketball.

The teams, the tradition, the fans. That's what matters in college. And that will keep going on, even with DIII players.

If an athlete can get a pro team to accept him after graduating from high school, I say go for it.

Colleges should offer 1, 2, 3 and 4 year, contractual scholarships. Once you complete that contract you can not return to that school. This would create some additional competition for recruits. For example, school A might offer a 3 or 4 year contract/scholarship while school B might offer the same recruit a 1 year contract.

Isn't the middle ground to remove the age restriction, but add a requirement that if a player chooses college, he must stay for at least two (or three) years? (ie, can't be drafted or sign an NBA contract until the 2-3 year period expires)

Too simple?

(04-02-2015 03:51 PM)YNot Wrote:  Isn't the middle ground to remove the age restriction, but add a requirement that if a player chooses college, he must stay for at least two (or three) years? (ie, can't be drafted or sign an NBA contract until the 2-3 year period expires)

Too simple?

I think it's a nice try, but I don't see how the NBA can enforce that on its end.

The test for discrimination is: A) was it an arbitrary choice?, B) was it in the interest of the business?

It's not in the NBA's business interests to deny top talent and it would be an arbitrary choice for them wait for 2-3 years after signing with a college team.


There was some noise a month or two ago from the B1G, trying to raise support among the P5 for freshmen ineligibility in MBB.

But if the goal is to attempt to keep top level talent in college programs for two years, I just don't see it getting done without the NBA raising the age restriction to 20.


The facts remain: 1) people are sick and tired of "one and done" players, so long as there's no unfair advantage between conferences (ie, the SEC tries to recruit a bunch of one and done players, because they don't care about academics and want to win at all costs), 2) the NBA players association has never liked 19 years old, let alone 20 and they think it's a bunch of racist, white owners trying to keep black kids from making it out.

Better off to let kids get drafted whenever the NBA decides they are ready. Three years is too long to require someone to stay in my opinion. You'd have more kids that are long-shots, and might have ended up playing four years of college ball and getting an education, declaring because the three years seems like so much.

The big difference nobody talks about in baseball is you can be drafted, and decide to turn that down and go to school instead. That's the crux of the NBA problem...it's all a gamble.

The solution to me would be making anyone draft eligible who finishes high school eligibility. Players do not have to sign with the NBA just because they are drafted, if they don't like their position. Do not negate their college eligibility for hiring an agent, as long as the agent doesn't pay them. Players that are not drafted, or think they can improve their position can go to college, try to join the developmental league, or go overseas. IF they choose college, they cannot enter the following year's draft, so going to college requires two seasons. Any other option they remain draft eligible the following year.

I know that would involve a lot of logistical changes on the way the NBA, NBA teams, and college programs operate. But you're not going to fix the situation without disrupting the current structure.

How about this, to build on what Lou proposed:

- NBA draft eligible at 18
- if you're drafted, you can turn that down to play college basketball, but the drafting team retains your rights unless ...

- if you graduate from college, you're free to sign with any team.

(04-02-2015 03:08 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Lastly, players can sign with the NBA DL right out of high school, now. The age limit is 18. But they go to high major DI programs because the competition is better, I think.

I bet if there was a 3 year requirement, you'd see more kids jumping to the NBDL.

One-and-done has ruined college basketball. Absolutely anything would be better than what we have.

Actually there is becoming more of a push from the Professional ranks for there to be new NBA rules in regards to the age of players allowed to enter the draft. The arms race has gotten very costly for these teams. They are picking up guys well before they are ready simply because they know that if they don't, someone else will. Many of these younger players are not ready at year 1 or even year 2 but these GM's know that if they want to remain competitive that they have to eat these up front costs because if they don't then someone else will.

A general NBA rule that pushes back the Age of Entry would save these teams quite a bit of money.

(04-02-2015 04:24 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  Better off to let kids get drafted whenever the NBA decides they are ready. Three years is too long to require someone to stay in my opinion. You'd have more kids that are long-shots, and might have ended up playing four years of college ball and getting an education, declaring because the three years seems like so much.

The big difference nobody talks about in baseball is you can be drafted, and decide to turn that down and go to school instead. That's the crux of the NBA problem...it's all a gamble.

The solution to me would be making anyone draft eligible who finishes high school eligibility. Players do not have to sign with the NBA just because they are drafted, if they don't like their position. Do not negate their college eligibility for hiring an agent, as long as the agent doesn't pay them. Players that are not drafted, or think they can improve their position can go to college, try to join the developmental league, or go overseas. IF they choose college, they cannot enter the following year's draft, so going to college requires two seasons. Any other option they remain draft eligible the following year.

I know that would involve a lot of logistical changes on the way the NBA, NBA teams, and college programs operate. But you're not going to fix the situation without disrupting the current structure.

Three years is a long time but they would have the option to go to the D-League out of high school and if good enough to the NBA under my proposal. And how would you police the second thing in bold, you can't control people and find all of the paper trails?

(04-02-2015 06:33 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  One-and-done has ruined college basketball. Absolutely anything would be better than what we have.

At this point, my bracket is pretty much won. I guess that happens when you have all four teams correct in the Final Four. I am not one of those that tries too hard to get all the Cinderella picks. So lucky for me I get to cheer for Wisconsin and Michigan State despite having Kentucky and Duke in my Championship game.

I saw an interesting piece on ESPN that showed Kentucky as having 9 McDonald's All Americans on the team while Duke has 8. Michigan State only has 1 and Wisconsin has zero. MSU and Wisconsin are doing it the more traditional way. I want one of them to win. Of course part of it is the Big Ten thing but I truly do want the traditional route to win out over the McDonald's All American Collector Cup teams.

(04-02-2015 03:51 PM)YNot Wrote:  Isn't the middle ground to remove the age restriction, but add a requirement that if a player chooses college, he must stay for at least two (or three) years? (ie, can't be drafted or sign an NBA contract until the 2-3 year period expires)

Too simple?

In that case, EVERYBODY good would jump except the brainiacs who can handle academic life to any degree and sports.

Now, in regard to BYU, they are not equivalent to the Academies. The one thing they have in common is that they both have Institutional missions that are different from the Universities of the NCAA. Their missions are not the same though and trust me, those Mormons have no problem with throwing their money around. Stipends are not an issue for them. Their issue is coverage and being able to get their brand seen across the nation. That is why they like independence, it allows them a lot of scheduling flexibility.

When you look at a 20 team AAC that has four divisions and only 7 conference games a season, that still allows BYU plenty of flexibility for scheduling national schools. With the proclamation of them being seen as P5 quality, they have the advantage of choice. They can choose to join or they can choose to stay independent.

What do they get with independence? They get a 12 game season with the most scheduling flexibility possible. What do they get by joining this future AAC that I propose is absolutely going to happen? They still get the ability to schedule five national programs in football that aren't part of the conference but they will be able to be part of a televised AAC postseason conference football tournament. Now THAT is what they are looking for. When the Major conferences all have these tournaments which adds TWO strong post season victories for each of their conference champions, that would make it very hard for an independent BYU to stand up against when it comes to getting into the National Postseason picture. BYU wants to be there. BYU isn't against being in a conference, it's just that such a choice has be be better than being independent.

I like Mark Cuban's idea of an NBADL that accepts kids out of HS and has an educational component (classes on personal finance, media relations, legal issues) with some restrictions/supervision given and a mentoring piece. Its not pretending to be college, but you still have to learn some stuff about the world. If you choose to go to college and enter the draft before 21, the first year you are in the NBADL. The first year in NBADL they are restricted and can't be brought up to play.

Then again, I don't see why you can't declare for the draft, and if you pass your point where you're happy w/your position, you take yourself off the board between picks- teams would have to risk someone not being available if they wait too long just like the normal process.

(04-02-2015 05:31 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  How about this, to build on what Lou proposed:

- NBA draft eligible at 18
- if you're drafted, you can turn that down to play college basketball, but the drafting team retains your rights unless ...

- if you graduate from college, you're free to sign with any team.

That's a very good idea.