PAC 12 wants NCAA to make freshman ineligible to eliminate one and dones

[wildturkey]

They would be stupid to do this. It would hurt the game even further because I guarantee a sizable chunk of the top prospects would play overseas for a year or jump to the D-League. There's no way a kid that good is going to sit out a full year. They really just need to beg the NBA to raise the age limit. But if they can't convince them, just leave it alone.

 

[Clayton]

This will make CBB more bearable and NBA slightly watchable.

The NBA has been reaping the benefits of the current setup. Mens college basketball has become as lopsided as Womens college basketball

 

[jontaejones]

The NBA has been reaping the benefits of the current setup. Mens college basketball has become as lopsided as Womens college basketball

NBA doesn't reap the benefits.

They want to raise the age limit too.

Players association and player lobbyists are the ones who resist.

 

[broncosmitty]

No rules about how many years a player should stay in college suits me just fine.

Yep!

I understand the NBA wanting to protect themselves from high picks that flame out, but that's their issue.

Nothing seems beneficial about freshman ineligibility to me. The best talent would start to go the Brandon Jennings over NCAA ball if that happens.

 

[uncfan103]

Yep!

I understand the NBA wanting to protect themselves from high picks that flame out, but that's their issue.

Nothing seems beneficial about freshman ineligibility to me. The best talent would start to go the Brandon Jennings over NCAA ball if that happens.

Is there anything wrong with that? That talent that is involved in college basketball is better than the talent we've had in the past. The talented and athletic players are not as skilled but if we eliminated the one and dones and let the Brandon Jennings of the world go to Europe would that diminish college basketball or just give college basketball less talented athletes?

 

[Wamu]

It won't stop them from trying. And u know what an agent is gonna tell them.

Who's the kid that was going to SMU and decided to go to Europe? I think it was because of grades tho

Emmanuel Mudiay

 

[bksballer89]

Best rule imo is to give kids the option to go to the nba straight from high school but if they go to the ncaa they must stay a minimum of 2-3 years

 

[mr.hockey4242]

I'm more in favor of 2 years and you can go.

Once you're and upperclassman you should get the choice. Also staying 3 years and the. Leaving is dumb to me. Why not wait 1 mroe and graduate?

 

[bksballer89]

Yeah you're right but I do think guys should be giving the option of going to the NBA straight out of HS but be forced to stay in school 2 years if they go to college

 

[gordontrue]

The problem with the current system:

- The players need more financial security/incentive to put off going to the NBA
- The NCAA needs the best players to spend more time with them (and to limit compliance problems from kids who aren't meant for college)
- The league needs access to the top talent and to minimize risk in drafting


My ideas of a solution

1) Allow players to make money on their own personal brand while maintaining an amateur status. No direct pay-to-play, but the talented players could make money by selling memorabilia, making appearances, merchandising licensing, etc.

2) No need to declare for the draft. Any team can draft the rights to any player. It is then between the team and the player as to when/if that player will come to the NBA. This is the current system with drafting international players and it works well. It used to be the system with college players. Larry Bird was drafted by the Celtics, then chose to finish out his senior year at school before agreeing on a contract the following year with the Celtics. These draft rights can, of course, be traded. Allow players to keep their eligibility despite being drafted.


I feel like these two things make the perfect blend to give the players, the NCAA, and the league what they want.

 

[trojanfan12]

The problem with the current system:

- The players need more financial security/incentive to put off going to the NBA
- The NCAA needs the best players to spend more time with them (and to limit compliance problems from kids who aren't meant for college)
- The league needs access to the top talent and to minimize risk in drafting


My ideas of a solution

1) Allow players to make money on their own personal brand while maintaining an amateur status. No direct pay-to-play, but the talented players could make money by selling memorabilia, making appearances, merchandising licensing, etc.

2) No need to declare for the draft. Any team can draft the rights to any player. It is then between the team and the player as to when/if that player will come to the NBA. This is the current system with drafting international players and it works well. It used to be the system with college players. Larry Bird was drafted by the Celtics, then chose to finish out his senior year at school before agreeing on a contract the following year with the Celtics. These draft rights can, of course, be traded. Allow players to keep their eligibility despite being drafted.


I feel like these two things make the perfect blend to give the players, the NCAA, and the league what they want.

Option #2 seems like a pretty good idea. It might create a situation where a player doesn't necessarily feel like he has to come out right away. We may see more of these guys stick around for at least another season because they no longer have to worry about the draft. Teams may even encourage a player to stay in school for another season by telling them, "we're going to draft you this year, but we want you to stay in school for one more season to develop, here are the things we want you to work on."

I don't like #1 because it seems like it would be too easy for the college teams to use as a recruiting advantage. I can see coaches talking to players about the endorsement deals and personal appearance fees that they can get at one school vs. another.

 

[gordontrue]

Option #2 seems like a pretty good idea. It might create a situation where a player doesn't necessarily feel like he has to come out right away. We may see more of these guys stick around for at least another season because they no longer have to worry about the draft. Teams may even encourage a player to stay in school for another season by telling them, "we're going to draft you this year, but we want you to stay in school for one more season to develop, here are the things we want you to work on."

Exactly.

I don't like #1 because it seems like it would be too easy for the college teams to use as a recruiting advantage. I can see coaches talking to players about the endorsement deals and personal appearance fees that they can get at one school vs. another.

A good point and a fair concern. That would definitely happen.

 

[63Hawk]

Freshman eligibility.

I believe that freshman should be required to take a red shirt year.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Option #2 seems like a pretty good idea. It might create a situation where a player doesn't necessarily feel like he has to come out right away. We may see more of these guys stick around for at least another season because they no longer have to worry about the draft. Teams may even encourage a player to stay in school for another season by telling them, "we're going to draft you this year, but we want you to stay in school for one more season to develop, here are the things we want you to work on."

I'm not saying I don't like the idea in general, but I'm not comfortable with the bold part. I hate the idea that college players might have two coaches to listen to.

Pro coach: "We'd like to see you develop a 15 foot jumper."
College coach: "So help me god, if you shoot another @$%^@&^@ 15 foot jumper, I'm yanking you from the game and you're not going back in. Get under the #$#@$^& basket and stay there."

I think stuff like this already happens to a degree because "scouts and GMs say that developing an outside game would help his stock tremendously" but I think it would be far worse coming from your soon-to-be employer instead of some anonymous people that may or may not ever draft you.

 

[trojanfan12]

The biggest problem with any of this is that there is no perfect/completely fair solution. There are always going to be those Kobe, Lebron, etc. types that are ready for the NBA and can make the "if I were a computer prodigy and Microsoft or Apple wanted to hire me straight out of high school I could go work for them. So, why can't I go to the NBA if I'm ready?" argument.

If they increase the age limit so that a player has to be 2 years removed from the argument, you can add the guys who would have been one and done's to that.

On the other hand, allowing kids to declare right out of high school will likely increase the number of players who have no business declaring for the draft, but do because they got some bad advice, end up losing their college eligibility and don't get drafted.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm not saying I don't like the idea in general, but I'm not comfortable with the bold part. I hate the idea that college players might have two coaches to listen to.

Pro coach: "We'd like to see you develop a 15 foot jumper."
College coach: "So help me god, if you shoot another @$%^@&^@ 15 foot jumper, I'm yanking you from the game and you're not going back in. Get under the #$#@$^& basket and stay there."

I think stuff like this already happens to a degree because "scouts and GMs say that developing an outside game would help his stock tremendously" but I think it would be far worse coming from your soon-to-be employer instead of some anonymous people that may or may not ever draft you.

True, that's a possibility. It would be up to the college coach to tailor it to fit his system. However, college coaches have ego's and want to win too. They may not want to be told by NBA coaches what their players need to work on, especially if it's not something they need for their team.

It could really create problems if it's a team with multiple players who have been drafted.

 

[gordontrue]

I'm not saying I don't like the idea in general, but I'm not comfortable with the bold part. I hate the idea that college players might have two coaches to listen to.

Pro coach: "We'd like to see you develop a 15 foot jumper."
College coach: "So help me god, if you shoot another @$%^@&^@ 15 foot jumper, I'm yanking you from the game and you're not going back in. Get under the #$#@$^& basket and stay there."

I think stuff like this already happens to a degree because "scouts and GMs say that developing an outside game would help his stock tremendously" but I think it would be far worse coming from your soon-to-be employer instead of some anonymous people that may or may not ever draft you.

Good point