https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/sports/ada...21752.html
Silver makes the argument that players ARE being paid so that destroys college system. At least he admits that college sports fans follow their teams players in the Proffesional level. This sets up a nice case for the skill players in college football to go pro right out of highschool or after their freshman year of college.
Both the NBA and the NFL should follow baseball.
Sorry big uglies!
(10-17-2017 10:58 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/sports/ada...21752.html
Silver makes the argument that players ARE being paid so that destroys college system. At least he admits that college sports fans follow their teams players in the Proffesional level. This sets up a nice case for the skill players in college football to go pro right out of highschool or after their freshman year of college.
Both the NBA and the NFL should follow baseball.
Sorry big uglies!
One thing I recommend for everyone: watch/listen to that full interview with Adam Silver. I happened to catch it in its entirety yesterday and it's further evidence that he is, without question, the most balanced, logical, transparent and clear-headed sports executive that I've ever seen. Silver shows that there are ways to promote and showcase your product (and even take positions on hot button issues like standing for the national anthem at sporting events) without either treating the fans like they're morons or being hostile to tough questions.
Putting all of that aside, I actually like the idea of the NHL system where teams can draft players while still allowing them to play in college. That honestly makes a lot more sense to me for basketball than the MLB system of "zero-or-2" because we saw in the old system that anyone that halfway thought that he had talent (whether sane or not) chose "zero". This is ultimately a decision for the NBA to make in its best interests and, as an NBA fan, the product simply suffered when the draft was made up of high schoolers. For every LeBron or Kobe, there were multiple very high profile busts. Plus, basketball is inherently a superstar-driven sport, so having a lottery pick bust is significantly more damaging than missing out on a high draft pick in the NFL or MLB (where depth can overcome the lack of a superstar).
The NHL model still allows for basketball players to get the certainty of being drafted, but still play college ball at the same time where he can develop where necessary (as opposed to flaming out by going to the pros too quickly). I hadn't ever seen that particular model suggested before for the NBA and honestly think that's much more realistic than either the MLB model or going back to waaaaaay too many high schoolers populating the NBA Draft board and rosters. This is a good mechanism on paper to allow for the LeBron-types to go straight to the NBA where they *truly* have the ability to make the immediate jump, but give some transitional to both players and NBA teams that realistically aren't on the LeBron level. (I know the G League and European leagues are out there, but let's face it: they're depressing environments for training compared to playing at Duke, Kentucky, et. al.)
The NFL really isn't part of this discussion. There isn't anywhere near the clamor for either college football players to leave early or the NFL to want to draft young players. This is really a basketball-driven issue.
The NFL should set up a developmental league. That would be a benefit to the players and colleges. You could even have them play at historic college stadiums.
If I could impose a solution it would be this.
Draft would be expanded to 4 or 5 rounds.
Players can be drafted at age 18 or upon completing high school eligibility but are ineligible to play in the NBA until age 19 or one season has elapsed. Any player enrolling in a four year college is ineligible to play in the NBA until age 20 or two seasons have elapsed.
A team drafting a player holds their rights for 30 months if they do not sign. Then they become free agents.
So if Bob Basketball is drafted out of high school his choices are:
1. Sign with the NBA team drafting him and play a year of G League ball.
2. Enroll in college after his second season of college negotiate with the team drafting him and signing.
3. Enroll in college, and in January of his junior season he has a window to sign as a free agent (which ends his college career if he does so before the season ends or wait until June when his name goes back into the draft).
Will completely upend the contract system. Teams will give players a signing bonus rather than a fat initial contract.
(10-17-2017 02:56 PM)_C2_ Wrote: [ -> ]The NFL should set up a developmental league. That would be a benefit to the players and colleges. You could even have them play at historic college stadiums.
How would that benefit colleges?
(10-17-2017 02:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]If I could impose a solution it would be this.
Draft would be expanded to 4 or 5 rounds.
Players can be drafted at age 18 or upon completing high school eligibility but are ineligible to play in the NBA until age 19 or one season has elapsed. Any player enrolling in a four year college is ineligible to play in the NBA until age 20 or two seasons have elapsed.
A team drafting a player holds their rights for 30 months if they do not sign. Then they become free agents.
So if Bob Basketball is drafted out of high school his choices are:
1. Sign with the NBA team drafting him and play a year of G League ball.
2. Enroll in college after his second season of college negotiate with the team drafting him and signing.
3. Enroll in college, and in January of his junior season he has a window to sign as a free agent (which ends his college career if he does so before the season ends or wait until June when his name goes back into the draft).
Will completely upend the contract system. Teams will give players a signing bonus rather than a fat initial contract.
I like a lot of aspects of this proposal, but I don't think allowing draftees that don't sign to become free agents would fly in reality. Personally, I'd love it since I'd rather see international soccer-style bidding wars for top hoops players as opposed to the draft (as that's actually more "fair" to me than the randomness of the lottery/draft system). Practically, though, the owners of lower profile franchises would kill that prospect since they'd be at a severe disadvantage. The more likely scenarios are that the 30-month window passes and either the player goes back into the draft or that player's draft rights continue to be held by the team that drafted him for his entire college career (or maximum college eligibility) plus a reasonable timeframe thereafter (e.g. 1 year). That's effectively what's in place now for early entry players (e.g. drafting a one-and-done player means a team actually holds the draft rights for 3 years, which is equal to the amount of time that he would have elapsed if he had played a full college career).
(10-17-2017 03:38 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (10-17-2017 02:59 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]If I could impose a solution it would be this.
Draft would be expanded to 4 or 5 rounds.
Players can be drafted at age 18 or upon completing high school eligibility but are ineligible to play in the NBA until age 19 or one season has elapsed. Any player enrolling in a four year college is ineligible to play in the NBA until age 20 or two seasons have elapsed.
A team drafting a player holds their rights for 30 months if they do not sign. Then they become free agents.
So if Bob Basketball is drafted out of high school his choices are:
1. Sign with the NBA team drafting him and play a year of G League ball.
2. Enroll in college after his second season of college negotiate with the team drafting him and signing.
3. Enroll in college, and in January of his junior season he has a window to sign as a free agent (which ends his college career if he does so before the season ends or wait until June when his name goes back into the draft).
Will completely upend the contract system. Teams will give players a signing bonus rather than a fat initial contract.
I like a lot of aspects of this proposal, but I don't think allowing draftees that don't sign to become free agents would fly in reality. Personally, I'd love it since I'd rather see international soccer-style bidding wars for top hoops players as opposed to the draft (as that's actually more "fair" to me than the randomness of the lottery/draft system). Practically, though, the owners of lower profile franchises would kill that prospect since they'd be at a severe disadvantage. The more likely scenarios are that the 30-month window passes and either the player goes back into the draft or that player's draft rights continue to be held by the team that drafted him for his entire college career (or maximum college eligibility) plus a reasonable timeframe thereafter (e.g. 1 year). That's effectively what's in place now for early entry players (e.g. drafting a one-and-done player means a team actually holds the draft rights for 3 years, which is equal to the amount of time that he would have elapsed if he had played a full college career).
With the salary cap and a few tweaks to said salary cap to tighten up a few workarounds, the chances for any given team to be make a deep run improve in my opinion. Teams will shed some productive players to get cap room to win the bidding wars. The GM's willing to forego a mega star can construct some deep teams that can win a lot.
But I put the short window in there simply to make that possible in my dream universe.
(10-17-2017 02:56 PM)_C2_ Wrote: [ -> ]The NFL should set up a developmental league. That would be a benefit to the players and colleges. You could even have them play at historic college stadiums.
Maybe the NFL should try to negotiate with the Candian Football League about putting 8 (development league teams) from the USA in the CFL.
Bring back NFL Europa, it was great for development, NFL blew it shutting it down.
NBA needs to go to a farm system (1 minor league team to 1 NBA team) , and have a draft similar to baseball.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
(10-17-2017 09:56 PM)Rabonchild Wrote: [ -> ] (10-17-2017 02:56 PM)_C2_ Wrote: [ -> ]The NFL should set up a developmental league. That would be a benefit to the players and colleges. You could even have them play at historic college stadiums.
Maybe the NFL should try to negotiate with the Candian Football League about putting 8 (development league teams) from the USA in the CFL.
Leave CFL alone, it is a unique and different game.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
(10-17-2017 10:22 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote: [ -> ]Bring back NFL Europa, it was great for development, NFL blew it shutting it down.
NBA needs to go to a farm system (1 minor league team to 1 NBA team) , and have a draft similar to baseball.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
NBADL is growing. ESPN and NBA Channel broadcast the games.
(10-17-2017 10:58 AM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/sports/ada...21752.html
Silver makes the argument that players ARE being paid so that destroys college system. At least he admits that college sports fans follow their teams players in the Proffesional level. This sets up a nice case for the skill players in college football to go pro right out of highschool or after their freshman year of college.
Both the NBA and the NFL should follow baseball.
Sorry big uglies!
Hard to argue with Silver's points, and I agree the NBA should do that. The NFL has lacked a minor league for a very long time. The NHL's system is interesting though, and could provide a possible solution to the NFL's problems. Let players declare for the draft anytime they wish, but they can not be paid by their team/club until they decide to leave their college team and play for their professional team/club.
(10-17-2017 03:18 PM)dbackjon Wrote: [ -> ] (10-17-2017 02:56 PM)_C2_ Wrote: [ -> ]The NFL should set up a developmental league. That would be a benefit to the players and colleges. You could even have them play at historic college stadiums.
How would that benefit colleges?
You put fewer so called student-athletes who don't belong there and don't want to be there on college squads. Even without the best of the best, college football will move forward because people are just rooting for the institution/state anyways. Dynamic star college athletes are rare, especially since the 90's. The chase for top level recruits would not be nearly as strong.
Silver is correct that the NBA's one-and-done rule drives the system of large illicit payments that is at the heart of what the FBI has been investigating -- and the public is going to start realizing that the NBA shares the blame for this shady economy with the shoe guys, agents, and college coaches, if the NBA doesn't stop one-and-done quickly.
Silver is also correct that ending one-and-done would be a huge help to the college game, even if all of today's one-and-done players then turn pro out of high school and never play college basketball.
Agree with _c2_ the bulk of the people following college athletics are watching because of the name on the front of the uniform, not the back. Skimming off the super elite players who have no interest in being in school or learning under a specific coach is a positive.
There might be some drop of viewership from people attracted by seeing the "stars of tomorrow" but very few games involve a future 1st or 2nd round player in any sport. People want to watch competitive games between known brands.
Why force the computer genius to pass Physical Education before he can get paid for his skills? Unless Sheldon can do 100 push-ups and 100 sit-ups in 15 minutes he is not allowed to even showcase his mad computer skills.
(10-18-2017 09:13 AM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]Agree with _c2_ the bulk of the people following college athletics are watching because of the name on the front of the uniform, not the back. Skimming off the super elite players who have no interest in being in school or learning under a specific coach is a positive.
There might be some drop of viewership from people attracted by seeing the "stars of tomorrow" but very few games involve a future 1st or 2nd round player in any sport. People want to watch competitive games between known brands.
Granted, I think there's a symbiotic relationship between the talent level and the maintenance of those brands. Whether it's conscious or not, the reason why college football and college basketball are significantly more popular than, say, college baseball, is that we know that we're watching the best talent for that particularly level as a whole (whereas that's not the case for college baseball since so many talented high school players end up going straight to the minor leagues).
That also explains the difference levels in interest between FBS and FCS overall and even within FBS with the separation of the P5/G5. Even if you see outliers in FCS or the G5 (whether in terms of teams or individual players), there's still a broader overall talent level difference that the average sports fan can easily identify (just as the average sports fan can tell the difference in the talent level between a AAA minor league baseball game and a Major League Baseball game even when the score is exactly the same).
I can't remember if I've used this analogy before, but here's how I would look at talent levels and college sports... and why I would disagree that it's *all* about the brand. When I go to see the Phantom of the Opera or any other musical on Broadway, I might not have any idea who the individual actors might be, but I sure as heck can tell the difference between a Broadway production of Phantom compared to a local community theater production of Phantom... and I'll pay the ticket price difference accordingly. There's a very real talent expectation level when I'm watching a Broadway show compared to lower level groups (even if it's the same "brand" of Phantom of the Opera).
So, can Ohio State and Alabama get by with their brand names alone for a few years with lower levels of talent? Maybe. However, the fact is that sports fans know talent when they see it probably better than anyone and they adjust their viewing habits accordingly. When Ohio State and Alabama are offering Broadway-level talent today but then try to pass off community theater level talent under their brand names tomorrow, the viewership will suffer dramatically (and I don't think colleges want anything to do with that type of scenario). Remember that these huge P5 and CFP TV contracts are based on *casual* sports fan viewers as opposed to alums or people with direct ties to a school, so that talent level absolutely matters.
(10-18-2017 11:58 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (10-18-2017 09:13 AM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]Agree with _c2_ the bulk of the people following college athletics are watching because of the name on the front of the uniform, not the back. Skimming off the super elite players who have no interest in being in school or learning under a specific coach is a positive.
There might be some drop of viewership from people attracted by seeing the "stars of tomorrow" but very few games involve a future 1st or 2nd round player in any sport. People want to watch competitive games between known brands.
Granted, I think there's a symbiotic relationship between the talent level and the maintenance of those brands. Whether it's conscious or not, the reason why college football and college basketball are significantly more popular than, say, college baseball, is that we know that we're watching the best talent for that particularly level as a whole (whereas that's not the case for college baseball since so many talented high school players end up going straight to the minor leagues).
That also explains the difference levels in interest between FBS and FCS overall and even within FBS with the separation of the P5/G5. Even if you see outliers in FCS or the G5 (whether in terms of teams or individual players), there's still a broader overall talent level difference that the average sports fan can easily identify (just as the average sports fan can tell the difference in the talent level between a AAA minor league baseball game and a Major League Baseball game even when the score is exactly the same).
I can't remember if I've used this analogy before, but here's how I would look at talent levels and college sports... and why I would disagree that it's *all* about the brand. When I go to see the Phantom of the Opera or any other musical on Broadway, I might not have any idea who the individual actors might be, but I sure as heck can tell the difference between a Broadway production of Phantom compared to a local community theater production of Phantom... and I'll pay the ticket price difference accordingly. There's a very real talent expectation level when I'm watching a Broadway show compared to lower level groups (even if it's the same "brand" of Phantom of the Opera).
So, can Ohio State and Alabama get by with their brand names alone for a few years with lower levels of talent? Maybe. However, the fact is that sports fans know talent when they see it probably better than anyone and they adjust their viewing habits accordingly. When Ohio State and Alabama are offering Broadway-level talent today but then try to pass off community theater level talent under their brand names tomorrow, the viewership will suffer dramatically (and I don't think colleges want anything to do with that type of scenario). Remember that these huge P5 and CFP TV contracts are based on *casual* sports fan viewers as opposed to alums or people with direct ties to a school, so that talent level absolutely matters.
College football and college basketball were popular before pro football and pro basketball were a thing.
College baseball was just another club sport in an era where every town or county or neighborhood had a borderline professional baseball team and there was an established major league, then two of them.
I don't really care if anyone makes any money off TV. Not my issue.
(10-18-2017 04:15 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]College football and college basketball were popular before pro football and pro basketball were a thing.
Yes. But today, when the NFL and NBA are very popular, there seems to be a fan expectation, certainly a casual fan expectation, that the top level of the college games will be only a notch below the NBA/NFL games. It's fair to wonder if the fan interest in college football and hoops would remain the same if the college top level was four or five notches below the NBA/NFL level.