# Screw David Stern - More college taking advantage of star players



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7996718?MSNHPHMA

Good deal, now the future Derrick Rose's, Melo's an Oden' can be milked for money by their respective college teams. At the same time, get paid nothing.

God I hate the NCAA. I hope more star US players just go to Europe and get paid 5 million a year and just say **** off to college basketball.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

If the NCAA and NBA really cared about education they would force players to stay for four years an impose a rule where you have to graduate to play in the NBA. But they won't, because this isn't about education, it's about the NCAA milking the star players, what a scam.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

I can understand why they should go to college for a year, but two years is just inscrutable. They work ten years towards the goal to make it to the NBA, have a platform on national television to show off what they can for a season and then make the jump to the pros. I don't know what the motivation behind all this is, but it can't be good.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

You didn't even get to play varsity basketball as a college freshman back in the day...

I think it will make for a better NBA and NCAA product... maybe the college players should be compensated?


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

Free player development for Stern the scumbag.


----------



## dastrey (Dec 30, 2003)

The players really should be compensated. But as a result, the fans benefit. Players are coming into the league a bit more polished. 1 year of college is probably the equivalent to 2 years of on the job training in the NBA.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

dastrey said:


> The players really should be compensated. But as a result, the fans benefit. Players are coming into the league a bit more polished. 1 year of college is probably the equivalent to 2 years of on the job training in the NBA.


:rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2: 

You have no idea what you're talking about.

College basketball sucks. Someone should start a union for the college players so that they can demand the same deal the pros get (i.e. 60% of the proceeds). **** the NCAA.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

dastrey said:


> The players really should be compensated. But as a result, the fans benefit. Players are coming into the league a bit more polished. 1 year of college is probably the equivalent to 2 years of on the job training in the NBA.


The amount of equivalent training depends on the player. Lebron wouldn't have progressed a whole lot by dunking on BYU players for 2 years.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

Lets not forget that it is a very few NCAA players that make it to the NBA. The schools offer free education to these players, yes the the schools benefit from ticket sales and TV revenues, but he players are getting an opportunity for and education that can last a lifetime. 

Lets say college players get paid.....let them pay for their own school costs...room and board, tuition, books ect..... how well do you think these kids would handle the money....they would blow it all away. Remember there are 60 new picks for the NBA in a year 60! How many NCAA D-1 players are there in any given year? Put in the Euro players and upper classmen and how many spots are going to freshmen?

Donte Green from Syracuse is coming out this year...he may go late lottery and earn OK cash.....or he could come back for one more year and play on a healthy Cuse team and be a top 5 pick.....how much more money will he make on his rookie deal in the long run.....millions....but the NCAA and NBA are ripping these kids off?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

billfindlay10 said:


> Lets not forget that it is a very few NCAA players that make it to the NBA. The schools offer free education to these players, yes the the schools benefit from ticket sales and TV revenues, but he players are getting an opportunity for and education that can last a lifetime.
> 
> Lets say college players get paid.....let them pay for their own school costs...room and board, tuition, books ect..... how well do you think these kids would handle the money....they would blow it all away. Remember there are 60 new picks for the NBA in a year 60! How many NCAA D-1 players are there in any given year? Put in the Euro players and upper classmen and how many spots are going to freshmen?
> 
> Donte Green from Syracuse is coming out this year...he may go late lottery and earn OK cash.....or he could come back for one more year and play on a healthy Cuse team and be a top 5 pick.....how much more money will he make on his rookie deal in the long run.....millions....but the NCAA and NBA are ripping these kids off?


Yes, they are. And economically speaking you're wrong. Every year that delays the end of his rookie deal delays the big money (free agency). The difference between #5 and #12 isn't enough to compensate for the lost free agent wages, and not enough to compensate for the loss of a year's worth of endorsement money.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

If they make it out of HS or 2-years in college, I will not have a problem. Even if a team owns your draft rights and sends you to the D-League for two years, I won't care, similar to baseball. If it's just two years, then I will be very upset. Thankfully, we don't have to hear about this nonsense until 2011.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

As a basketball fan I don't think two years is a bad idea. As an American however its plain ridiculous.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Stupid...


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I dont have a problem with it. Let college fans enjoy some of this stars for more than a year. If this guys are so worried about injuries, get insurance. Heck when was the last time a lotto pick suffered a career ending injury that prevented him from playing in the league


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Well, Leon Powe went from a first rounder to a second rounder as a result of two reconstructive surgeries. Billy Walker's gone from a top 10 pick to a borderline first rounder as a result of a blown knee. It's not as uncommon as you're assuming.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

They should do like baseball and soccer where professional clubs can sign you at 14 or 16.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Yes, they are. And economically speaking you're wrong. Every year that delays the end of his rookie deal delays the big money (free agency). The difference between #5 and #12 isn't enough to compensate for the lost free agent wages, and not enough to compensate for the loss of a year's worth of endorsement money.


i've been saying for a while that doing away with the rookie salary scale will keep kids in college longer, as they'll be playing for their first contract, and not their 2nd. the rookie salary cap eliminated glen robinson's expecting $100M rookie contracts, and introduced the influx of 18 year olds. 

also, the nba could expand their roster to minimize the on-court impact of young, not ready for prime time assets.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

TheATLien said:


> They should do like baseball and soccer where professional clubs can sign you at 14 or 16.


baseball has an extensive minor league system. football, which requires 3 years out of h.s., has no real minor league system.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

I wasn't being totally serious.

I think basketball is the easiest of the major team sports for a 17 or 18 year old to come in and be a productive player. This age rule is dumb.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

TheATLien said:


> I wasn't being totally serious.
> 
> I think basketball is the easiest of the major team sports for a 17 or 18 year old to come in and be a productive player. This age rule is dumb.


Come on man, didnt you enjoy watching the Rose's, Durants and Beasleys that have played on the college level? Without an age limit, we would never have gotten a chance to see them play in college.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

HB said:


> Come on man, didnt you enjoy watching the Rose's, Durants and Beasleys that have played on the college level? Without an age limit, we would never have gotten a chance to see them play in college.


It would be neat if they were at my school, but seeing as how they aren't I don't really care. But I also don't watch college hoops. The play is too sloppy.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Who cares? We lost a year of seeing them in the NBA.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> Well, Leon Powe went from a first rounder to a second rounder as a result of two reconstructive surgeries. Billy Walker's gone from a top 10 pick to a borderline first rounder as a result of a blown knee. It's not as uncommon as you're assuming.


Well true, although I think Powe probably got picked about where he should be surgery or no surgery. Kmart broke his leg, but that didnt stop him from being picked number 1


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

Leon Powe was a bad example because he lost money but it wasn't a result of the age limit. He just wasn't good enough to come straight out.

Bill Walker however seems like a good example, though we don't know where he would have been picked. We cant just say that every player that gets injured in college is a casualty of the age limit when a lot of these guys might not have been drafted or been second rounders anyway.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> Kmart broke his leg, but that didnt stop him from being picked number 1


You forgot to add "..._in the worst draft of all time_."


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

You have to play at least three years in college to be eligible for the NFL. So I dont see any problems with students playing two years. However I do agree that the students need to be compensated.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Does this happen to have anything to do with Stern's growing interest in 'NBA Europe?' Barring studs from entering the league would make the (short-term, at least) Euro talent pool much richer in a short amount of time = more interest = growth potential = $$$.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

I love the alarmist tones.That's not the sky falling Chicken Little.
One the CBA does not expire for three years and the league is a partner with the Players association in every detail of how things get done or do not get done...Two this is going to be the last thing that the Players Association will be looking to negoitiate.The probability of this happening is extremely low because the players won't gain anything in exchange and they aren't negoitiating away anything for nothing.Three I don't think it would stand up in court even with the d league in play

Four why should I really give a damn about someone losing money because the owners and players negoitiate away their rights to play in the leagues.What a bunch of sanctimonius bull****.Worry about your own problems


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

RebelSun said:


> Does this happen to have anything to do with Stern's growing interest in 'NBA Europe?' Barring studs from entering the league would make the (short-term, at least) Euro talent pool much richer in a short amount of time = more interest = growth potential = $$$.


This is a good point. If it's two years and not an extended age limit, then that will skew the balance to european players in terms of drafting for potential. If I have a Europlayer with a similar skillset to a college player, but he's two years younger--why not draft him and see if I can develop him further?

But yeah this is really dumb. I hope if this happens someone challenges it right away.

Why can't someone like Bill Walker just sue the NBA for the money he lost because of the re-instituted age limit?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Also this is insanely stupid considering that three of the four MVP candidates this year are straight out of high school. Four out of five if you count Dwight Howard as a candidate.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> Why can't someone like Bill Walker just sue the NBA for the money he lost because of the re-instituted age limit?


WHAT? The NBA isn't an entitlement.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Also this is insanely stupid considering that three of the four MVP candidates this year are straight out of high school. Four out of five if you count Dwight Howard as a candidate.


And then of course you have Tim Duncan who happened to be a four year player and manages to have his team in championship conversations year after year. Yup you see the arguement can go both ways right?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

HB said:


> And then of course you have Tim Duncan who happened to be a four year player and manages to have his team in championship conversations year after year. Yup you see the arguement can go both ways right?


To be fair, Duncan would have been the #1 pick in '95 (his sophomore year), '96 and '97. Just like Greg Oden would have been the #1 pick in '06, '07 and '08.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Which is why I dont really buy the whole bolt for the NBA as soon as you can arguement? I can't even fathom a scenario where Durant would have played himself out of the top five if he had returned for one more season, same goes for Oden


----------



## kidd2rj (Jan 29, 2005)

i agree with the 1 year rule but 2 years seems a little overboard. 1 year is good because stern knew that if he didn't stop high schoolers right now then sooner or later the entire draft is going to be high school kids. What good does that do? sure some kids make it but others bottom out and they just used up all chance they had at going to college. also, to say these kids aren't being paid to go to college, well i believe many of them probably have scholarships and if they are really good then maybe they have full rides somewhere. That's a lot more than that engineer going to that same school and leaving after 4 years with $200,000 in debt. If they aren't good enough for the nba, they play 4 years, get an education and graduate with little to no debt. can't beat that. I do think however that during the tournament, the school should provide every student 2 tickets and airfare to each game for the parents. You have schools making millions, coaching being paid millions so they should be able to afford to let parents come see their kids play.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

An age limit doesn't make sense because it affects less than 2% of all basketball players in a given high school class. The problem is people want to see the best players in college. The funny thing with all of this is if the best black college players went to HBCU's, I doubt college fans would like that. No one wants to see Hampton and Grambling in the Final Four.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HB said:


> Which is why I dont really buy the whole bolt for the NBA as soon as you can arguement? I can't even fathom a scenario where Durant would have played himself out of the top five if he had returned for one more season, same goes for Oden


If Durant blew out his knee, that's one scenario.

Plus look how little college polished Durant's game. All it did was allow him to play to his bad habits.

Can you imagine Lebron having to play college? Lord knows the bad habits he would have picked up dominating inferior competition for another year or two.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HKF said:


> An age limit doesn't make sense because it affects less than 2% of all basketball players in a given high school class. The problem is people want to see the best players in college. The funny thing with all of this is if the best black college players went to HBCU's, I doubt college fans would like that. No one wants to see Hampton and Grambling in the Final Four.


Actually I would like to see that. Grambling blowing out Kentucky by 80 points...would be sweet. i would watch college basketball if that happened.


----------



## seligbud (Apr 7, 2008)

All I can say is I hope this encourages the very best of the best prospects to go play for maccabi or cska for a couple years for millions rather then rot in the NCAA. The more they try to push this age limit, the sooner we'll get back to 18 year olds in the draft


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

HB said:


> Which is why I dont really buy the whole bolt for the NBA as soon as you can arguement? I can't even fathom a scenario where Durant would have played himself out of the top five if he had returned for one more season, same goes for Oden


There's actually a very easy scenario, it's called injury. Star players shouldn't have to risk injury by staying in college where they don't get paid.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

seligbud said:


> All I can say is I hope this encourages the very best of the best prospects to go play for maccabi or cska for a couple years for millions rather then rot in the NCAA. The more they try to push this age limit, the sooner we'll get back to 18 year olds in the draft


I agree. To say it is about education is bull****. The NBA as a possibility applies to less than 1% of college basketball players. The leaving early to be drafted applies to even less players. Why is the NCAA so concerned amount this small sub population entering the draft? Easy, so they can milk them for money, these guys aren't getting bachelor degrees after two years.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

anyone beginning to pursue a 4 year education right now is a mark.
2012.

Act like you may know.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Dornado said:


> You didn't even get to play varsity basketball as a college freshman back in the day...
> 
> I think it will make for a better NBA and NCAA product... maybe the college players should be compensated?


How do you determine compensation? There's no free market, then you have deal with title 9. Are you going to pay women's college players to make even though no one watches or gives a **** about those games?

Who gives a **** about the NCAA product, the NCAA shouldn't even be a concern. Since when is the NBA responsible for people watching college basketball games?


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

kflo said:


> i've been saying for a while that doing away with the rookie salary scale will keep kids in college longer, as they'll be playing for their first contract, and not their 2nd. the rookie salary cap eliminated glen robinson's expecting $100M rookie contracts, and introduced the influx of 18 year olds.
> 
> also, the nba could expand their roster to minimize the on-court impact of young, not ready for prime time assets.


I agree with this 100%.

It'd be the best decision and that's probably why it has no chance of happening.


----------



## seligbud (Apr 7, 2008)

Just one more thing to add...

Wages from a team aren't the only thing you get as a pro basketball player. I don't remember what LeBron got when he turned pro from Nike, but I'm sure it was something on the order of $10 million a year. I'm sure he'd have gotten something close to that even if he had decided to go play in the ACB or whatever for a couple years, money which he couldn't touch in the NCAA


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

As european basketball gets more and more high level, why wouldn't a top player go to europe and make a few million before coming back to the NBA?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

3/4 of the people that have complained in this thread are mostly people who dont even care about NCAA basketball. Probably the same people that you will see complaining about the death of American basketball and why international basketball is improving leaps and bounds over the local product.

I mean when you hear someone say who gives a **** about the NCAA product it just leaves me shaking my head. Exactly what is wrong with college fans actually enjoying or rooting for the best high school players. So you would prefer that the NCAA product never have these All Americans go to college and bolt for the NBA. What type of quality are you leaving behind for college basketball then?


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

HB said:


> And then of course you have Tim Duncan who happened to be a four year player and manages to have his team in championship conversations year after year. Yup you see the arguement can go both ways right?


For it to be going both ways wouldn't somebody have to be arguing that players should never stay in for four years?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

essbee said:


> For it to be going both ways wouldn't somebody have to be arguing that players should never stay in for four years?


Isn't that what was implied in futur's post about four of this year's MVP candidates all bolting for the NBA from high school.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

HB said:


> Isn't that what was implied in futur's post about four of this year's MVP candidates all bolting for the NBA from high school.


No. The rule they're talking about would make it _mandatory _to attend school for a set number of years. The post future made showed that it's not NECESSARY to contribute at a high level in the NBA. Nobody said that players should be forbidden from attending school for four years so your point about Duncan doesn't make any sense. Future used those examples to show that the rule is unwarranted and since nobody's talking about banning people who come in after four years of school... extremely irrelevant.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

essbee said:


> No. The rule they're talking about would make it _mandatory _to attend school for a set number of years. The post future made showed that it's not NECESSARY to contribute at a high level in the NBA. Nobody said that players should be forbidden from attending school for four years so your point about Duncan doesn't make any sense.


Actually never mind, not going to drag this on longer than necessary


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

HB said:


> Heh from what I got in that post, I actually thought it was in support of doing away with the whole age limit process


I don't like the age limit process because it suggests collusion between a professional organization and an amateur one while both make huge profits, but that's a separate argument from the one about Kobe, KG, Lebron etc. We're talking about how unfair the rules are because they're mandatory even though there are players that might not need it. That's the issue.


----------



## seligbud (Apr 7, 2008)

HB said:


> 3/4 of the people that have complained in this thread are mostly people who dont even care about NCAA basketball. Probably the same people that you will see complaining about the death of NBA basketball and why international basketball is improving leaps and bounds over the local product.
> 
> I mean when you hear someone say who gives a **** about the NCAA product it just leaves me shaking my head. Exactly what is wrong with college fans actually enjoying or rooting for the best high school players. So you would prefer that the NCAA product never have these All Americans go to college and bolt for the NBA. What type of quality are you leaving behind for college basketball then?


If European basketball is catching up to the american game, it's certainly not because they stop players from playing pro basketball until they're 20. Players turn pro at 16. Ricky Rubio is one of the best players in the ACB right now at age 17. 

And I don't like college basketball. I don't like the 35 second shotclock(even the women's game has a 30 second clock), possession arrow, unrestricted zones or cheap three pointers. There's nothing wrong with you liking it, and enjoying seeing top players play there, but that's no reason to restrict the potential of talented young men


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The other problem is college is to win games, not improve players to help them make the league. I will be glad once the D-League has 30 teams, because I won't have to hear about this anymore. College fans are so scared they are going to have to go back to watch 1950's basketball in the peach baskets. Yes, all of the top flight kids won't go to college, but then again, if I could have gotten a movie deal out of HS, I would have never went to college either.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

The age limit is ridiculous. Why doesn't the college ranks of baseball complain about talent that they could have going pro? Maybe their college game would be better if there were age limits.
Age limits in the NBA is stupid. It's there for two reasons. It can reduce the amount of max contracts a player would have, and two, it's there to protect GMs from themselves.
Players who fall through the cracks between HS and the pros are those who probably don't have the grades to even go to college to play ball. Guys who come out from HS and get drafted to end up to be good players on average. Look at the more recent guys. Those who have problems are players that would be problematic even if they went to school, and really, what is one year of school gonna do, other than change their draft stock from top 3 to top 5, or top 10 to top 3?

All the one and done guys the past two seasons would be drafted on or near the same picks they have and will be selected on. Someone like Mayo would drop a few spots, but he would still be a top 5 pick regardless so what does it change? Not much. 
Imagine if we were denied Lebron in the NBA for 3, 4 years. 

And lets not act like it's NBA or bust for all college ball players. The majority of guys who played ball where I went to school are playing professionally overseas. Most of these guys get sham grads in majors that are rigged for them to do well to stay on the team. People are insulting those who really do go to college to learn and get a degree for a job by saying that these players are earning degrees in school. 

You think anyone on Memphis or Kansas have been busting their hump trying to do homework over the past few weeks? Many of these guys will be playing professional ball, whether it be in the NBA or international.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I dont think the NCAA is even trying to make the point that its about the education, cause its clearly not.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

Tragedy said:


> And lets not act like it's NBA or bust for all college ball players. The majority of guys who played ball where I went to school are playing professionally overseas. Most of these guys get sham grads in majors that are rigged for them to do well to stay on the team. People are insulting those who really do go to college to learn and get a degree for a job by saying that these players are earning degrees in school.
> 
> You think anyone on Memphis or Kansas have been busting their hump trying to do homework over the past few weeks? Many of these guys will be playing professional ball, whether it be in the NBA or international.


The NCAA only cares about their profits, the most embarrassing thing is that they keep getting away with it. College sports fund a lot of **** at universities beyond sports and they don't want to lose their cash cows too early.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

seligbud said:


> If European basketball is catching up to the american game, it's certainly not because they stop players from playing pro basketball until they're 20. Players turn pro at 16. Ricky Rubio is one of the best players in the ACB right now at age 17.


That's a good point. It's funny how the big thing a few years ago was how Euros know fundamentals, and American players are all flash and no substance, which turned into people thinking American players need to stay in college to learn fundamentals, while Euros turn pro at 14 years old or whatever.

So basically we're saying you can't learn anything in the NBA, and the Euro leagues are superior because one can get better in the Euro league, but if you don't go to college you'll be missing a necessary component to learn and succeed.

All it was really is the American players athleticism overshadowing their fundamentals, and the Euro players getting props for theirs (which is really shooting and passing around the perimeter) because they weren't doing much of anything else (attacking the basket, defending).


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> Which is why I dont really buy the whole bolt for the NBA as soon as you can arguement? I can't even fathom a scenario where Durant would have played himself out of the top five if he had returned for one more season, same goes for Oden


Free basketball superstars aren't an entitlement.



futuristxen said:


> As european basketball gets more and more high level, why wouldn't a top player go to europe and make a few million before coming back to the NBA?


This is the nuclear winter scenario, that the best players coming out of high school will sign up to play in Europe for four to six years and then contest their NBA draft eligibility in court (i.e. deny the validity of the NBAS draft on the grounds that as pro players they're free agents).


----------



## Roscoe Sheed (Jun 19, 2006)

I think this is a desperate ploy by the NCAA to save its "product". I can hardly watch the college game. The NBA games are so much more enjoyable to watch


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

ehmunro said:


> Free basketball superstars aren't an entitlement.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the nuclear winter scenario, that the best players coming out of high school will sign up to play in Europe for four to six years and then contest their NBA draft eligibility in court (i.e. deny the validity of the NBAS draft on the grounds that as pro players they're free agents).


Yeah you don't see drafts in european sports. The teams who spend the most money get the most talent.

A sports draft is un-american. And it's eerily similar in setup to a slave auction.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

It's stupid and racist. The only reason the NBA can sell this to the public while Golf and Tennis allow 14 year olds to compete if they're good enough is because Stern is essentially saying "we want these black kids to have an education so they aren't going directly from their street gangs to being your kid's favorite player." And Americans buy it. No one has a problem with 17 year old prodigies playing pro tennis.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

The NBA is a business.The employees in that business are well represented and well compensated.Businesses and employees are free to negoitiate the terms and conditions under which the services of one party are provided to the other party.So far as the government is concerned what they negoitiate between one another is largely none of it's business.Slavery has nothing to do with it.The NBA draft,the CBA and the salary cap are all in large part designed to enhance competition by preventing the wealthier organizations from monopolizing the available talent as they did in the 70's when the same teams competed for the title every single year.NO AGE LIMIT HAS EVER OR SHALL EVER EXIST WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE NBAPA SO RELAX.

There's nothing here to get excited about unless you're one of the dozen or so people in the entire world who could actually make a living in the NBA straight out of High School


Now you may return to your hyperbole...Be sure to breathe occasionally.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

essbee said:


> The NCAA only cares about their profits, the most embarrassing thing is that they keep getting away with it. College sports fund a lot of **** at universities beyond sports and they don't want to lose their cash cows too early.


The sad thing about it is that it really doesn't fund anything else at universities outside of a few token things. Athletics helps fund more athletics.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

HB said:


> I dont think the NCAA is even trying to make the point that its about the education, cause its clearly not.


Yea but these knuckleheads here are, so that's mainly addressing those who say these players should be thankful they get a "free" education.

Let me put it straight to you guys. Those who say these kinds of things are guys who wish they could have had the choice to play college ball much less pro ball. It is NOT a free education because these players are bringing in far more money than they would have to pay for school. The price of schooling is already exorbitant as it is. A Derrick Rose or Michael Beasely means $$$$$$$ for schools, and giving them a "free education" really doesn't cost the school much in the big picture.

Let's stop acting like these schools are doing everyone a favor here. Ultimately they are looking out for their pockets. 

I also find it funny that guys think its unfair professionals make tens of millions, while teachers make little.

At DI schools, the highest paid person on campus is usually the coach of their big name program. How is that for unfair?


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

futuristxen said:


> Yeah you don't see drafts in european sports. The teams who spend the most money get the most talent.
> 
> A sports draft is un-american. And it's eerily similar in setup to a slave auction.


Let's not get too far. Sign me up for ANY slave auction that means guaranteed millions, traveling on jet planes, and groupies and video chicks galore.

Please, sign me up for that.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Tragedy said:


> Yea but these knuckleheads here are, so that's mainly addressing those who say these players should be thankful they get a "free" education.
> 
> Let me put it straight to you guys. Those who say these kinds of things are guys who wish they could have had the choice to play college ball much less pro ball. It is NOT a free education because these players are bringing in far more money than they would have to pay for school. The price of schooling is already exorbitant as it is. A Derrick Rose or Michael Beasely means $$$$$$$ for schools, and giving them a "free education" really doesn't cost the school much in the big picture.
> 
> ...


The highest paid state employee in many states (teachers, governor, etc) is the head football coach at the big state school.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Nimreitz said:


> It's stupid and racist. The only reason the NBA can sell this to the public while Golf and Tennis allow 14 year olds to compete if they're good enough is because Stern is essentially saying "we want these black kids to have an education so they aren't going directly from their street gangs to being your kid's favorite player." And Americans buy it. No one has a problem with 17 year old prodigies playing pro tennis.


 
Maaaaan. Michelle Wie. Someone please explain to me why she's always on ESPN and she's losing every damn time. Go look at her earnings at that, she's making money and not winning anything. It's BS.

Let golf be flooded by young flashy black men, who don't bend to the will of corporate america and see what happens.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Diable said:


> So far as the government is concerned what they negoitiate between one another is largely none of it's business.


As far as I'm aware, the NBA operates under an anti-trust exemption issued by the federal government.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Meh. It's good for the game of basketball and for the athletes themselves to get an education. If you've ever heard KG, Kobe, Dwight, or LeBron speak about anything other basketball, they sound as dumb as a stump. Can't hurt to have a role model that actually knows who John Adams was.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

They are paid to play basketball, not teach History 315.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

^ Sure, but they're humans before basketball players.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

EHL said:


> Meh. It's good for the game of basketball and for the athletes themselves to get an education. If you've ever heard KG, Kobe, Dwight, or LeBron speak about anything other basketball, they sound as dumb as a stump. Can't hurt to have a role model that actually knows who John Adams was.


I'm sure you will find that some of the dumbest players in the NBA spent years in college.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> I'm sure you will find that some of the dumbest players in the NBA spent years in college.


I'm sure you will find that, on the mean, some of the smartest players in the NBA spent years in college.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Who cares? I'm just telling you that intelligence has nothing to do with how long someone has spent in college. Most star D1 athletes major in throw away majors because the school only cares about keeping them eligible from semester to semester. If you think everybody out there is like Shane Battier, majoring in theology at Duke you're wrong. Most guys were majoring in leisure studies at Kansas State.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Tyler Hansbrough is about to be 23 years old and is a junior. Have you heard him speak?


----------



## Theonee (Dec 5, 2006)

Playing in NBA is not a right, it is a privilege.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Theonee said:


> Playing in NBA is not a right, it is a privilege.


Wrong. It's a job. Nothing more, nothing less. If you have the ability to do the job, you should be allowed to pursue it.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Theonee said:


> Playing in NBA is not a right, it is a privilege.


Says the guy who is terrible at basketball.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Theonee said:


> Playing in NBA is not a right, it is a privilege.


Exactly, all these people are making it seem like its racist, or this huge uncivil practice that is going on.

The NBA is a private organization that can set whatever qualifications it wants. Hell, if the NBA would require players from now on to have MBA's, nobody can do crap about it. (extreme, but its gets the point across)


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

OneBadLT123 said:


> Exactly, all these people are making it seem like its racist, or this huge uncivil practice that is going on.
> 
> Bottom line, the NBA is a private organization that can set whatever qualifications it want. Hell, if the NBA would require players from now on to have MBA's, nobody can do crap about it. (extreme, but its gets the point across)


Except you're wrong. If Derrick Rose enters the draft he will get drafted. They NBA wants Derrick Rose. It's not as if he's a thug who no body wants, they are making rules to exclude players for arbitrary reasons when they are qualified and desired by the employers. And I'd also like to say that the collective bargaining is completely unfair for those seeking to enter the marketplace. The players who are entering have no hand in the bargaining, and the NBAPA does not represent them until they get into the league.

The NBA is not doing a service, they are hurting young men because of incompetant GM's. That's the extent of it. Because GM's can't properly evaluate talent someone like LeBron James would have to delay a massive paycheck for 2 years. How is that fair? Tell me how it's fair that a prodigy wants to play, is good enough to play, and every team in the league would pay him to play if he was eligible, but he's denied because of an arbitrary age limit restriction.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Who cares? I'm just telling you that intelligence has nothing to do with how long someone has spent in college. Most star D1 athletes major in throw away majors because the school only cares about keeping them eligible from semester to semester. If you think everybody out there is like Shane Battier, majoring in theology at Duke you're wrong. Most guys were majoring in leisure studies at Kansas State.


Huh? The studies done on those who go to college and those who don't are conclusive; those who go to college are on average much more knowledgeable, make far money over their lifetimes, and and live longer. You don't have to take upper division theology to be get something out of a college education; even basic breath requirements would do wonders for the intellectual curiosity of many NBA athletes and would probably do a lot for the NBA's image which is, I imagine, part of Stern's reasoning. This notion that just because _some_ schools are lenient with their athletes that it should nix the idea of mandatory college education entirely is pure asininity. Required college education is an attempt to further the interests of basketball in the U.S. and aboard, a GOOD thing for NBA fans. Not like there isn't precedent; basketball popularity was at its highest when the NBA's best players all went to 2-4 years college of college or were graduates (Jordan, Magic, Bird, Jabbar, Shaq, Dream, Ewing) with some even serving in defense, sacrificing years of their early 20's (Drob). The reasoning is logical and based on statistical evidence (Finals ratings, etc.).


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Nimreitz said:


> Except you're wrong. If Derrick Rose enters the draft he will get drafted. They NBA wants Derrick Rose. It's not as if he's a thug who no body wants, they are making rules to exclude players for arbitrary reasons when they are qualified and desired by the employers. And I'd also like to say that the collective bargaining is completely unfair for those seeking to enter the marketplace. The players who are entering have no hand in the bargaining, and the NBAPA does not represent them until they get into the league.


While they are probably making this rule for both money and the integrity of the college game (mostly money), there isn't a damn thing anyone can do about it. The NFL has had numerous lawsuits thrown in its direction for not accepting highschool'ers and every single time the NFL wins.

Bottom line, the NBA can set whatever requirements they want as long as it is approved by the appropriate parties.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with requiring an education. Yeah it probably benefits the NCAA more, but it may also benefit the player in the long term.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

EHL said:


> Huh? The studies done on those who go to college and those who don't are conclusive; those who go to college are on average much more knowledgeable, make far money over their lifetimes, and and live longer.


L-O-mother****ing-L

Are you freaking kidding me? You think this has anything to do with this argument? Why do you think those with college educations make more money and live longer? Because they have a degree and on average are smarter than those who self selected not to go to college. They get better job opportunities, avoid hard manual labor, can afford better health care, and can retire earlier. So show this statistic to a bright, unmotivated kid who doesn't think going to college is valuable.

A basketball player who is going to make millions of dollars on his rookie deal, not to mention his second contract, already has all the benefits you cited of going to college, plus more money (more years playing for cash, not for free), and a better health plan and earlier retirement.

As far as the "much more knowledgeable" part goes, again you don't think that it's self selective at all? The idea that smarter people on average go to college and dumber people on average do not goes over your head? They're more knowledgeable not because of college, but because on average they have higher intelligences.

EDIT: As for the second part which I failed to quote, there were fewer teams when players were required to get an education, and there wasn't really free agency. Dynasties were built, and there was more talent per team because there were fewer teams. Contract 8 teams next year and tell me what that does for the quality of the league. Much more than an age limit will do, I guarantee you that.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Except you're wrong. If Derrick Rose enters the draft he will get drafted. They NBA wants Derrick Rose. It's not as if he's a thug who no body wants, they are making rules to exclude players for arbitrary reasons when they are qualified and desired by the employers. And I'd also like to say that the collective bargaining is completely unfair for those seeking to enter the marketplace. The players who are entering have no hand in the bargaining, and the NBAPA does not represent them until they get into the league.
> 
> The NBA is not doing a service, they are hurting young men because of incompetant GM's. That's the extent of it. Because GM's can't properly evaluate talent someone like LeBron James would have to delay a massive paycheck for 2 years. How is that fair? Tell me how it's fair that a prodigy wants to play, is good enough to play, and every team in the league would pay him to play if he was eligible, but he's denied because of an arbitrary age limit restriction.


What's funny here is that you don't even get that this is how the real world works; private enterprise has the *right* to deny you entrance based on qualifications. The DoD isn't going to hire someone with a year of experience when they can hire someone with 4 or 5 years of experience even IF the former might do a better job than the latter. Experience matters in practically every field regardless of how inherently talented a person might be. The NBA is no difference; it is a private enterprise, an LLC. LeBron James, had he been unfortunate enough to fall under the age restriction limit, would have had the option of finding employment aboard or even starting up his own league. His options still would have been voluminous and no one would have shed a tear because he still would have likely made millions playing aboard. Boo hoo.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

EHL said:


> Huh? The studies done on those who go to college and those who don't are conclusive; those who go to college are on average much more knowledgeable, make far money over their lifetimes, and and live longer.


The studies on those that make the NBA are quite conclusive, those that get drafted in the first round make far more money over the course of their careers than college graduates, _even those with advanced degrees_. And, hey, guess what? When their NBA careers are over they have plenty of money left over to get that degree if they want it.

And is spelling the word _abroad_ that tough?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

EHL said:


> What's funny here is that you don't even get that this is how the real world works; private enterprise has the *right* to deny you entrance based on qualifications. The DoD isn't going to hire someone with a year of experience when they can hire someone with 4 or 5 years of experience even IF the former might do a better job than the latter. Experience matters in practically every field regardless of how inherently talented a person might be. The NBA is no difference; it is a private enterprise, an LLC. LeBron James, had he been unfortunate enough to fall under the age restriction limit, would have had the option of finding employment aboard or even starting up his own league. His options still would have been voluminous and no one would have shed a tear because he still would have likely made millions playing aboard. Boo hoo.


But you are making bad comparisons. You understand that the biggest hedge funds and investment banks hire their worker bees directly out of Princeton, Harvard, MIT, etc every year right? If you know what they pay, you would understand that people with tons of experience, even in the banking and investment field, would kill for those positions. But it doesn't matter because they want the kids who are going to really shine, and they get those people directly from Princeton. That IS how the real world works at upper echelon employers. They don't want Joe Schmo with his experience, they want the prodigy out of MIT who carries some risk because he's never done that kind of work before. The NBA is the same way.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

Theonee said:


> Playing in NBA is not a right, it is a privilege.


Getting paid as an employee is not a privelege. Hell are you talking about?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

EHL said:


> What's funny here is that you don't even get that this is how the real world works; private enterprise has the *right* to deny you entrance based on qualifications. The DoD isn't going to hire someone with a year of experience when they can hire someone with 4 or 5 years of experience even IF the former might do a better job than the latter. Experience matters in practically every field regardless of how inherently talented a person might be. The NBA is no difference; it is a private enterprise, an LLC. LeBron James, had he been unfortunate enough to fall under the age restriction limit, would have had the option of finding employment aboard or even starting up his own league. His options still would have been voluminous and no one would have shed a tear because he still would have likely made millions playing aboard. Boo hoo.


Actually, I'm not sure who told you this, but this is absolutely not how labor law works in the US. You have to show a reasonable justification for the restrictions if they have a disparate impact. The NFL's age restriction has been argued as a necessity by reason of _physical_ maturity (i.e. an 18 year old can't meet the physical requirements of playing in the NFL). The NBA doesn't really have a physical maturity argument. With a one year restriction, no one's challenged it yet, but if the NBA requires two years of indentured servitude, someone's going to challenge the restriction.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> L-O-mother****ing-L
> 
> Are you freaking kidding me? You think this has anything to do with this argument? Why do you think those with college educations make more money and live longer? Because they have a degree and on average are smarter than those who self selected not to go to college. They get better job opportunities, avoid hard manual labor, can afford better health care, and can retire earlier. So show this statistic to a bright, unmotivated kid who doesn't think going to college is valuable.


What? I'm not even sure this was a coherent argument. Private enterprise has a moral and ethical obligation to advance the interests of its employees, they are *legally* (though loosely) obligated to abide by standards of ethics. It is NOT unheard of for an organization to further the training of their employees. They do NOT have to be college graduates to benefit from education; if it even paves the way to a future degree that is without question a good thing for that individual athlete. And in a negotiation over CBA rules, Stern will take what he can get, in this case it's just a 1 year college requirement. I wouldn't be surprised if his ultimate goal is 4 years. 



> A basketball player who is going to make millions of dollars on his rookie deal, not to mention his second contract, already has all the benefits you cited of going to college, plus more money (more years playing for cash, not for free), and a better health plan and earlier retirement.


I can't help you if you don't see the difference between money and an education. If even half these athletes knew just how lucky they were to be making millions, we'd see a lot more local development and investment from their earnings. An actual education would certainly be a first step in enlightening them to this reality. 



> As far as the "much more knowledgeable" part goes, again you don't think that it's self selective at all? The idea that smarter people on average go to college and dumber people on average do not goes over your head? They're more knowledgeable not because of college, but because on average they have higher intelligences.


I have to question your intelligence, period, if you honestly think a person with a below average intellect cannot receive a college degree. College, not Yale. Far and away the biggest determinant of completing a college degree is motivation and incentive, intellect does not play a leading role (to a point). Something you would know if you had done the prerequisite research.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> The sad thing about it is that it really doesn't fund anything else at universities outside of a few token things. Athletics helps fund more athletics.


Not quite correct. The success of a big college sports program does a lot more tan fund just athletics, it also is proven to increase enrollment especially for mid-majors. ADs have acknowledged as much repeatedly when talking about the value of making the NCAA tournament for example.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

ehmunro said:


> The studies on those that make the NBA are quite conclusive, those that get drafted in the first round make far more money over the course of their careers than college graduates, _even those with advanced degrees_.


Link? 



> And, hey, guess what? When their NBA careers are over they have plenty of money left over to get that degree if they want it.


And what percentage of them actually have the motive or incentive to do so? 



> And is spelling the word _abroad_ that tough?


Nope. Though correcting a minor error like that on an Internet message board is pretty sad.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

EHL said:


> What? I'm not even sure this was a coherent argument. Private enterprise has a moral and ethical obligation to advance the interests of its employees, they are *legally* (though loosely) obligated to abide by standards of ethics. It is NOT unheard of for an organization to further the training of their employees. They do NOT have to be college graduates to benefit from education; if it even paves the way to a future degree that is without question a good thing for that individual athlete. And in a negotiation over CBA rules, Stern will take what he can get, in this case it's just a 1 year college requirement. I wouldn't be surprised if his ultimate goal is 4 years.


THIS is what I would call incoherent.




> I can't help you if you don't see the difference between money and an education. If even half these athletes knew just how lucky they were to be making millions, we'd see a lot more local development and investment from their earnings. An actual education would certainly be a first step in enlightening them to this reality.


Ridiculous. Money is how capitalism and our entire system of law and order works; it is the only way we can measure anything. However, from a lot of this rhetoric, I think that you've bought into the Stern argument of "these black kids are thugs at 18 and we don't want them as role models for our society and we don't want them having anything. If they go to college we can clean them up a little bit and turn them into how White America wants to see them."



> I have to question your intelligence, period, if you honestly think a person with a below average intellect cannot receive a college degree. College, not Yale. Far and away the biggest determinant of completing a college degree is motivation and incentive, intellect does not play a leading role (to a point). Something you would know if you had done the prerequisite research.


Anyone can finish college, it's not difficult. I barely went to class and never was in danger of failing out. I was very careful to use "average" when prefacing everything in that paragraph because on average those who choose to go to college are probably going to be more intelligent than those who choose not to (or who don't choose at all and are just rejected everywhere). It's not the case in every instance of course, and I was arguing that very point earlier in this thread.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

EHL said:


> Link?


Here.



EHL said:


> And what percentage of them actually have the motive or incentive to do so?


The ones with the motivation to do so. If they lacked it they were never going to get a degree in the first place.



EHL said:


> Nope. Though correcting a minor error like that on an Internet message board is pretty sad.


If you hadn't made the error every time you spelled the word... :whistling:


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> THIS is what I would call incoherent.


Most of his posts are.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

EHL said:


> Link?


Is that a joke? Okay, well I'm going to go one further. A graduate of the University of Kansas School of Law will make $63k his first year, and likely never make more than $100k in any year when you adjust for inflation. The number 20 pick in the NBA (not really even average, but slightly below average for a first round pick) will make about $5 million in four years if his team picks up both team options in his 3rd and 4th year (very likely for a first round pick, so therefore average).

The first round pick will be up $5 million by the time the kid is done with undergrad. If the first round pick only stayed around for 2 years and made $2 million, he could then go to college, earn the average lifetime salary of a college graduate, and be slightly under $2 million ahead. You're blind if you don't see that.

Using the grad school starting salary, it will take someone with an advanced degree 79 years to get to that $5 million. If they go over the average and make $100k on average, it will still take 50 years.


----------



## Theonee (Dec 5, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> Says the guy who is terrible at basketball.


And what makes you an expert, if you are so good you should be working for some sports media, instead of rambling in some forums. Never question someone's intelligence, or knowledge, chances are you might be dumber than you think you are. I respond to ridiculous post with ridiculous response, and good post with good response.


----------



## Theonee (Dec 5, 2006)

HKF said:


> Wrong. It's a job. Nothing more, nothing less. If you have the ability to do the job, you should be allowed to pursue it.


True, but the employers set the rules and qualifications, otherwise the job seeker can always try to find job elsewhere.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> THIS is what I would call incoherent.


I suggest a Intro to Finance course. 



Nimreitz said:


> Ridiculous. Money is how capitalism and our entire system of law and order works; it is the only way we can measure anything. However, from a lot of this rhetoric, I think that you've bought into the Stern argument of "these black kids are thugs at 18 and we don't want them as role models for our society and we don't want them having anything. If they go to college we can clean them up a little bit and turn them into how White America wants to see them."


I'm sure David Stern is thinking to himself "If only I had listened to those like Nimreitz, the NBA wouldn't have been such an utter disaster of a financial entity during my tenure". 



Nimreitz said:


> Anyone can finish college, it's not difficult. I barely went to class and never was in danger of failing out. I was very careful to use "average" when prefacing everything in that paragraph because on average those who choose to go to college are probably going to be more intelligent than those who choose not to (or who don't choose at all and are just rejected everywhere). It's not the case in every instance of course, and I was arguing that very point earlier in this thread.


Your first sentence here seems to contradict your previous statement that "They're more knowledgeable not because of college, but because on average they have higher intelligences"? Though I sort of get what you're saying here. 



ehmunro said:


> Here.


I don't see where the issue of making money over a lifetime is addressed anywhere in that link. 




> The ones with the motivation to do so. If they lacked it they were never going to get a degree in the first place.


My point is that sometimes you don't know what's best for you intellectually or financially at age 18, and there's nothing wrong with forcing college on young kids who may not know any better, especially those who have been coddled from childhood due to their innate physical gifts. 



> If you hadn't made the error every time you spelled the word... :whistling:


Be it 2 or 3 times, still pretty sad however you slice it to correct it.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Never occurred to you that I have professional ambitions that exceed working in sports media?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Theonee said:


> True, but the employers set the rules and qualifications, otherwise the job seeker can always try to find job elsewhere.


That's why the NBA is different. They can't seek employment elsewhere.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

EHL said:


> I suggest a Intro to Finance course.
> 
> I'm sure David Stern is thinking to himself "If only I had listened to those like Nimreitz, the NBA wouldn't have been such an utter disaster of a financial entity during my tenure".


I'm not giving Stern advice on how to make more money. I'm giving him advice on how not to use racist assumptions on behalf of the public to screw young basketball players and marginally make more money for the league. And there's no evidence that an age limit or dress code is going to make the NBA any money anyway. The product on the court is what sells the league. When the product is terrible, no body watches, when the product is great, people watch.

Stern thinks 2 years of college will put a better product on the court, but there's no evidence of that. Do you realize that there were something like 7 rounds in the NBA Draft back in the early 80s? Look at some first rounds, and you will find scrub after scrub, bust after bust. And all those guys went to college.


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

there's a reason why high school kids can't go to the NFL. they weigh 200lbs. after about two or three hits by all-pro's they are pretty much DEAD.

now back onto the real topic: people are saying that the NBA fans are getting ripped off by having these phenoms stay in college an extra year or two. ripped off? do you not remember the influx of high school kids that didn't play until their 3rd or 4th years anyways? or the freshmen that choke? for every Tracy McGrady, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwight Howard, Al Jefferson and Lebron James, there will always be a Leon Smith, a Ndudi Ebi, a CJ Miles, a Ricky Sanchez, a Gerald Green, a Sebastian Telfair, a Robert Swift, a Shaun Livingston. 

And the players that break out after 3 seasons or more like Martell Webster, Travis Outlaw, Monta Ellis, Andrew Bynum, Louis Williams, Amir Johnson and other players that are still very very iffy Spencer Hawes, Tyrus Thomas and other freshmen. 

point being? everybody will get used. and like others have said, it's up to David Stern and the players union to agree on something. In the corporate world, it's called interns where potential employees show off their skill sets without being paid. Unfortunately the NBA does not have this system, and they are reaching out to the NCAA for a PAID INTERNSHIP.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Is that a joke? Okay, well I'm going to go one further. A graduate of the University of Kansas School of Law will make $63k his first year, and likely never make more than $100k in any year when you adjust for inflation. The number 20 pick in the NBA (not really even average, but slightly below average for a first round pick) will make about $5 million in four years if his team picks up both team options in his 3rd and 4th year (very likely for a first round pick, so therefore average).
> 
> The first round pick will be up $5 million by the time the kid is done with undergrad. If the first round pick only stayed around for 2 years and made $2 million, he could then go to college, earn the average lifetime salary of a college graduate, and be slightly under $2 million ahead. You're blind if you don't see that.
> 
> Using the grad school starting salary, it will take someone with an advanced degree 79 years to get to that $5 million. If they go over the average and make $100k on average, it will still take 50 years.


You don't get it; for an athlete, NCAA basketball is the experience component and college classes are the education component. i.e. NBA athletes get _both_ education and experience in college, while most normal people only get one. Your investment example is only partially correct; that is, while it's true that the school you go to can be very important for that first job, experience is far and away the leading long-term determinant of overall lifetime success. There's nothing wrong with forcing young kids to get an education, particularly from an individual standpoint. And again, there's precedent, see my post listing the players and Finals ratings examples.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

deanwoof said:


> now back onto the real topic: people are saying that the NBA fans are getting ripped off by having these phenoms stay in college an extra year or two. ripped off? do you not remember the influx of high school kids that didn't play until their 3rd or 4th years anyways? or the freshmen that choke? for every Tracy McGrady, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwight Howard, Al Jefferson and Lebron James, there will always be a Leon Smith, a Ndudi Ebi, a CJ Miles, a Ricky Sanchez, a Gerald Green, a Sebastian Telfair, a Robert Swift, a Shaun Livingston.


Isn't that irrelevant since that same "for every ____ there's a ____" argument applies to every type of player from high schooler to 4 year graduate?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

People say the veterans. Let me give you a laundry list of NBA veterans in the league right now.

Scot Pollard, Ira Newble, DJ Mbenga, Ryan Bowen, Eric Snow, Shavlik Randolph, Louis Amundson, Jake Voskuhl, Sean Marks, Eric Piatkowski. Why should we care about bums like this hanging onto NBA jobs when they contribute practically nothing on an NBA floor?

People keep saying the young players take spots from deserving talent, but these guys would be big fat zeros if they got anything more than garbage time. Yes, I know Mbenga has played for the Lakers, but face it he is horrific. If someone can explain to me why having a guy like Shavlik Randolph or Ryan Bowen is better than having Josh Smith and Dorell Wright, I will concede. 

Frankly, as long as guys like Moobs Scalabrine and Ira Newble are in the league, an agent limit will never make sense.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

deanwoof said:


> there's a reason why high school kids can't go to the NFL. they weigh 200lbs. after about two or three hits by all-pro's they are pretty much DEAD.
> 
> now back onto the real topic: people are saying that the NBA fans are getting ripped off by having these phenoms stay in college an extra year or two. ripped off? do you not remember the influx of high school kids that didn't play until their 3rd or 4th years anyways? or the freshmen that choke? for every Tracy McGrady, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dwight Howard, Al Jefferson and Lebron James, there will always be a Leon Smith, a Ndudi Ebi, a CJ Miles, a Ricky Sanchez, a Gerald Green, a Sebastian Telfair, a Robert Swift, a Shaun Livingston.
> 
> ...


High School Seniors who have declared for the draft have likely made more money than any other category of players who have declared for the draft and are more likely than any other category to be All Stars.

You are very hard pressed to find any player who declared out of high school and didn't make millions since KG broke the modern barrier. Off the top of my head I can think of James Lang as the only one. And a stupid, 6'8'', fat, center, was never going to college anyway, nor was he going to ever be a legit NBA player without years of working his *** off for nothing even beyond college had he gone. He was like a shorter, fatter, Derrick Caracter. By the way, the success of high schoolers who have declared for the draft is astounding, considering how many fantastic players have flamed out in the last 10 years, and how many very talented college players couldn't stick around.

EDIT: DeAngelo Collins is another one. He was not exactly the smartest kid in the world either.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> I'm not giving Stern advice on how to make more money. I'm giving him advice on how not to use racist assumptions on behalf of the public to screw young basketball players and marginally make more money for the league. And there's no evidence that an age limit or dress code is going to make the NBA any money anyway. The product on the court is what sells the league. When the product is terrible, no body watches, when the product is great, people watch.


The amount of depth and talent in the NBA, and the quality of the teams, is superior to the 1990's yet currently the NBA is unable to reproduce playoff ratings on par with that era despite wide expansion of the league worldwide. That is a major concern for Stern, and that is one reason he is instituting some of these rules. The fact that you think it's racist is, well, just pretty ridiculous. 



> Stern thinks 2 years of college will put a better product on the court, but there's no evidence of that. Do you realize that there were something like 7 rounds in the NBA Draft back in the early 80s? Look at some first rounds, and you will find scrub after scrub, bust after bust. And all those guys went to college.


And how is this any different then bust after bust after bust with guys straight out of HS; Gerald Green, Dajuan Wagner, Kwame Brown? Maybe a college education and some discipline and work ethic instilled during their teenage years would have yielded more psychologically ready players upon entrance into the NBA? That's certainly not out of the realm of possibility, nor is there any proof it will hurt the league to put players through college. It may even have the effect of improving the popularity of NCAA ball, which could have a self-reinforcing positive effect on the NBA.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I am not sure why people try to use 2nd round HS players to aid their argument. They mention guys like Taj McDavid, who wasn't even a ranked HS player at all or Ellis Richardson. These guys weren't even top 300 players in their respective HS classes. Then someone will say James Lang or Tony Key, two other 2nd round picks, but of course 2nd round picks aren't expected to make the NBA regardless of age, not to mention their grades were so bad, college wasn't an option without another three years of prep school.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

EHL said:


> The amount of depth and talent in the NBA, and the quality of the teams, is superior to the 1990's yet currently the NBA is unable to reproduce playoff ratings on par with that era despite wide expansion of the league worldwide. That is a major concern for Stern, and that is one reason he is instituting some of these rules. The fact that you think it's racist is, well, just pretty ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> And how is this any different then bust after bust after bust with guys straight out of HS; Gerald Green, Dajuan Wagner, Kwame Brown? Maybe a college education and some discipline and work ethic instilled during their teenage years would have yielded more psychologically ready players upon entrance into the NBA? That's certainly not out of the realm of possibility, nor is there any proof it will hurt the league to put players through college. It may even have the effect of improving the popularity of NCAA ball, which could have a self-reinforcing positive effect on the NBA.


Dajuan Wagner went to Memphis for a year big guy. Guess his year of super important college didn't do for him what you assume it does for everybody.


----------



## Chad (Jul 3, 2004)

HB said:


> Actually never mind, not going to drag this on longer than necessary


owned


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Dajuan Wagner went to Memphis for a year big guy. Guess his year of super important college didn't do for him what you assume it does for everybody.


Good call, but doesn't address the other straight-out-HS busts or anything else I said. Nor did I assume any such thing. Then again, Stern must be racist to want teenagers to have a college education.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

A college education is fine. It should be a choice however. If the NBA wants to make a rule that you have to go out of HS or go to college for two or three years I am fine with that. However, the best will turn pro and the not so best will realize they have to go to school and get educated. I don't see anything wrong with giving better options.

Even if the draft was changed to incorporate playing for the D-League with NBA teams holding your rights for two years. I would not have a problem with that.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

KennethTo said:


> http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7996718?MSNHPHMA
> 
> Good deal, now the future Derrick Rose's, Melo's an Oden' can be milked for money by their respective college teams. At the same time, get paid nothing.
> 
> God I hate the NCAA. I hope more star US players just go to Europe and get paid 5 million a year and just say **** off to college basketball.


if you feel that strongly about it, dont support the NCAA and don't watch college basketball, you get enough people to do that, maybe something will change.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

EHL said:


> I don't see where the issue of making money over a lifetime is addressed anywhere in that link.


That was a link to Michael McCann's study of the subject. You need to download the actual paper. I would think that common sense might tell you that the five million or so that the average NBA first round pick makes from his rookie deal would be more than the two million or so that the average grad makes over the course of a lifetime, but if you want it in black & white, Mike did the study.



EHL said:


> My point is that sometimes you don't know what's best for you intellectually or financially at age 18, and there's nothing wrong with forcing college on young kids who may not know any better, especially those who have been coddled from childhood due to their innate physical gifts.


There is absolutely something wrong with forcing college on them.



EHL said:


> Be it 2 or 3 times, still pretty sad however you slice it to correct it.


It was _every single time you used the word_.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

EHL said:


> And how is this any different then bust after bust after bust with guys straight out of HS; Gerald Green, Dajuan Wagner, Kwame Brown? Maybe a college education and some discipline and work ethic instilled during their teenage years would have yielded more psychologically ready players upon entrance into the NBA? That's certainly not out of the realm of possibility, nor is there any proof it will hurt the league to put players through college. It may even have the effect of improving the popularity of NCAA ball, which could have a self-reinforcing positive effect on the NBA.


There are a hundred college busts for every high school one.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Chad said:


> owned


Whats this character talking about?


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

we should at least acknowledge that many young kids are drafted not because of their current ability to play competitively in the nba, but because in 4 years they might be able to do so at a high level. some kids show a talent at age 15 that would make them high draft picks because teams want the next kobe/lebron/kg, or more importantly don't want to pass on the next kobe/lebron/kg. and because the financial risk is minimal (rookie scale), it's not that big of a gamble, and the reward stands to be huge if you're right. but there's no real minor league for them to develop. 

again, remove the rookie salary scale (and good luck removing that, as that takes cap money away from the guys already in the players union and gives it to guys not yet in the league), and the risk to making a mistake increases dramatically, and both parties have the motivation (and risk/reward tradeoff) to make the right call for the draft.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

All I will say is that when you have a policy being negotiated that hurts a third party(the players) and that party is not in anyway represented in that negotiation, then they are going to get royally screwed.

Shoe companies, college coaches, NCAA, and NBA represented.....someone is missing. Hey but they are trying to keep the kids from being exploited. :lol:

Also, I think the colleges are about to open themselves up to being sued as much as the NBA. The bveil of amateur athletics/student athletes is slowly being lifted and the realism of it being the NBA's partnered minor league system is about to come out. So far they have benefitted from the players not wanting to "rock the boat" and hurt their draft status but eventually there will come a point where it won't matter. 

*However, the genius of David Stern should be acknowledged. In less than a 20 years he has restructured the NBA's entire business model. I remember Glenn Robinson's rookie holdout still. The NBA has gone from paying rookies big time contracts right out of the gate to first getting a rookie salary scale in place and slowly going from three years to five years. Now, with the age limit, Stern has effectively minimized the cost associated with player development. From age 18-24, players salaries are next to nothing. There are no hold outs and plus there is now a built in measure that prevents even the best of the best salaries from getting out of control with the MAX contract and the dollar for dollar luxury tax.*


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Really the basketball players should demand the same treatment that the (largely caucasian) baseball and hockey players get from the NCAA. They should also demand a share of the marketing goldmine that the NCAA gets from exclusive marketing rights to athletes' names and images (this is the real big ticket item for the NCAA and why they're so anal about the basketball players).


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

EHL said:


> Huh? The studies done on those who go to college and those who don't are conclusive; those who go to college are on average much more knowledgeable, make far money over their lifetimes, and and live longer. You don't have to take upper division theology to be get something out of a college education; even basic breath requirements would do wonders for the intellectual curiosity of many NBA athletes and would probably do a lot for the NBA's image which is, I imagine, part of Stern's reasoning. This notion that just because _some_ schools are lenient with their athletes that it should nix the idea of mandatory college education entirely is pure asininity. Required college education is an attempt to further the interests of basketball in the U.S. and aboard, a GOOD thing for NBA fans. Not like there isn't precedent; basketball popularity was at its highest when the NBA's best players all went to 2-4 years college of college or were graduates (Jordan, Magic, Bird, Jabbar, Shaq, Dream, Ewing) with some even serving in defense, sacrificing years of their early 20's (Drob). The reasoning is logical and based on statistical evidence (Finals ratings, etc.).


Do a discounted cash flow of the potential earnings of a college graduate in law, liberal arts or even engineering, it will be substantially less than the amount a star basketball player could make would is drafted in the first round.

You are comparing the average employment of someone who doesn't graduate college, a NBA first round salary is significantly above average.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

ehmunro said:


> There are a hundred college busts for every high school one.


ok then those college busts would've been hs busts too except they never declared.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

You guys do know that not all college basketball teams can afford to pay their basketball athletes right? Sure a couple of them are raking in big dough, but I personally think the majority of schools can't afford to do such. It doesnt make sense for certain schools to pay their athletes, and the others don't.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HB said:


> You guys do know that not all college basketball teams can afford to pay their basketball athletes right? Sure a couple of them are raking in big dough, but I personally think the majority of schools can't afford to do such. It doesnt make sense for certain schools to pay their athletes, and the others don't.



All colleges aren't entitled to play in the big time.:angel:

Seriously, they can pay or not. If Oklahoma State can afford to pay Bill Self $3.5 million/year (more than most NBA coaches) than I am sure the NCAA and the NBA can find a way to compensate NBA players.

Heck, allow players to declare for the draft at any time but require them to go to school for 2 years. Then allow them to draw a stipend off of their rookie contract.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

OK State is one of the top programs in the country. I am talking about a no name team like Coppin state. How do you expect them to keep up with the type of money programs like UNC, Duke or OK State for that matter are bringing in? Should a team like that really be expected to pay its athletes the same way those big name teams will


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

knickstorm said:


> ok then those college busts would've been hs busts too except they never declared.


Who cares? The situation is self-governing. The fact that high schoolers wash out at a lower rate (again, limiting ourselves to first round consideration) is indicative that the players making the leap are the best of them. Even the guys that washout have generally done better for themselves, in purely economic terms. Gerald Green has already earned twice the average lifetime's salary for a college grad, and he'll probably be able to play overseas for a couple of years based on his slam dunk title. If he'd gone to college he'd've been lucky to get selected in the first round and would never have got the three years of guaranteed money, and might never have stuck on a roster to get his shot at an NBA Slam Dunk Title.

Honestly, if people are that worried, why aren't they worried about the international players, who have a much higher flame-out rate than the high schoolers? Hell, the draft rules are written to excuse international players from the rules that govern the selection of American ones. And why? They bust more often than high schoolers and there aren't many European Garnetts, Kobes, T-Macs, J-Neals, LBJs, et al running around.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> Who cares? The situation is self-governing. The fact that high schoolers wash out at a lower rate (again, limiting ourselves to first round consideration) is indicative that the players making the leap are the best of them. Even the guys that washout have generally done better for themselves, in purely economic terms. Gerald Green has already earned twice the average lifetime's salary for a college grad, and he'll probably be able to play overseas for a couple of years based on his slam dunk title. If he'd gone to college he'd've been lucky to get selected in the first round and would never have got the three years of guaranteed money, and might never have stuck on a roster to get his shot at an NBA Slam Dunk Title.
> 
> *Honestly, if people are that worried, why aren't they worried about the international players, who have a much higher flame-out rate than the high schoolers? Hell, the draft rules are written to excuse international players from the rules that govern the selection of American ones. And why? They bust more often than high schoolers and there aren't many European Garnetts, Kobes, T-Macs, J-Neals, LBJs, et al running around*.



Dont you think the owners actually prefer it that way though?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

MemphisX said:


> All colleges aren't entitled to play in the big time.:angel:
> 
> Seriously, they can pay or not. If Oklahoma State can afford to pay Bill Self $3.5 million/year (more than most NBA coaches) than I am sure the NCAA and the NBA can find a way to compensate NBA players.
> 
> Heck, allow players to declare for the draft at any time but require them to go to school for 2 years. Then allow them to draw a stipend off of their rookie contract.


Jesus, how about they just let the kids collect their endorsement money and pay the kids for all the loot they make off merchandising them?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> Dont you think the owners actually prefer it that way though?


The owners prefer international players to bust out at a much higher rate than high schoolers? Wha?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> The owners prefer international players to bust out at a much higher rate than high schoolers? Wha?


Nah I meant more in terms of how it affects their wallets in the long run.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Given that internationals have the highest bust rate, aren't they, in theory, wasting more money on international players?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

True, good point.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Maybe Bill Gates should have been forced to stay in school rather than leave early to start Microsoft?


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

The following players are the reason why I support the age limit. Even though some of these players eventually developed, while some are still trying to find themselves. While others are out the league or are about to be out the league. 

Sebastian Telfair
Gerald Green
Kwame Brown
Jonathon Bender
Al Harrington
Ndudi Ebi
Kendrick Perkins
Travis Outlaw
James Lang
Tyson Chandler
Eddy Curry
Desaga Diop
Robert Swift
JR Smith
Martell Webster
Andrew Bynum
CJ Miles
Ricky Sanchez
Louis Williams
Andrey Blathce
Amir Johnson


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> Maybe Bill Gates should have been forced to stay in school rather than leave early to start Microsoft?



What does that have to do with anything? If these guys want to go and make money, they can go to any of the other professional leagues. The NBA is a business, they can set whatever mandate they want.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> Given that internationals have the highest bust rate, aren't they, in theory, wasting more money on international players?


yes, but you don't hear people running around complaining about how Yi Jianlian is ruining the league because it's seeing young black kids get rich that really pisses people off.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

essbee said:


> yes, but you don't hear people running around complaining about how Yi Jianlian is ruining the league because it's seeing young black kids get rich that really pisses people off.


NBA.com lists Yi has 21. Thats about the same age most of these guys would be if they stayed 2 years in college


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

eddymac said:


> The following players are the reason why I support the age limit. Even though some of these players eventually developed, while some are still trying to find themselves. While others are out the league or are about to be out the league.
> 
> Sebastian Telfair
> Gerald Green
> ...


At least 9 of those guys contribute something to their respective teams - your list sucks.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

HB said:


> What does that have to do with anything? If these guys want to go and make money, they can go to any of the other professional leagues. The NBA is a business, they can set whatever mandate they want.


Just wanted to add my own stupid comment to the growing pile of dumb comments already posted in here. 

The thing is, there is no reason to set whatever mandate they want, if they keep pushing with age limits they will reach a point where they can face legal action. besides, they can't set mandates however they please, because they have to be agreed upon by the player's union.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

eddymac said:


> The following players are the reason why I support the age limit. Even though some of these players eventually developed, while some are still trying to find themselves. While others are out the league or are about to be out the league.


Sebastian Telfair - still in the league, capable backup point (same age as Rondo, Farmar and Lowry)
Gerald Green - out of the league
Kwame Brown - a bust, but no different than Todd Fuller busting and will still be in the league
Jonathon Bender - chronically injured. I am not sure what college would have done for him, if he keeps getting hurt.
Al Harrington - Al should have went to college? Why?
Ndudi Ebi - Guy was a bust and out of the league. Never showed any NBA skills. Taken at the end of the first round.
Kendrick Perkins - starter on the Celtics
Travis Outlaw - 6th man on the Blazers
James Lang - second round pick? Who expected him to shine.
Tyson Chandler - starting center in the NBA
Eddy Curry - starting center in the NBA
Desaga Diop - solid backup center
Robert Swift - injury prone, I am sure he would be happy getting hurt in college and never playing NBA ball.
JR Smith - this guy would have benefited from college why? He is from a stable home life, he's just a knucklehead. 
Martell Webster - starter or 6th man on the Blazers
Andrew Bynum - I am sure Lakers fans would love that. 
CJ Miles - another 2nd round pick.
Ricky Sanchez - this guy hasn't even played a minute of NBA ball.
Louis Williams - one of the best bench guys in the league
Andrey Blathce - on his way to being a double-double guy if he could start.
Amir Johnson - fought from being a 2nd round pick, into a stable NBA career on one of the deepest teams in league.

So if you want to call Ebi a bust go ahead. Sanchez has been playing minor league ball since 2005. He will probably never make the NBA. However, he chose not to go to Memphis probably because his grades were horrific. James Lang is another one. Late 2nd round pick. His grades were so horrible, he wouldn't have even been eligible to play at Louisville and he hasn't even played in an NBA game. 

Bender and Swift suffered injury after injury. Seems pretty common that, that happens every now and then. Look at Grant Hill and Penny Hardaway. 

CJ Miles is going to have to leave Utah, not because he can't play, but because Andre Kirilenko is making max money and the Jazz will not have the kind of money to re-sign Millsap and Deron first.

I could do the same thing for guys who stay 4 years in college in the last 10 years and the recurring theme would be, it's not an age thing. It's a talent thing and there is no science to the draft. No one could have known Jay Williams would be as stupid as he was and end his career riding a motorcycle. Meanwhile Monta Ellis comes out of HS and is exactly what the NBA should want in a ball player.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

> New age limit in the NBA? Don't count on it
> Erroneous reports go out that the league is looking to require two years of college. The age rule is expected to remain at 19.
> April 8, 2008
> 
> ...



link


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

essbee said:


> yes, but you don't hear people running around complaining about how Yi Jianlian is ruining the league because it's seeing young black kids get rich that really pisses people off.


Oh, come now, Yi Jianlian is my age. :bsmile:


----------



## seligbud (Apr 7, 2008)

The NBA can't just set 'any limit they want.' The rule used to be that a player couldn't be drafted until his college class graduated. You can make pretty much the same arguments for that as any arbitrary age limit, but it was overturned by the Supreme Court in 1971 if the player could show that he or his family was facing hardship by(arbitrarily) not being allowed to play. I'm sure plenty of top prospects could meet that standard today, though who knows what the court might decide today or what standard/reasoning they might use. 

The point is you're operating on pretty shaky ground when you start trying to keep people out of a profession for spurious reasons. Just because the NBA or even the NBAPA might agree to some restriction on entry doesn't make it proper or even legal


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

they're 18+, which means they're adults.. why should the NBA force these legally "adults" to go to college? 

im thinkin stern is getting some sort of compensation for going along with the new CBA.


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

HKF said:


> Sebastian Telfair - still in the league, capable backup point (same age as Rondo, Farmar and Lowry)
> Gerald Green - out of the league
> Kwame Brown - a bust, but no different than Todd Fuller busting and will still be in the league
> Jonathon Bender - chronically injured. I am not sure what college would have done for him, if he keeps getting hurt.
> ...





Tragedy said:


> At least 9 of those guys contribute something to their respective teams - your list sucks.




College would have benefitted all those players that I listed. Plus do you guys read? I said that some of those players either developed, still trying to find themselves or are busts. So quite frankly that applies to everybody on that list.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

eddymac said:


> College would have benefitted all those players that I listed. Plus do you guys read? I said that some of those players either developed, still trying to find themselves or are busts. So quite frankly that applies to everybody on that list.


No it wouldn't. Jonathan Bender & Robert Swift might never have had NBA careers at all due to injury problems. Next to none of them would have been helped by waiting to enter. if they weren't good enough to make it, college would have exposed them (hello, Mr. Green, we're talking to you) and kept them out of the league. No amount of college was going to help an overweight 6'8" center that plays no defense turn into an NBA player (hello, Mr. Lang).


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> No it wouldn't. Jonathan Bender & Robert Swift might never have had NBA careers at all due to injury problems. Next to none of them would have been helped by waiting to enter. if they weren't good enough to make it, college would have exposed them (hello, Mr. Green, we're talking to you) and kept them out of the league. No amount of college was going to help an overweight 6'8" center that plays no defense turn into an NBA player (hello, Mr. Lang).


That's all speculation though, how do you know how Gerald Green would have performed in college. It would have given him an oppurtunity to develop the fundamentals he currently lacks.


----------



## Tiz (May 9, 2005)

Read the first few pages of this thread and just finding myself laughing a bit. Gave up after about the third page of reading through everything.

As others have stated this is an issue for the league and the players union to figure out. Just curious why so many fans would be up in arms over setting an age limit. If it helps protect the integrity of the game (which is ultimately a product) then so be it. If it helps save the teams money and frustration so be it. More importantly if it helps protect some of these kids coming into the league all the more important.

I for one am of the mindset that, regardless how much money you make, nothing beats an education that will last you the rest of your life. Yes colleges make money off the sports, but so does the NBA, the networks, newspaper and magazine publishers, clothing and show manufacturers. The list goes on and on, everyone wants a piece of the pie.

I think setting age requirements for the league is a good thing. Whether the players are going to college, spending time in the DL, over in Europe or in a "minor" league. It helps to ensure that once a player gets to the NBA that they are of the highest level of player on the planet and more importantly that they are mature enough to handle the pressures that this league brings (both mentally and physically).

Yes some players have come into the league at a young and been successful. Everyone will point out Lebron (conspiracy theories aside I am still not convinced that is his real age), since he is the an easy choice. You can add Kobe and Amare into that list. Now remember though Kobe didn't start putting up "Kobe-like" stats until his third season. Amare had a decent rookie season, but he may not have seen the minutes he did if not for injuries at PF/C positions on the Suns that year. I am sure there are some other players you can make arguments about.

But for every Lebron, Kobe and Amare how many Kwame's, Darko's and Darius' are there that were just not mentally or physically ready for the NBA game.

Everyone's favorite whipping boy is Kwame in this argument. Here is a kid who came in and helped ruin MJ's image among other things. Over the course of his first 7 years in the league has made (just in NBA salary) in the neighborhood of $42million. Most people on this board will work a lifetime and only see a fraction of that amount. And in that time Kwame put together career stats of of 7.5pts, 5.7rebs with 1 asst and just under 1 steal and 1 block per game. This puts him stat wise right in the realm of Bo Outlaw (don't get me wrong I like Bo Outlaw and will take him as my 12th man any day).

Would spending some time in college or the DL been good for Kwame. One will never know. But it could have given an indication if this kid was ready for the big leagues. Was he mature enough? Was he physically capable of meeting the demands? Would have saved fans, management and players a lot headaches that is for sure. To top it all off of course is the fact that his bloated contract gets thrown into a deal to land Gasol with the Lakers. Please note that Gasol was taken #3 in the same draft. And Memphis will get what??? Some cap space??

Another way to look at things. Take this years rookies. ESPN just had the list of Top50 rookies update today. Look at the list and the age of each of those player (here are the top 10 in ranked order):

Durant = 19
Horford = 21
Scola = 27
Thornton = 24
Young = 19
Noah = 23
Landry = 24
Moon = 27
Navarro = 27
Stuckey = 21

You get Durant and Young in there at 19, everyone else is 21 and older with Scola, Navarro and Moon coming in at 27 (after years overseas). So what does that tell me if I wanted to make an assumption. That nearly 80% of the top rookies in the league this year are over 21. And that more than half completed college or an equivalant amount of time in "minor" leagues.

So what if the kid has to wait 2 more years to start making 7 or 8 figures per year. Over the course of an NBA career they will more than make up for it. And while they may not enjoy the money playing college ball, they sure can playing in the DL and from endorsements.

Also would help the image of the DL by getting some more talent in that pool as well. Which not only allows the league to develop players but also brings the professional game to much smaller markets (Ft. Wayne, Tulsa, Austin, Albuquerque, etc). I am sure fans of these teams would love to see an influx of young talent.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

eddymac said:


> That's all speculation though, how do you know how Gerald Green would have performed in college. It would have given him an oppurtunity to develop the fundamentals he currently lacks.


For one it would have meant a year off from basketball as he was academically ineligible to play. Green's problem is that he's fundamentally stupid. Once he'd finally managed to get the grades to get on the court at all, he would have gone from hot prospect to possible second rounder, and there would have been no guaranteed contract. He's earned more than $4 million as an NBAer, and can work on his game in the D League if he wants, or exploit his NBA Slam Dunk title and sign a contract to play overseas for a few years. Economically speaking there's zero chance that he'd be better off in college.


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> For one it would have meant a year off from basketball as he was academically ineligible to play. Green's problem is that he's fundamentally stupid. Once he'd finally managed to get the grades to get on the court at all, he would have gone from hot prospect to possible second rounder, and there would have been no guaranteed contract. He's earned more than $4 million as an NBAer, and can work on his game in the D League if he wants, or exploit his NBA Slam Dunk title and sign a contract to play overseas for a few years. Economically speaking there's zero chance that he'd be better off in college.


Even if he was acedemically ineligible he could have still worked on his game else where like you mentioned. Going overseas, D league etc. Either way he wasn't ready to be in the NBA and you can at least agree with that.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Tiz said:


> But for every Lebron, Kobe and Amare how many Kwame's, Darko's and Darius' are there that were just not mentally or physically ready for the NBA game.


For every Brandon Roy there are how many Marcus Banks? (It's much higher because the bust rate is higher for college players than high school ones.)



Tiz said:


> So what if the kid has to wait 2 more years to start making 7 or 8 figures per year. Over the course of an NBA career they will more than make up for it.


Economically speaking you're completely wrong. If they're not good enough to play in the NBA, then getting exposed in college will ruin their earnings potential, not enhance it. If they are good enough then every year that delays their entry costs them millions in salary and endorsement money and delays their reaching the big money of a free agent deal. Economically speaking every year they wait (so long as the rookie salary scale is in place, kflo is completely right in that if they ended the rookie scale more players would go to college) costs them millions that won't be made up over the course of their career.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

eddymac said:


> Even if he was acedemically ineligible he could have still worked on his game else where like you mentioned. Going overseas, D league etc. Either way he wasn't ready to be in the NBA and you can at least agree with that.


Except that he wouldn't have $4 million in earnings. He'd be in no demand overseas as a high schooler not smart enough to go to college, and the D-League pay would have been squat. Going straight to the NBA was the best thing that ever happened to him. As a result he'll have a career playing basketball that might never have developed if he had to go the college route. He might have taken a Jamario Moon style wandering career through the minors, Globetrotters and overseas before arriving as a minimum salary player in his late 20s, but now he can do the same thing, only with a ****load of money in the bank.


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

I asked this question earlier in this thread and no one responded to it. But the NFL has a three year rule and everyone except Maurice Clarett has no problems with it. So whats wrong if the NBA institutes a two year rule? Is two years really that long of a time to wait. It's not like they are asking the guys to play four years.



ehmunro said:


> Except that he wouldn't have $4 million in earnings. He'd be in no demand overseas as a high schooler not smart enough to go to college, and the D-League pay would have been squat. Going straight to the NBA was the best thing that ever happened to him. As a result he'll have a career playing basketball that might never have developed if he had to go the college route. He might have taken a Jamario Moon style wandering career through the minors, Globetrotters and overseas before arriving as a minimum salary player in his late 20s, but now he can do the same thing, only with a ****load of money in the bank.


Yeah he made more money, but was he *READY* to be in the NBA? No so some sort of development would have needed to take place before he should have been allowed to enter the league. It's a way for the NBA to protect themselves from players like Green.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

eddymac said:


> I asked this question earlier in this thread and no one responded to it. But the NFL has a three year rule and everyone except Maurice Clarett has no problems with it. So whats wrong if the NBA institutes a two year rule? Is two years really that long of a time to wait. It's not like they are asking the guys to play four years.


The courts accepted the NFL's physical maturity argument. The NFL rule exists because, allegedly, 18 and 19 year olds can't take the pounding in football (and I thought I answered this earlier). Not because they lack skills and not because the NFL has the right to say no arbitrarily (the Spencer Haywood case is still the legal precedent) but because they're physically unable to perform. That certainly isn't the case in basketball. 



eddymac said:


> Yeah he made more money, but was he *READY* to be in the NBA? No so some sort of development would have needed to take place before he should have been allowed to enter the league. It's a way for the NBA to protect themselves from players like Green.


The NBA is very easily able to protect themselves from players like Green, they can simply not draft them. No one forced Boston to draft Green, in fact to do it they broke a draft promise to Monta Ellis (another high schooler). Had they taken Houston's offer to switch picks they'd've threatened 70 wins this year. And if the NBA needs to be "protected" from players like Gerald Green, why aren't we worried about protecting it from players like Primoz Brezec, Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Jiri Welsch, Zarko Cabarkapa, Zoran Planinic, Pavel Podkolizine, Viktor Khryapa, Sergei Monya, Fran Vasquez, and Yaroslav Korolev?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

But ehmunro at least going by the last two or three years, the NBA's infatuation with international players seems to be dwindling.


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

> The NBA is very easily able to protect themselves from players like Green, they can simply not draft them.


That's why the NBA institutated the age limit to protect teams from themselves. So that these GM's cant draft those players. 





> why aren't we worried about protecting it from players like Primoz Brezec, Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Jiri Welsch, Zarko Cabarkapa, Zoran Planinic, Pavel Podkolizine, Viktor Khryapa, Sergei Monya, Fran Vasquez, and Yaroslav Korolev?


This also applies to some of those Euro players as well. The excuse for them is that they were Pro's at a young age.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> But ehmunro at least going by the last two or three years, the NBA's infatuation with international players seems to be dwindling.


Well, jesus, doesn't that list I posted above make it obvious why? :bsmile:



eddymac said:


> That's why the NBA institutated the age limit to protect teams from themselves. So that these GM's cant draft those players.


Paraphrasing... "The market dictates that there can never be an idiot-proof product. Because when you make a product more idiot proof, the market producers bigger and better idiots until equilibrium is achieved."

Here's a sample of the awesome, NBA-ready college talent drafted with the first fifteen picks from 2000-2006: Marcus Fizer, DeMarr Johnson, Stro' Swift, Chris Mihm, Jerome Moiso, Mateen Cleeves, Courtney Alexander, Jason Collier, Eddie Griffin, Rodney White, Kedrick Brown, Dajuan Wagner, Jared Jeffries, Melvin Ely, Marcus Haislip, Fred Jones, Stephen Hunter, Mike Sweetney, Marcus Banks, Reece Gaines, Rafael Araujo, Luke Jackson, Ike Diogu, Antoine Wright, Adam Morrison, Shelden Williams, Patrick Olo'Bryant, and J.J. Redick. I had to limit myself to the top 15 because a full list of first round college busts simply takes too long to type out. :bsmile:


----------



## Tiz (May 9, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> Economically speaking you're completely wrong. If they're not good enough to play in the NBA, then getting exposed in college will ruin their earnings potential, not enhance it. If they are good enough then every year that delays their entry costs them millions in salary and endorsement money and delays their reaching the big money of a free agent deal. Economically speaking every year they wait (so long as the rookie salary scale is in place, kflo is completely right in that if they ended the rookie scale more players would go to college) costs them millions that won't be made up over the course of their career.


Economically I am completely wrong??? I just don't quite get your comment on that one.

And some of what you are saying in response just doesn't quite make sense to me at least.

If they are not good enough for the NBA then they shouldn't have been in there and saved there teams the 8 to 10 million in the rookie contracts. College or time in the minors would have helped weed some of these folks out. 

All you seem to be hung up on is the money that the individual players are making. Which are huge sums of money. Just because you are 6'11" you should be guaranteed to make million's of dollars?

What about the integrity of the sport and the league? What about the overall quality of play? Those to me are much more important that what some 18 year old kid can make per year.

College hurts the earning potential? Did 3 years at LSU hurt Shaq's? Did 4 years at Wake Forest hurt Duncan's? 4 years at Santa Clara hurt Nash? 3 years at UConn hurt Ray Allen? Let's see Shaq has earned over $230 million dollars in NBA salary, Duncan and Allen over $100 million and Nash at a paltry $60million.

You are talking about sums of money that you couldn't even spend in a lifetime (unless of course you are Latrell Sprewell who over the course of his NBA career made $96mil). These players earn more on their interest income than 99% of population makes in actual salary.

So the difference between starting at 18 or 20 (or 21 or 22) is the difference between making 75 million over your NBA career instead of 85 million? Do you see how that sounds?

And if you are NOT good enough to be making that kind of money in the league than why were you drafted in the first place at such a young age and guaranteed such large sums of money.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Well, jesus, doesn't that list I posted above make it obvious why? :bsmile:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You know, no one is going to respond to this, the number of busts that come from college backgrounds is higher than high schoolers. If a players has the tools to be in the NBA, then it's better for them to be in the NBA and adapt to the quickness, length and athletic ability of NBA players.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

eddymac said:


> College would have benefitted all those players that I listed. Plus do you guys read? I said that some of those players either developed, still trying to find themselves or are busts. So quite frankly that applies to everybody on that list.


What a joke. Even the guys that took longer to develop were making money in the NBA. They developed AND made money. Had they stayed in college for 3 years they wouldn't have made a cent, then they would have come into the league and made rookie scale for at least 4 years. Instead Amir Johnson got to sign a free agent deal 2 years after graduating from high school. I'm sure he's crying himself to sleep right now.

And by the way, he can go to college whenever he wants to because he's a frickin millionaire now.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> For every Brandon Roy there are how many Marcus Banks? (It's much higher because the bust rate is higher for college players than high school ones.)


exactly.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Tragedy said:


> Maybe Bill Gates should have been forced to stay in school rather than leave early to start Microsoft?


Larry Ellison an Steve Jobs too...


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Tiz said:


> I for one am of the mindset that, regardless how much money you make, nothing beats an education that will last you the rest of your life. Yes colleges make money off the sports, but so does the NBA, the networks, newspaper and magazine publishers, clothing and show manufacturers. The list goes on and on, everyone wants a piece of the pie.


You're an a-hole who doesn't speak for everybody. Not everyone wants to go to college. I'm sure Mark Zuckerberg sheds hundreds of tears every day because he didn't finish his valuable education and instead sold 1.6% of facebook to Microsoft for $240 million. Poor Mark. He can go back any damn time he wants. You can get an education at any time, but you don't always have a window to make millions. Just like the creator of facebook, kids declaring out of high school struck while the iron is hot and set themselves up for life. Because they're young and black we have a problem with it, but everyone lauds Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg's stories and how they dropped out of school to pursue their professional interests.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

HB said:


> What does that have to do with anything? If these guys want to go and make money, they can go to any of the other professional leagues. The NBA is a business, they can set whatever mandate they want.


these guys are capable of performing though and better players that current players in the league, that's why they should be able to be drafted and played... additionally antitrust exemptions are given to sports leagues/unions. Denying a lebron james from playing in the NBA, when he is more qualified than 95% of the current players, because he didn't prop up the check book of Ohio's athletic department is completely arbitrary and unjustified

hey by your logic, Citibank can say we won't black people or asian people, they are private, they can do whatever they want


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Tiz said:


> Economically I am completely wrong??? I just don't quite get your comment on that one.
> 
> And some of what you are saying in response just doesn't quite make sense to me at least.
> 
> ...


You are making the argument why an age limit makes sense for NBA teams. No one will dispute that. We're saying that it is unfair to the players who want to get drafted who are barred by an arbitrary age limit.

Eddy Mac, just to let you know when the age limit was temporarily lifted in the wake of the first Clarett decision, Mike Williams and a couple other players also declared. It's not that Clarett is the only guy who has a problem with the age limit, it's just that he was the only one willing to rock the boat and test it at substantial risk to his career.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Tiz said:


> Economically I am completely wrong??? I just don't quite get your comment on that one.
> 
> And some of what you are saying in response just doesn't quite make sense to me at least.
> 
> If they are not good enough for the NBA then they shouldn't have been in there and saved there teams the 8 to 10 million in the rookie contracts. College or time in the minors would have helped weed some of these folks out.


That's great for the teams, not so good for the players that everyone wants to force into college for their own good.



Tiz said:


> All you seem to be hung up on is the money that the individual players are making. Which are huge sums of money. Just because you are 6'11" you should be guaranteed to make million's of dollars?


If someone _offers_ me millions of dollars am I duty-bound to turn it down because I think I might not be worth the coin?



Tiz said:


> College hurts the earning potential? Did 3 years at LSU hurt Shaq's? Did 4 years at Wake Forest hurt Duncan's? 4 years at Santa Clara hurt Nash? 3 years at UConn hurt Ray Allen? Let's see Shaq has earned over $230 million dollars in NBA salary, Duncan and Allen over $100 million and Nash at a paltry $60million.


Well, at this point you're appealing to players who started playing prior to the rookie salary scale, when players could sign big money deals from the getgo. _However_, had Shaq declared after his freshman year he would have gone no later than second, and he missed two years of salary and two years of endorsements as a result. So, in fact, three years of college did reduce his overall earnings. (The same goes for Allen & Duncan, the human body only has so many years of pro basketball in it, every year that you do it for free is one year less that you get paid to do it, and one less year that you collect endorsement money.)

Now, fast forward to the last two CBAs, the days of the rookie salary scale. Prior to rookie scale players were able to negotiate deals with early opt-outs so that they could get the big money early, now players have to wait four years (at least) before free agency. So, yes, the extra delays in reaching free agency do put a damper on the lifetime earnings of basketball players.



Tiz said:


> You are talking about sums of money that you couldn't even spend in a lifetime (unless of course you are Latrell Sprewell who over the course of his NBA career made $96mil). These players earn more on their interest income than 99% of population makes in actual salary.
> 
> So the difference between starting at 18 or 20 (or 21 or 22) is the difference between making 75 million over your NBA career instead of 85 million? Do you see how that sounds?


So, what you're saying is that the proof that a player's lifetime earnings aren't effected by delayed entry is that they might lose as little as ten million dollars over the course of a career? Let me guess, you're a poli-sci major, right? And what about guys whose careers are foreshortened by injuries? Would they somehow have been better off getting injured for free? Would Jonathan Bender have been better off with two years of college? He would never have even reached his free agent deal due to the injury miseries. Getting injured in college would have prevented him from being a top 10 pick and even reduced the value of his rookie deal. Rather than making some $30 million over the course of a career he would have been lucky to make a quarter of that.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Here's a sample of the awesome, NBA-ready college talent drafted with the first fifteen picks from 2000-2006: Marcus Fizer, DeMarr Johnson, Stro' Swift, Chris Mihm, Jerome Moiso, Mateen Cleeves, Courtney Alexander, Jason Collier, Eddie Griffin, Rodney White, Kedrick Brown, Dajuan Wagner, Jared Jeffries, Melvin Ely, Marcus Haislip, Fred Jones, Stephen Hunter, Mike Sweetney, Marcus Banks, Reece Gaines, Rafael Araujo, Luke Jackson, Ike Diogu, Antoine Wright, Adam Morrison, Shelden Williams, Patrick Olo'Bryant, and J.J. Redick. I had to limit myself to the top 15 because a full list of first round college busts simply takes too long to type out. :bsmile:


^^^ THREAD OVER!!

Until someone can state with facts that going to college seriously increases the chances of players being better, you cannot keep using that argument. The funny thing is, most of those guys listed wouldn't have even gotten to the NBA from high school. 

Making players stay longer is not for the players like David Stern and the NCAA would have you believe.  It creates hype for the players in the NCAA and a fan base that will follow that player to the NBA. Coming out of High School it's a few years before that really happens. It has nothing to do with fundamentals, schooling, or maturity.

I mean really, let's think about this. Some of the most immature people in this country can be found on college campuses. Fraternities anyone? It's also about protecting GMs and giving them time to evaluate talent.

And lastly, these are young black men we're talking about. Everyone is jealous of the money they make in the NBA, yet there's bigger contracts in baseball, and no one complains about young athletes in any other sport - so long as it's not too black.


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

Tiz said:


> Economically I am completely wrong??? I just don't quite get your comment on that one.
> 
> And some of what you are saying in response just doesn't quite make sense to me at least.
> 
> If they are not good enough for the NBA then they shouldn't have been in there and saved there teams the 8 to 10 million in the rookie contracts. College or time in the minors would have helped weed some of these folks out.


So you're blaming the kids for the bad job done by the GM and the scouting teams? They work them out IN PERSON! If the kid isn't ready for NBA level, don't draft him! It's not like they're tricking them by sending in a video of them playing against a bunch of 10 year olds wearing mustaches on 8ft hoops! (which is what I would do if I were to send a draft tape into the league)


> All you seem to be hung up on is the money that the individual players are making. Which are huge sums of money. Just because you are 6'11" you should be guaranteed to make million's of dollars?


No, you have to be at least 7'5 for that.


> What about the integrity of the sport and the league? What about the overall quality of play? Those to me are much more important that what some 18 year old kid can make per year.


Yes, why have LeBron in the league when you can have Darko instead? Brilliant.


> College hurts the earning potential? Did 3 years at LSU hurt Shaq's? Did 4 years at Wake Forest hurt Duncan's? 4 years at Santa Clara hurt Nash? 3 years at UConn hurt Ray Allen? Let's see Shaq has earned over $230 million dollars in NBA salary, Duncan and Allen over $100 million and Nash at a paltry $60million.


Yes, for everyone other than Nash. If they had entered the league sooner, they would have made more money. It's simple math. The sooner you start working the sooner you start making money.


> You are talking about sums of money that you couldn't even spend in a lifetime (unless of course you are Latrell Sprewell who over the course of his NBA career made $96mil). These players earn more on their interest income than 99% of population makes in actual salary.


That can be millions. So you are for an age limit in Hollywood as well? I mean, why should they get all that money for one movie? Oh yeah, because the star's earning power for the employing company is a little bit higher than your earning power for your company.


> So the difference between starting at 18 or 20 (or 21 or 22) is the difference between making 75 million over your NBA career instead of 85 million? Do you see how that sounds?


We don't want you to work for us until you've worked for at least one year for free and we'll probably make million from your hard work. But you'll get a great education like Basketball 110 and English 101 and some hard science classes like Geology 101 or Math 114. If you can't pass by yourself, then we'll just talk to the teacher for you. However, if you get injured during that year, you get nothing, not even that free education we promised you! 

See how that sounds?


> And if you are NOT good enough to be making that kind of money in the league than why were you drafted in the first place at such a young age and guaranteed such large sums of money.


Once again, blame the employer for hiring not the employee for getting a job.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

A college scholarship is only a year agreement that is renewable for the duration of the players stay there (usually four years, five if redshirted). If a player does get hurt, a coach can revoke that scholarship and give it to a player that can contribute. This is has happened many times in the past. Heck, it just happened at Clemson to a kid who was taking care of his little brother to get him out of foster care. Tommy Bowden pulls his scholarship and the kid has to find another school to go to. All so he can find another running back among the other 10 he already has.

If you think colleges give a crap about these kids you are sadly mistaken.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

HKF said:


> Heck, it just happened at Clemson to a kid who was taking care of his little brother to get him out of foster care. Tommy Bowden pulls his scholarship and the kid has to find another school to go to. All so he can find another running back among the other 10 he already has.


That kid got his scholarship pulled? Wow. Wow.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

I agree players need to stay in college longer, but I don't like forcing them to. I strongly disagree with compensating them beyond scholarships, but there needs to be an incentive beyond education to stay because of the money being left on the table.

In the next CBA, they don't need to address age limits, they need to address the rookie pay scale.

Scale it so that the potential contract you can get depends on how many years you played college ball. Make it a very small contract for freshman, make it a potential max contract for seniors who go in the top 5.

This way, if a star player leaves as a freshman and signs a 4 year 10 million dollar deal. He's actually making less money and getting his first big contract later than if he would have stayed until his senior year and signed a 15 million dollar deal.

I also wouldn't be opposed to doing away with early entry altogether. Let the guys who are ready or almost ready for the NBA out of high school go to a USA Basketball Acadamy or something where they can train all day and give college basketball back to the actual students.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

How about the NCAA just treat the basketball players like the hockey and baseball players? Is that really too much to ask?


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

MLKG said:


> I agree players need to stay in college longer, but I don't like forcing them to. I strongly disagree with compensating them beyond scholarships, but there needs to be an incentive beyond education to stay because of the money being left on the table.
> 
> In the next CBA, they don't need to address age limits, they need to address the rookie pay scale.
> 
> ...


Would NEVER happen. Why do you think they need to stay in college longer?

Why do people think staying in college longer magically makes ALL players better?


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> That kid got his scholarship pulled? Wow. Wow.



There was a write up on it last month:



> But that happy tale took a disheartening turn earlier this week when Clemson announced that McElerathbey's scholarship would not be renewed even though he has two more years of eligibility remaining. Contrary to popular belief, football scholarships are not guaranteed four-year rides, but year-to-year deals that can be pulled at the school's discretion.
> 
> Cold-blooded? Heartless? You bet. Having one more scholarship to hand out isn't going to change Clemson's program in any significant way, but losing it certainly could change Ray Ray and Fahmarr's lives.
> 
> Ray Ray now has the choice of transferring to another school to finish his eligibility (if he can find one willing to offer him a scholarship), or he could finish his degree requirements over the summer, enroll in graduate school at Clemson and accept the school's offer to be a graduate assistant. Although Clemson points out that McElrathbey would still be on scholarship, the stipend would pay for tuition and books only, not room and board. Contrary to the original news reports, Clemson now says that the scholarship and stipend would cover everything.


link


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Tragedy said:


> Would NEVER happen. Why do you think they need to stay in college longer?
> 
> Why do people think staying in college longer magically makes ALL players better?


Because players who arent ready to play in the league are only going to rot on someones bench anyways. Maybe this might be an exaggeration, but most of the players that get drafted go to the elite programs. Nothing wrong with them learning how to play the game from some of the best coaches in college. NBA coaches should not be teaching a player things he should have known before coming into the league, theres no time for that.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

HB said:


> Because players who arent ready to play in the league are only going to rot on someones bench anyways. Maybe this might be an exaggeration, but most of the players that get drafted go to the elite programs. Nothing wrong with them learning how to play the game from some of the best coaches in college. NBA coaches should not be teaching a player things he should have known before coming into the league, theres no time for that.


That's completly wrong. There's a significant gap between college and pro play on an individual level so every player will have a lot to learn when coming into the NBA. Certain things can't be learned in college.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

You know what's funny and I am going to use this as an example. Mike Dunleavy Jr. went to Duke for three years and has said that everything he learned at Duke was worthless in relation to his NBA readiness. Not to mention, we have a guy in Corey Brewer who was also played for three years, who had to have his entire jumpshot de-constructed and revamped on the pro level. 

The truth is, development is up to the player for the most part, insofar as to how hard they work, but... a coach is supposed to be able to recognize weaknesses and help them improve. When an NBA ready guy gets to the league and has to have his entire mechanics changed, something is very wrong.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> Because players who arent ready to play in the league are only going to rot on someones bench anyways. Maybe this might be an exaggeration, but most of the players that get drafted go to the elite programs. Nothing wrong with them learning how to play the game from some of the best coaches in college. NBA coaches should not be teaching a player things he should have known before coming into the league, theres no time for that.


Given the inferior coaching at the college level (college's are limited to two full time assistants and one part time, whereas most pro teams maintain six) and the strict time limits on athletic participation during the approved season and the strict ban on coaching staffs working with players outside the approved season, I'm not sure where you'd get the idea they'd learn faster in college. As a competitive bridge player I'll tell you that it doesn't help you to play inferior competition, you get better by playing people as good or better than yourself. College players don't get that, which is why so few of the non-superstars are ever able to make a contribution until their second or third or even fourth season in the show. In the NBA the coaching is better, the players get more individual attention than at the college level, and the assistants are year round employees that work with younger players even in the offseason to help them improve their games.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

Tragedy said:


> Would NEVER happen. Why do you think they need to stay in college longer?
> 
> Why do people think staying in college longer magically makes ALL players better?


I didn't say anything about it making them better players. I don't think there is anything you can learn in your last two years of college basketball that you can't learn in your first year in the NBA. There's a lot you can learn in school though. Plus it's a lot of fun.

Right now even the guys who WANT to stay in college can't do it because they are leaving way too much money on the table. If Greg Oden had the opportunity to sign a max deal after completing his senior year (as opposed to what would be the year after his senior year), don't you think that might have made his decision different? At least if he really wanted to stay he could have.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> Given the inferior coaching at the college level (college's are limited to two full time assistants and one part time, whereas most pro teams maintain six) and the strict time limits on athletic participation during the approved season and the strict ban on coaching staffs working with players outside the approved season, I'm not sure where you'd get the idea they'd learn faster in college. As a competitive bridge player I'll tell you that it doesn't help you to play inferior competition, you get better by playing people as good or better than yourself. College players don't get that, which is why so few of the non-superstars are ever able to make a contribution until their second or third or even fourth season in the show. In the NBA the coaching is better, the players get more individual attention than at the college level, and the assistants are year round employees that work with younger players even in the offseason to help them improve their games.


I find it hard to believe that an 18 or 19 year old player would learn more about the game from a Byron Scott or Lawrence Frank than he would from Calhoun or Coach K


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

HKF said:


> You know what's funny and I am going to use this as an example. Mike Dunleavy Jr. went to Duke for three years and has said that everything he learned at Duke was worthless in relation to his NBA readiness. Not to mention, we have a guy in Corey Brewer who was also played for three years, who had to have his entire jumpshot de-constructed and revamped on the pro level.


troy murphy said the reason he had to work so hard in the pros was that the transition was so severe he was failing for the first time in his life and it made him re-assess everything in order to stay in the NBA.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> I find it hard to believe that an 18 or 19 year old player would learn more about the game from a Byron Scott or Lawrence Frank than he would from Calhoun or Coach K


Mike Dunleavy Jr. specifically disagrees with you. Beyond that there's that little issue of college time limits (both in terms of the limited size of the season and the limits on weekly work during the season) and the limited size of the college coaching staff (keeping in mind that the assistants have to handle recruiting as well).


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

For every Mike Dunleavy JR. you have guys like Brandon Roy, who progressed every single year in college and will tell you that the college experience made them better players today.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> For every Mike Dunleavy JR. you have guys like Brandon Roy, who progressed every single year in college and will tell you that the college experience made them better players today.


Given the list of college busts from the top half of the first round from the first seven drafts of this decade, your statement is false on its face. Brandon Roy is the exception, hell, Mike Dunleavy Jr. is an exception, too. The rule is Marcus Banks, Julius Hodge and Reece Gaines.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

HB said:


> For every Mike Dunleavy JR. you have guys like Brandon Roy, who progressed every single year in college and will tell you that the college experience made them better players today.


Thus proving it should be a matter of choice and not a mandatory age limit. Thanks for playing.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> Given the list of college busts from the top half of the first round from the first seven drafts of this decade, your statement is false on its face. Brandon Roy is the exception, hell, Mike Dunleavy Jr. is an exception, too. The rule is Marcus Banks, Julius Hodge and Reece Gaines.


Well what is the alternative? Someone has got to get drafted. Its not the NBA, NCAA or GM's fault that quality of players coming into the league has dipped significantly the last few years. I saw the list of players you put up on the previous page, I mean whats the solution to that. Those were the best players present in those drafts, age limit or not.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

essbee said:


> Thus proving it should be a matter of choice and not a mandatory age limit. Thanks for playing.


Unfortunately its not about choice, the NBA mandate is as good as gold. Its not even calling for the players to stay four years in college, this is simply trying to put an end to the one and dones.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> Well what is the alternative? Someone has got to get drafted. Its not the NBA, NCAA or GM's fault that quality of players coming into the league has dipped significantly the last few years. I saw the list of players you put up on the previous page, I mean whats the solution to that. Those were the best players present in those drafts, age limit or not.


So, if there's nothing to be done, why the insistence that kids get inferior coaching and not get paid for their time? On a purely mechanical level there really aren't any more busts now than in previous eras, all there are are more teams. Ebi was a 26th pick, thirty years ago that would have made him a mid second round pick, compare him to the 26th picks over the last thirty years and I'll wager there are as many busts as guys that play. But for some reason we pretend it's a tragedy when Ebi or Green wash out of the NBA, but shrug our shoulders when Joe Forte, Curtis Borchardt, or Frank Williams wash out.


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> Here's a sample of the awesome, NBA-ready college talent drafted with the first fifteen picks from 2000-2006: Marcus Fizer, DeMarr Johnson, Stro' Swift, Chris Mihm, Jerome Moiso, Mateen Cleeves, Courtney Alexander, Jason Collier, Eddie Griffin, Rodney White, Kedrick Brown, Dajuan Wagner, Jared Jeffries, Melvin Ely, Marcus Haislip, Fred Jones, Stephen Hunter, Mike Sweetney, Marcus Banks, Reece Gaines, Rafael Araujo, Luke Jackson, Ike Diogu, Antoine Wright, Adam Morrison, Shelden Williams, Patrick Olo'Bryant, and J.J. Redick. I had to limit myself to the top 15 because a full list of first round college busts simply takes too long to type out.


Now here is a list of college ready pros taken within the first 15 picks.

Kenyon Martin
Mike Miller
Jamal Crawford
Keyon Dooling
Jason Richardson
Shane Battier
Joe Johnson
Richard Jefferson
Troy Murphy
Mike Dunleavy
Drew Gooden
Chris Wilcox
Caron Butler
Fred Jones (He is a solid pro he is no way a bust)
Carmelo Anthony
Chris Bosh
Dwayne Wade
Chris Kaman
Kirk Hinrich
TJ Ford
Jarvis Hayes (A solid pro)
Nick Collison
Luke Ridnoir
Emeka Okafor
Ben Gordon
Devin Harris
Josh Childress
Luol Deng
Andre Igudola
Andrew Bogot
Marvin Williams
Deron Williams
Chris Paul
Raymond Felton
Charlie Villanueva
Channing Frye
Sean May (Injury prone though)
Rashard McCants
Lamarcus Alridge
Adam Morrison (Had a good rookie year but has been out for this season)
Tyrus Thomas
Brandon Roy
Randy Foye
Rudy Gay
Ronnie Brewer
Cedric Simmons



So you see ehmunro my list outweighs your list by a ton. So for every Mateen Cleaves there are Deron Williams.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

You know quite a few of those guys only went to school for one year. Most notably Bosh, Marvin Williams, Luol Deng, Jamal Crawford, Tyrus Thomas and Carmelo Anthony.

Jarvis Hayes is the definition of a bust as well, at least with Washington he was.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Everyone should be in charge of their own team, of their own development, of their own lives, and basically at the end of the day, they should be responsible for their own choices. If a player is not ready, then teams shouldn't pick him. If you feel a player develops better in college, then that's fine, they can do that. At the end of the day, it should be their choice. It should be the players choice to join, and the teams choice to pick. Penalizing NBA-ready players just because they're young, and also limiting the teams that want to draft those players (but can't) is just wrong. Especially when the reasoning behind it is to cover up bad decision-making on the part of general managers. Bad decisions will be made regardless of how old players have to be when they join the league. 

If you want to emphasize and encourage education, then force players to actually get a degree. Otherwise, there shouldn't be an age limit. Again, nobody is forcing teams to pick these guys. To me, it's as dumb as having a height limit. Nobody under 5'5 allowed, they can't handle the NBA because they're too short. That's what it's like and it's dumb. They're trying to covering up bad decision-making with discrimination.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

eddymac said:


> Now here is a list of college ready pros taken within the first 15 picks. ...
> 
> So you see ehmunro my list outweighs your list by a ton. So for every Mateen Cleaves there are Deron Williams.


Cedric Simmons has yet to play a quality NBA minute, he'd qualify as bust if we're putting him on either list ( I had him as a neutral, but there's zero way you can classify him as a success). As the highlight of Ty Thomas' career so far was a slam dunk contest, I think you'd need to move him into a bust column, as well. Ammo stunk to high heavens as a rookie, he is a spectacular bust. Ditto for Channing Frye. There is no universe where a lottery pick is a success when he tops out as an NBA tenth man on his 23rd team, so take Fred Jones, Jarvis Hayes, and Keyon Dooling off your list of "successes". 

The fact is that your list of "lottery success stories" is dominated by NBA roleplayers. _And we haven't even begun to look at the rest of the draft_. So what you've established is that college players drafted in the lottery have more than a 40% bust rate. When we look at high schoolers taken in the same time frame and pick range (which excludes a lot of players like Monta Ellis, Josh Smith, and the guys picked from 1995-1999) and you work out a bust rate of 33%. And guess what, that means they have the highest success rate of all (because international players bust out even more than college players). I guess the process really is self-governing after all (i.e. the guys that make the leap are generally ready to make the leap).


----------



## jman23 (Aug 13, 2007)

KennethTo said:


> http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7996718?MSNHPHMA
> 
> Good deal, now the future Derrick Rose's, Melo's an Oden' can be milked for money by their respective college teams. At the same time, get paid nothing.
> 
> God I hate the NCAA. I hope more star US players just go to Europe and get paid 5 million a year and just say **** off to college basketball.


this is actually good for both nba and college basketball and there is no scam


----------



## jman23 (Aug 13, 2007)

KennethTo said:


> http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7996718?MSNHPHMA
> 
> Good deal, now the future Derrick Rose's, Melo's an Oden' can be milked for money by their respective college teams. At the same time, get paid nothing.
> 
> God I hate the NCAA. I hope more star US players just go to Europe and get paid 5 million a year and just say **** off to college basketball.


this is actually good for both nba and college basketball and there is no scam


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

> Cedric Simmons has yet to play a quality NBA minute, he'd qualify as bust if we're putting him on either list ( I had him as a neutral, but there's zero way you can classify him as a success).


He has been getting playing time in NO and has been solid, and even then he cannot be labeled a bust because he still has time to develop



> As the highlight of Ty Thomas' career so far was a slam dunk contest, I think you'd need to move him into a bust column, as well.


He has shown flashes, plus he still has time to develop, it is wayyyy to early to label him a bust.



> Ammo stunk to high heavens as a rookie, he is a spectacular bust. Ditto for Channing Frye.


Both these players had good rookie years. How can Morrison be labeled a bust when he has been injuried the whole year. Frye had a good rookie year but regressed his second year, and is now playing a vital role in Portland off the bench. 



> There is no universe where a lottery pick is a success when he tops out as an NBA tenth man on his 23rd team, so take Fred Jones, Jarvis Hayes, and Keyon Dooling off your list of "successes".


So because they aren't all stars that makes them a bust. Fred Jones has played well in NY this season. Dooling is a key player in Orlando's rotation, ditto for Hayes in Detriot who was plauged by injuries his first few seasons in Washington. Shane Battier was a top 5 pick in 01 and I wouldn't consider him a bust. He is a key player on a good Rockets team.


----------



## sknydave (Apr 27, 2006)

The players are compensated with a free education. Whether or not they want to take advantage of that is up to them.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Tiz said:


> Did 4 years at Wake Forest hurt Duncan's?



Yes, it probably cost Duncan $200 million but hey he got that worthless (to him) degree.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Ah, maybe you need to keep up. Cedric Simmons is on the Chicago Bulls now.


----------



## seligbud (Apr 7, 2008)

Morrison was pretty much the worst player in the NBA last year. There were guys who played worse, but none of them were given as many minutes/shots to screw up


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

So in the last 14 or so pages, all I have gotten is that there really is no benefit to going to college, especially for this one and done stars. 

Its kinda sad when you read Duncan missed out on 200 or so million dollars because of the 4 years he stayed in college. Newsflash, he has made a TON of money. How much is enough?


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

seligbud said:


> Morrison was pretty much the worst player in the NBA last year. There were guys who played worse, but none of them were given as many minutes/shots to screw up


Thats a big exaggeration.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

eddymac said:


> He has been getting playing time in NO and has been solid, and even then he cannot be labeled a bust because he still has time to develop


:rofl2: :rofl2: :rofl2:

Is he now? He isn't a success (your claim) until he can actually play in the NBA. Get back to me in three or four years.



eddymac said:


> He {Ty Thomas} has shown flashes, plus he still has time to develop, it is wayyyy to early to label him a bust.


Which would mean that he can't be called a "success" either, no? If anything Ty & Cedric reinforce the point that college doesn't produce NBA-ready talent.



eddymac said:


> Both these players had good rookie years. How can Morrison be labeled a bust when he has been injuried the whole year. Frye had a good rookie year but regressed his second year, and is now playing a vital role in Portland off the bench.


Morrison shot an aFG% of .422, or about 70 points under the NBA average. His scoring efficiency was downright Walkerian. And you get all that in a guy that can't defend any position in the NBA. Now, after a crappy rookie year he's injured, and will return even less athletic than before. El Busto, baby. And, yeah, I understand that Channing Frye's 6 points and 4 boards would be very tough to replace for Portland, but for a #8 pick we can say, bust.



eddymac said:


> So because they aren't all stars that makes them a bust. Fred Jones has played well in NY this season. Dooling is a key player in Orlando's rotation, ditto for Hayes in Detriot who was plauged by injuries his first few seasons in Washington. Shane Battier was a top 5 pick in 01 and I wouldn't consider him a bust. He is a key player on a good Rockets team.


Shane Battier is an actual NBA starter. As for Jones, when you've played for as many teams as you've spent years in the NBA, you're a bust. And while Detroit would struggle to replace Hayes' six points a game, as a lottery pick, when you've topped out as an NBA ninth man, you're a bust. Same goes for Dooling.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> Given the list of college busts from the top half of the first round from the first seven drafts of this decade, your statement is false on its face. Brandon Roy is the exception, hell, Mike Dunleavy Jr. is an exception, too. The rule is Marcus Banks, Julius Hodge and Reece Gaines.


Forgot to add this to my previous post on this. 

We are talking about 2 hours of practice for 6 to 7 days a week. Including video sessions where any coach worth his mettle should be doing more teaching, looking at your above point I think college coaches are given adequate time to impart basketball knowledge to these players. It doesnt look limited to me. Whereas in the NBA besides the preseason, everything is pretty much a rush. The schedule doesn't permit a head coach time to be teaching a rookie how to play basketball. These things he should have learnt before getting into the league


----------



## seligbud (Apr 7, 2008)

I don't think so. He had one of the worst statistical lines in the NBA. Very low efficiency scoring despite very low volume as well, little contribution on the boards despite being 6'8, not much playmaking. Single-digit PER. I think you'll agree that he was also one of the worst defensive players in the league(maybe the worst among people who played 20 MPG, I don't know). As I said, I'm sure there are worse players, but they aren't given 29 MPG


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

Once again because some of those players aren't all stars that doesn't make them *BUST*. Fred Jones played on three teams ~Bust1!, Dooling played on four teams ~Bust1!. Hayes has been a productive player for the Pistons this year off the bench, but because they have played for various teams and not all stars they are ~Bust1!. 

Morrison had his ups and downs but I wouldn't label him a bust by all means. A player would need to have at least a few years to prove themselves. 

Since you like High Schoolers so much did you label Curry and Chandler bust? It took them awhile to adjust but they are now quality players.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

eddymac said:


> He has shown flashes, plus he still has time to develop, it is wayyyy to early to label him a bust.


The ridiculousness of your argument can be boiled down to this one sentence. You blame high school players who aren't NBA ready from the beginning on their lack of college experience, but at the same time you bend over backwards to make excuses as to why guys who actually went to college are not NBA ready. Can't you see that college is not really much of a prep for the NBA? You know what college does? It allows kids to age and play in a more competitive environment. It would be absurd to suggest that players don't improve in college; however, they don't and cannot improve at anywhere near the rate they can improve in the NBA. For one, they are learning how to play in the NBA instead of learning how to play in college.

HB, just because it seems like "enough" time for you, doesn't mean it is anywhere close to what someone needs if they are dedicating their life to this profession. Plus you are just citing what goes on during the season; in the off season, players are restricted to being camp counselors and attending open gyms while their NBA counterparts are at ATTACK with Tim Grover working on every facet of their game. It's not even close!


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

jman23 said:


> this is actually good for both nba and college basketball and there is no scam


It's an atrocious deal for the players, who are most certainly getting scammed (because the NCAA gets the exclusive marketing rights to players who are forbidden from accepting their own endorsement money).



sknydave said:


> The players are compensated with a free education. Whether or not they want to take advantage of that is up to them.


They are "compensated" with a ****ty education, which isn't guaranteed as the college can pull the scholarship. All the while they surrender all the marketing rights to their names and image while they're in college. Oh, yeah, it's a great deal.



HB said:


> So in the last 14 or so pages, all I have gotten is that there really is no benefit to going to college, especially for this one and done stars.
> 
> Its kinda sad when you read Duncan missed out on 200 or so million dollars because of the 4 years he stayed in college. Newsflash, he has made a TON of money. How much is enough?


So, in other words, you think players should be forced into college, even if they don't need it, because you don't think it's fair that they make so much money?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

No not at all. I am saying this notion that there isnt any merits to going to college, or staying one more year for that matter isnt flying with me. These guys arent entitled to play in the NBA.

They wanna make money, fine! They can go to the other professional leagues out there. Especially when Euro leagues are paying so much. After two years they can always come back and play in the NBA. No one is forcing them to go to college.


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

seligbud said:


> I don't think so. He had one of the worst statistical lines in the NBA. Very low efficiency scoring despite very low volume as well, little contribution on the boards despite being 6'8, not much playmaking. Single-digit PER. I think you'll agree that he was also one of the worst defensive players in the league(maybe the worst among people who played 20 MPG, I don't know). As I said, I'm sure there are worse players, but they aren't given 29 MPG


Morrison averaged 11 ppg.


----------



## jman23 (Aug 13, 2007)

ehmunro said:


> It's an atrocious deal for the players, who are most certainly getting scammed (because the NCAA gets the exclusive marketing rights to players who are forbidden from accepting their own endorsement money).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


why are we even talking about something that probably isn't even going to happen according to my reports stern was only thinking about it once
and hasn't given it much thought sense.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

HB said:


> No not at all. I am saying this notion that there isnt any merits to going to college, or staying one more year for that matter isnt flying with me. These guys arent entitled to play in the NBA.
> 
> They wanna make money, fine! They can go to the other professional leagues out there. Especially when Euro leagues are paying so much. After two years they can always come back and play in the NBA. No one is forcing them to go to college.


If you want to be a doctor HB, you can go to Europe. The AMA has arbitrarily set some rule to keep you from entering your chosen profession. Can you see how that's unfair to you and how it couldn't possibly withstand a legal challenge? There are basketball players in the United States, there is a Pro Basketball League in the United States. You can't just say "well we have this monopolistic league, but screw you, you can't play in your native country, go to Europe."


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

But the fact of the matter is that these players have options, and its not just any option, its highly profitable options. Man I wish someone would give me the option to go abroad for a year or two and make millions and then come back home, knowing that I am guaranteed to make more millions after that tenure. Its not like the teams or countries they are going to arent going to pamper some of these players.

I didnt mention the NBDL because their wages are poor, and I cant see the lure for some players. Cept maybe those who want to stay close to their families


----------



## eddymac (Jun 23, 2005)

> You blame high school players who aren't NBA ready from the beginning on their lack of college experience


I did not say that. I said that the age limit is good because it allows players to go to school or if they choose go play in Europe or in the D League. That way they get time to develop. 




> but at the same time you bend over backwards to make excuses as to why guys who actually went to college are not NBA ready.


College is there to provide the fundamentals for these players to be successful in the NBA. So we can agree that the results have varied. There has been way more players that have went to college and turned into decent/good/great pros. There has been players who went to college and still needed more time to develop while others enter the league from college and dominated. 



> Can't you see that college is not really much of a prep for the NBA?


That statement is not true. That is your opinion so stop passing it off as fact. 



> For one, they are learning how to play in the NBA instead of learning how to play in college.


These players have obvious talents, playing in college is a way to further maximize these players potential. Some of these players turn out better than some. I'll give you an example, lets say I want to be a lawyer. I'm smart and I know the field very well. But going to college would give me the oppurtunity to study the field more and pick up the intricacies of law. It would be up to me whether I use what I'm thought in college to my advantage. The same applies to college basketball.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

eddymac said:


> College is there to provide the fundamentals for these players to be successful in the NBA. So we can agree that the results have varied. There has been way more players that have went to college and turned into decent/good/great pros. *There has been players who went to college and still needed more time to develop while others enter the league from college and dominated.*


O RLY? Tell me one player who came from college and dominated right away in the last 10 years.

Since 1995 I can count those players on 1 finger.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> If you want to be a doctor HB, you can go to Europe. The AMA has arbitrarily set some rule to keep you from entering your chosen profession. * Can you see how that's unfair to you and how it couldn't possibly withstand a legal challenge? * There are basketball players in the United States, there is a Pro Basketball League in the United States. You can't just say "well we have this monopolistic league, but screw you, you can't play in your native country, go to Europe."


You mean like going to medical school? They don't make you a doctor the second you can successfully perform surgery.... they don't make you a lawyer the second you can try a case... there are certain professional standards you have to meet, and many of them are arbitrary.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Dornado said:


> You mean like going to medical school? They don't make you a doctor the second you can successfully perform surgery.... they don't make you a lawyer the second you can try a case... there are certain professional standards you have to meet, and many of them are arbitrary.


As far as I know there is no age standard. The "arbitrary" stuff you're referring to is usually ethical, which I would say is far from arbitrary for a doctor or attorney.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> As far as I know there is no age standard. The "arbitrary" stuff you're referring to is usually ethical, which I would say is far from arbitrary for a doctor or attorney.


Just as the quality of player and public citizen is important to the NBA... sure, being 20 doesn't guarantee that you're better prepared than being 18... but taking an "Ethics" course doesn't mean you'll act as the epitome of morality when you become a lawyer... still, as a professional organization the NBA, like the ABA, have to draw the line somewhere to uphold the standards they want to achieve.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Dornado said:


> Just as the quality of player and public citizen is important to the NBA... sure, being 20 doesn't guarantee that you're better prepared than being 18... but taking an "Ethics" course doesn't mean you'll act as the epitome of morality when you become a lawyer... still, as a professional organization the NBA, like the ABA, have to draw the line somewhere to uphold the standards they want to achieve.


I agree, but it's not like forcing a Professionalism class on all law students is the only ethical check either. They take all of your law school applications, they want disclosure on every traffic ticket you've ever got, and much more. They look for ethical failures in your life before being an attorney and they weigh that. It's not arbitrary at all. Assuming someone is mature enough for the NBA based solely on age, and not past actions, is capricious and arbitrary.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> I agree, but it's not like forcing a Professionalism class on all law students is the only ethical check either. They take all of your law school applications, they want disclosure on every traffic ticket you've ever got, and much more. They look for ethical failures in your life before being an attorney and they weigh that. It's not arbitrary at all. * Assuming someone is mature enough for the NBA based solely on age, and not past actions, is capricious and arbitrary.*


I agree, but don't those "other" standards also exist for entrance into the NBA? Surely they pour over your past life extensively in the drafting and scouting process...


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

But that's not what is at issue here. Teams can choose to stay away from any player, and indeed have in the past, because of personal issues. This is an arbitrary age ban. You're telling me LeBron wasn't emotionally ready for the NBA? Dwight Howard? Come on.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> But that's not what is at issue here. Teams can choose to stay away from any player, and indeed have in the past, because of personal issues. This is an arbitrary age ban. You're telling me LeBron wasn't emotionally ready for the NBA? Dwight Howard? Come on.


Hey, I skip my Law and Ethics class all the time, I'm ready for the show.... I know right and wrong... I'm the Lebron James of legal ethics, if you will...


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Dornado said:


> Hey, I skip my Law and Ethics class all the time, I'm ready for the show.... I know right and wrong... I'm the Lebron James of legal ethics, if you will...


I can't wait. I would have taken that easy A class even if it wasn't required. Some people want to learn a bunch of stuff, but not me; I'm simply looking to pad my GPA.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

ehmunro said:


> That was a link to Michael McCann's study of the subject. You need to download the actual paper. I would think that common sense might tell you that the five million or so that the average NBA first round pick makes from his rookie deal would be more than the two million or so that the average grad makes over the course of a lifetime, but if you want it in black & white, Mike did the study.


Don't see the study there. In any case, I wonder how a study would measure the better education and more structured environment of at least one year of college education and its effect in the aggregate over a 30+ year pre-retirement lifetime in terms said player taking advantage of business opportunities, vs. a straight-from-HS player. Magic used to comment years ago about how the value his time at Michigan had on his decision to pursue a career in business after basketball. 



ehmunro said:


> There is absolutely something wrong with forcing college on them.


Not monetarily, intellectually, or personally. I guess college might increase underage drinking? That's about the only real negative of forcing college on someone. You can argue the degree, as in 1 year or 4 years. I think the 1 year stipulation was absolutely necessary. 



ehmunro said:


> It was _every single time you used the word_.


You mean all 3 times? Again, sad to even care at all. 



ehmunro said:


> There are a hundred college busts for every high school one.


This surprises no one considering the amount of college players that are drafted dwarf HS'ers. Biased sample size, depending on the exact degree (which I don't know off the top of my head). Though I would suspect it's large, which shows how much of a non-issue it is for the majority of prospective professional ballers to go to at least a year of college. The biggest reason this rule is such a nuisance to some people, like yourself, is because it denies you the pleasure of possibly watching the extremely early development of a great player. Except the NBA isn't fueled by hardcore enthusiast fans, who make up a ridiculously small minority and will in all likelihood never stop watching, as is clearly true in your case. Besides, this latest CBA was reached earlier than the prior one from what I remember, so not like the age limit was much of a hang-up.


----------



## LesFex (Apr 10, 2008)

Hello,

Is there any Institute which offers free basketball coaching?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

EHL said:


> Magic used to comment years ago about how the value his time at Michigan had on his decision to pursue a career in business after basketball.


To be fair, Magic's rookie contract was nothing compared to JR Smith's. And Lebron James is already pursuing a business career while moonlighting as a basketball player.

Jay-Z didn't go to college, and now he has record labels, sports teams, and clothing lines.

College is overrated. And way too expensive. Nobody should be forced to go, especially if they already have the skills to pay the bills.

Forcing people to go to college demeans the academic atmosphere at them even further. If you are at college you should be there because you want to learn. Not because you want to leave as soon as possible. They should do away with the whole notion of student-athlete, and just do inter-mural sports. Sure it would **** TV over, but it would re-center a lot of schools onto what matters, which is education, and beer pong... not your ****ing school's basketball team.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

If you're already capable of landing a spot in the industry you want out of HS, you *should not* have to pass through any obligatory bridges along the way towards your ultimate destination, point blank, period. 

You can talk about all the life lessons you want, but that's BS. You're not in college to become more mature. The primary reason you go to college is to hone your skills for a career/get a certificate that lands you a good job. That other stuff is a bonus. It's nice, but it's extracurricular. 

I can't think of (m)any players that are looked at as role models that wouldn't have been such without college. It's not college that defines who you'll be, it's your upbringing the previous 17-8 years in conjuction with school, so let's not act like college is some magical machine that transforms you from point A to B. 

There's no reasonable explanation that justifies keeping an able person out of their profession until they do amateur time. 

If you say it dilutes the Pro game, maybe GMs shouldn't make ****ty picks and scout HSers better.

If there's a 'primadonna' excuse, I'm pretty sure these one and doners are catered to/idolized even moreso in school than they are in "the real world."

And let's not act like in any entertainment subgenre in America talent/production doesn't overshadow nearly everything else. 

In the end, the only reason colleges want to be apart of a potential NBA players life is to rape them along the way financially. If it were more than that, I'm pretty sure the academic requirements wouldn't be so pathetic. 

And anything you can learn in college beyond academics you can learn in the real world.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> *To be fair, Magic's rookie contract was nothing compared to JR Smith's. And Lebron James is already pursuing a business career while moonlighting as a basketball player.
> 
> Jay-Z didn't go to college, and now he has record labels, sports teams, and clothing lines.*
> College is overrated. And way too expensive. Nobody should be forced to go, especially if they already have the skills to pay the bills.
> ...


Using one or two people who are the exception is weak. How about the millionaires and billionaires out there who have become successful because of the knowledge they gained in college. Magic and Jay-Z for that matter are probably surrounded with people who have college educations and are helping them make smart financial decisions. What do you think attorneys are for?

Regarding your last statement, NO ONE is forcing these kids to go to college. I have said it numerous times now, there are highly profitable options out there for those two or so years that the NBA is supposedly going to mandate.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HB said:


> Using one or two people who are the exception is weak. How about the millionaires and billionaires out there who have become successful because of the knowledge they gained in college. Magic and Jay-Z for that matter are probably surrounded with people who have college educations and are helping them make smart financial decisions. What do you think attorneys are for?
> 
> Regarding your last statement, NO ONE is forcing these kids to go to college. I have said it numerous times now, there are highly profitable options out there for those two or so years that the NBA is supposedly going to mandate.


One or two people? There's a lot more millionares and billionares than one or two people who haven't had or needed an American college education.

If you work in the entertainment biz, you do not need a college education. That's just a fact. Does Lindsay Lohan need a college education to make millions of dollars? What about Angelina Jolie? I would say in the entertainment biz, which professional sports is a part, a college degree is an exception not the rule.

College isn't even really about education. It's about making connections. And if you can do that without college, good for you because you just saved a lot of money.

If Angelina Jolie doesn't have to go to college to make millions of dollars, why does JR Smith?


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

oh boohoo. why are some of you crying over strangers and if they make millions this year or next year? you wont get a penny. just shut the hell up. these players are lucky they get paid more than 100 doctors combined.

go to school, its about the fans, not the players. heck, give me a chance to be born with lebron james' body and i'll have no problem doing all these things just for a chance to make 15million dollars for 9 months of playing a sport. on top of that, im rich and famous. all the women i want, all the money i want, anything i want?

are you klidding? cry some more, babies. make them go 2 years.


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

Dre™ said:


> There's no reasonable explanation that justifies keeping an able person out of their profession until they do amateur time.


i want to call you an insult name, but i wont because of board rules.

however, you have no clue about anything. 

when doctors want to be doctors, they have to go through about 10 years of school and a few years as 'amateur time' AKA INTERNSHIPS. FOR FREE. NO FAME. NO WOMEN ALL OVER CAMPUS. NO MAKING MILLIONS FOR PUTTING A BALL IN A HOOP. ALL THEY DO IS SAVE LIVES.


many professions YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INTERNSHIPS. 'amateur time' before you can be your own professional.

so please, go cry me a river. i cannot believe how much some of you baby these players. it's bad enough they make millions to put a ball in a hoop and then complain they have to practice.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

ChrisRichards said:


> oh boohoo. why are some of you crying over strangers and if they make millions this year or next year? you wont get a penny. just shut the hell up. these players are lucky they get paid more than 100 doctors combined.
> 
> go to school, its about the fans, not the players. heck, give me a chance to be born with lebron james' body and i'll have no problem doing all these things just for a chance to make 15million dollars for 9 months of playing a sport. on top of that, im rich and famous. all the women i want, all the money i want, anything i want?
> 
> are you klidding? cry some more, babies. make them go 2 years.


The reason we are crying IS self-interest. We don't per se care about their money(well actually society does, lifestyles of the rich and famous baby!! It's as american as being poor but thinking your middle class!) we care about seeing the best players playing in the same league at the same time.

For as bad as the NBA refs are, college ones are a million times worse. I don't get any joy out of watching Greg Oden get a bunch of offensive fouls because he's being guarded by a 6-5 guy who the ref feels sorry for. Nor do I get any joy out of seeing Kevin Durant light up obviously inferior competition. I want to see the best play against the best. And whether that means top euros coming to the NBA or high school players. I don't care about college athletics. I think it's dumb, stupid, and the only people it really helps are old rich white guys. Who I DEFINITELY don't care about.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

ChrisRichards said:


> i want to call you an insult name, but i wont because of board rules.
> 
> however, you have no clue about anything.
> 
> ...



This might be the worst post in internet history.



ChrisRichards said:


> oh boohoo. why are some of you crying over strangers and if they make millions this year or next year? you wont get a penny. just shut the hell up. these players are lucky they get paid more than 100 doctors combined.
> 
> go to school, its about the fans, not the players. heck, give me a chance to be born with lebron james' body and i'll have no problem doing all these things just for a chance to make 15million dollars for 9 months of playing a sport. on top of that, im rich and famous. all the women i want, all the money i want, anything i want?
> 
> are you klidding? cry some more, babies. make them go 2 years.


What exactly do you gain by being jealous?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

ChrisRichards said:


> i want to call you an insult name, but i wont because of board rules.
> 
> however, you have no clue about anything.
> 
> ...


Yeah because basketball is so much like being a doctor. You want to insult him because he isn't putting playing pro-ball on the same level as being a doctor?

Many professions DON'T require internships. Most entertainment ones don't. And that's what sports is ENTERTAINMENT. You don't need to go to college per se to be an entertainer. Sometimes it helps some people. But usually you either have it or you don't, and college isn't going to have much to do with it.

Again, why is it okay for Angelina Jolie to skip college and be an actor, but it's not okay for JR Smith?


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

i'm a college basketball fan as well as NBA fan. college bball tournament is one of the most fun times in the sports year. its amazing to watch, and MILLIONS OF AMERICANS agree with me. how much more fun would it have been to see Lebron there? 

college fans benefit from this, NBA teams benefit from it because they wont pick Kwame Browns out of HS anymore which could potentially save your favorite team from making a Kwame mistake one day, and it adds some maturity and development in basketball and personality in these kids.

essbee,We'll have none of that, thank you very much- Your Friendly Neighbourhood Moderator


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

futuristxen said:


> Yeah because basketball is so much like being a doctor. You want to insult him because he isn't putting playing pro-ball on the same level as being a doctor?
> 
> Many professions DON'T require internships. Most entertainment ones don't. And that's what sports is ENTERTAINMENT. You don't need to go to college per se to be an entertainer. Sometimes it helps some people. But usually you either have it or you don't, and college isn't going to have much to do with it.
> 
> Again, why is it okay for Angelina Jolie to skip college and be an actor, but it's not okay for JR Smith?


actors are freelance workers. they have no allegiance. they work on 1 movie at a time and then hope it makes enough money to make them famous and viable to make more movies. very different professions.

we have child actors, can we have child nba players? your comparison is horrible.

many MANY MANY professions have internships for free. 

those 'fat rich white men' only get rich because we fans pay to enjoy the services they put on. if they provide an even better more legendary services, thats what i care about. you sound like you are 15.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

What in the world is "klidding?"


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

you know what it is, dont act dumb. typo, it's the internet.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

ChrisRichards said:


> oh boohoo. why are some of you crying over strangers and if they make millions this year or next year? you wont get a penny. just shut the hell up. these players are lucky they get paid more than 100 doctors combined.
> 
> go to school, its about the fans, not the players. heck, give me a chance to be born with lebron james' body and i'll have no problem doing all these things just for a chance to make 15million dollars for 9 months of playing a sport. on top of that, im rich and famous. all the women i want, all the money i want, anything i want?
> 
> are you klidding? cry some more, babies. make them go 2 years.



It's an issue because it is unjust. Just because you have jealousy issues doesn't change that fact. I second essbee.

I don't see where some of the posters here get around to feeling that they should be able to force players to go to college for two years. Its plain and obvious that it just a scam for the NCAA to milk the talented young players for money. For any career that that pays attention to college education, the fact that these players went to college for two years and didn't graduate won't mean jack ****.


----------



## sknydave (Apr 27, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> They are "compensated" with a ****ty education, which isn't guaranteed as the college can pull the scholarship. All the while they surrender all the marketing rights to their names and image while they're in college. Oh, yeah, it's a great deal.


How is the education crappy? It's only as crappy as they want it to be. Most of these kids would have NEVER been able to get into the schools they are in without basketball. The school can pull the scholarship and the player can decide to leave at any time. I don't see how this is unfair.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

ChrisRichards said:


> oh boohoo. why are some of you crying over strangers and if they make millions this year or next year? you wont get a penny. just shut the hell up. these players are lucky they get paid more than 100 doctors combined.
> 
> go to school, its about the fans, not the players. heck, give me a chance to be born with lebron james' body and i'll have no problem doing all these things just for a chance to make 15million dollars for 9 months of playing a sport. on top of that, im rich and famous. all the women i want, all the money i want, anything i want?
> 
> are you klidding? cry some more, babies. make them go 2 years.


Well, being a grade school dropout doesn't seem to have hurt you any.



ChrisRichards said:


> i want to call you an insult name, but i wont because of board rules.
> 
> however, you have no clue about anything.
> 
> when doctors want to be doctors, they have to go through about 10 years of school and a few years as 'amateur time' AKA INTERNSHIPS. FOR FREE. NO FAME. NO WOMEN ALL OVER CAMPUS. NO MAKING MILLIONS FOR PUTTING A BALL IN A HOOP. ALL THEY DO IS SAVE LIVES.


Are you seriously trying to tell us that playing a game is somehow akin to be being a doctor? I mean, seriously? I retract my statement above.




ChrisRichards said:


> many professions YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE INTERNSHIPS. 'amateur time' before you can be your own professional.


The majority of professions, on the other hand, do not. Baseball, for example. Hockey for another. Tennis, golf, soccer, bowling, billiards, to name some more. Oddly enough, the only athletic professions that require you to make fat, caucasian billionaires fatter and richer before you're allowed to get paid yourself are the two sports dominated by African-Americans. Go figure. The trades require no free internships. The computer business only requires that you can do the ****ing job. They don't give a **** whether you've so much as graduated high school if you can write the code.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

ChrisRichards said:


> actors are freelance workers. they have no allegiance. they work on 1 movie at a time and then hope it makes enough money to make them famous and viable to make more movies. very different professions.
> 
> we have child actors, can we have child nba players? your comparison is horrible.
> 
> ...


No my comparison works because it's comparing entertainers to entertainers, and not basketball players to ****ing doctors or teachers.

How about music entertainers? Many of them sign multi-album deals without even setting a foot onto a college campus. Jessica Simpson doesn't have a college education. Hell, she is a high school dropout!

And look at non-american sports stars. The top players in soccer: Messi, Ronaldo, Kaka--household names across the globe. Not a college degree between them.

Look at tennis stars: Roger Federer doesn't have a college degree.
Why should Lebron James?

Look at baseball, how many MVPs have had a college degree in that sport?
Look at Wayne Gretzky!

The fact of the matter is that the NBA and the NFL are somewhat of anomolies in major world sports(though the NFL really isn't followed around the world) in how much college education they require.

You don't need a college education to play sports. You need a sports education, sure. But that could be accomplished a lot more efficiently than sending these guys to academic schools. Look in europe they have basketball and soccer academies to send players to at a very young age--why not have that instead of NCAA?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

sknydave said:


> How is the education crappy? It's only as crappy as they want it to be. Most of these kids would have NEVER been able to get into the schools they are in without basketball. The school can pull the scholarship and the player can decide to leave at any time. I don't see how this is unfair.


So if many of them would not be able to get into school without basketball (a dubious accusation), then why should they be "forced" to go? I mean they aren't students after all. Forcing basketball players to go to school, but not forcing regular people to go to college doesn't make a lot of sense. It should simply be a choice, because the law states until you reach a certain age, you're not an adult (lest you become emancipated from your parents).


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

KennethTo said:


> It's an issue because it is unjust. Just because you have jealousy issues doesn't change that fact. I second essbee.
> 
> I don't see where some of the posters here get around to feeling that they should be able to force players to go to college for two years. Its plain and obvious that it just a scam for the NCAA to milk the talented young players for money. For any career that that pays attention to college education, the fact that these players went to college for two years and didn't graduate won't mean jack ****.


congratulations, you lumped yourself in with the Please read the terms of service, thank you- Your Friendly Neighbourhood Moderator in an effort to discredit a post you dont agree with.


----------



## sknydave (Apr 27, 2006)

HKF said:


> So if many of them would not be able to get into school without basketball (a dubious accusation), then why should they be "forced" to go? I mean they aren't students after all. Forcing basketball players to go to school, but not forcing regular people to go to college doesn't make a lot of sense. It should simply be a choice, because the law states until you reach a certain age, you're not an adult (lest you become emancipated from your parents).


I didn't say anything about forcing them to go to college. I don't think they should be. If you don't want to go to college then go to the NBA!

I'm simply replying to the previous post.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

ChrisRichards said:


> actors are freelance workers. they have no allegiance. they work on 1 movie at a time and then hope it makes enough money to make them famous and viable to make more movies. very different professions.


Actually actors often sign multi-picture deals, or partner with studios through their production companies.

Why don't you just name a topic you actually do know something about and we'll start talking about that instead? Like pocket lint.


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

futuristxen said:


> No my comparison works because it's comparing entertainers to entertainers, and not basketball players to ****ing doctors or teachers.
> 
> How about music entertainers? Many of them sign multi-album deals without even setting a foot onto a college campus. Jessica Simpson doesn't have a college education. Hell, she is a high school dropout!
> 
> ...



singers dont have a 100+ year long relationship with college sports. in all sports, players have gone to college and then go on to pro. this has gone on for over a century in sports. its a tradition. 

add that to the fact that players' careers can end suddenly with an injury and if they didnt go to college they have nothing to fall back on. no skill.
it's an injustice to milk the players straight to pro and not have them learn anything or have anything to fall back on if they get injured.

there is only 1 logical conclusion, and thats why every sports legend from bill russel to walter payton have advocated keeping kids away from the commercials and spotlights until they are older.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The main issue that I find myself and ehmunro have with this rule, is that by forcing guys (who are ready and want to go) to remain in school is that you're taking away the best years of basketball they will play. Even I don't care about how much money someone can make, as anything can happen (someone could die). However, being able to see Lebron an extra two years on the pro level in the highest form of basketball, has been a treat. High caliber professional basketball players on average can play till they are 27. The greats can stretch that out another decade, with anomalies a tad longer (i.e. Reggie Miller, Kevin Willis). As much as I love Tim Duncan, it's obvious that Dave Odom isn't the guy who made him one of the best players in the NBA. Heck, if he would have gone to Golden State in '95, the Warriors might have 4 championships right now and he lost out on money that he will never recoup. However, I wouldn't downturn the man, because he did what he wanted to do. 

It just sucked watching him lose in the NCAA tournament almost every single year due to inferior guard play and ticky-tack fouls.


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

essbee said:


> Actually actors often sign multi-picture deals, or partner with studios through their production companies.


incorrect, not all actors sign to a studio exclusively. that is very stupid of you to say. 

secondly, those who do, their contracts are nothing like sports players. studio's can control what movies they do, and can pull the plug on their careers at any time. as i said, if a movie they are in is a bomb, they won't continue to get another big movie next time.

please, just stop posting. Goodbye- Your Friendly Neighbourhood Moderator


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

ChrisRichards said:


> incorrect, not all actors sign to a studio exclusively. that is very stupid of you to say.
> 
> secondly, those who do, their contracts are nothing like sports players. studio's can control what movies they do, and can pull the plug on their careers at any time. as i said, if a movie they are in is a bomb, they won't continue to get another big movie next time.
> 
> please, just stop posting. Goodbye- Your Friendly Neighbourhood Moderator



Lol who said all actors sign to studios exclusively? 

Also teams *can* release or trade players, they just often choose not to because they don't want to lose money or talent. 

Again, just tell me what topic you don't sound stupid discussing and we'll switch to that.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

ChrisRichards said:


> incorrect, not all actors sign to a studio exclusively. that is very stupid of you to say.
> 
> secondly, those who do, their contracts are nothing like sports players. studio's can control what movies they do, and can pull the plug on their careers at any time. as i said, if a movie they are in is a bomb, they won't continue to get another big movie next time.
> 
> please, just stop posting.


:stupid:


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

sknydave said:


> How is the education crappy? It's only as crappy as they want it to be. Most of these kids would have NEVER been able to get into the schools they are in without basketball. The school can pull the scholarship and the player can decide to leave at any time. I don't see how this is unfair.


Major college programs make it very clear to their athletes that academics better not interfere with their participation in their sport. So college athletes get degrees in physical education, recreational studies and any other major that won't require a severe academic load. Athletes in that top 5% of intellectual capacity will get more, but only because they're intelligent enough to handle the academic load without bogging down. For the rest of them they get a second class education that ends the minute they get a severe injury, leaving them to their own resources. The devalued degrees they do get won't serve them well, unless they intend to become phys ed teachers (a couple of friends of mine took that path after cups of coffee in the NFL and by "cup of coffee" I mean exhibition games, the Ferraris were too small to make it as LBs in the NFL). And the arrangement is unfair when the athlete _has_ to go to school, and the school can spit the player out when they're done chewing them up. In other words, it's not an equal relationship. The college sacrifices nothing in exploiting the athlete, who gets nothing for being exploited.


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

players going to college for a year before nba -

good or bad in your eyes?

the agreement around the sports has been good. it is the reason why they are contemplating making it 2 years. its all there.


----------



## ChrisRichards (Jul 17, 2007)

essbee said:


> Lol who said all actors sign to studios exclusively?
> 
> Also teams *can* release or trade players, they just often choose not to because they don't want to lose money or talent.


you did. you made it seem as if the majority do, which is not the case at all.
dont try to pull your hand away after you pulled the tail.

again, if players are traded or released, they receive their entire contract no matter what. this has absolutely no resemblance to an actor.

just stop.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> Major college programs make it very clear to their athletes that academics better not interfere with their participation in their sport. So college athletes get degrees in physical education, recreational studies and any other major that won't require a severe academic load. Athletes in that top 5% of intellectual capacity will get more, but only because they're intelligent enough to handle the academic load without bogging down. For the rest of them they get a second class education that ends the minute they get a severe injury, leaving them to their own resources. The devalued degrees they do get won't serve them well, unless they intend to become phys ed teachers (a couple of friends of mine took that path after cups of coffee in the NFL and by "cup of coffee" I mean exhibition games, the Ferraris were too small to make it as LBs in the NFL). And the arrangement is unfair when the athlete _has_ to go to school, and the school can spit the player out when they're done chewing them up. In other words, it's not an equal relationship. The college sacrifices nothing in exploiting the athlete, who gets nothing for being exploited.


And let's be frank, networking and name recognition will get these guys a lot more jobs than a simple degree ever would. Magic Johnson always wanted to be a sportscaster and eventually he got it. But he didn't get it because of his wanting to do it in college (he was horrible at it) he got it because he was Magic Johnson.


----------



## MeetTheMan (Apr 10, 2008)

ehmunro said:


> Well, being a grade school dropout doesn't seem to have hurt you any.
> 
> Are you seriously trying to tell us that playing a game is somehow akin to be being a doctor? I mean, seriously? I retract my statement above.
> 
> The computer business only requires that you can do the ****ing job. They don't give a **** whether you've so much as graduated high school if you can write the code.


perhaps you should follow the rules or have your moderator status brought into question. you insulted the poster, twice in a very degrading and insulting manner while at the same time you turn around and warn/ban the member for similar comments.

If you have complaints, Mr. Richards, please feel free to take your complaints to the moderational staff. They'll be glad to explain why you're not supposed to call posters "cavemen" and "idiots". 

Your Friendly Neighbourhood Moderator


----------



## MeetTheMan (Apr 10, 2008)

ChrisRichards said:


> incorrect, not all actors sign to a studio exclusively. that is very stupid of you to say.
> 
> secondly, those who do, their contracts are nothing like sports players. studio's can control what movies they do, and can pull the plug on their careers at any time. as i said, if a movie they are in is a bomb, they won't continue to get another big movie next time.
> 
> please, just stop posting. Goodbye- Your Friendly Neighbourhood Moderator


to ehmunro, what exactly did you edit out of that post?

the word stupid is what you warned him for? why is there a sign in the post below his that has a "Im with Stupid" face? Your behavior is highly questionable and should be looked into by staff.


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

MeetTheMan said:


> to ehmunro, what exactly did you edit out of that post?
> 
> the word stupid is what you warned him for? why is there a sign in the post below his that has a "Im with Stupid" face? Your behavior is highly questionable and should be looked into by staff.


Welcome to the forums! :grinning:


----------



## MeetTheMan (Apr 10, 2008)

do I just go looking for the top staff here or is there somehwere I can go report ehmunro?

this was posted by TheKEAF :

Things have been getting out of hand for the past couple weeks in here. The problem is mostly gimmick posters (you know who you are) that come here attempting to be funny but fail terribly. Your act has gotten old quick and the staff isn't gonna sit here and let this kind of stuff continue to bring down this forum. Either straighten your act up or be prepared to get banned. *Disrespecting other members, creating multiple threads about nothing, and racism will not be tolerated. *For those of you who don't get involved in all this nonsense, we appreciate you and what you bring to the forum. If you have any questions you can easily PM me or any other moderator/community moderator.


Obviously, ehmunro believes he is above forum rules. His post has not been edited out with his degrading comments, neither has esbee but only the Banned member was edited and warned.

Where do I go to report this disgusting abuse of moderation privileges?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

MeetTheMan said:


> do I just go looking for the top staff here or is there somehwere I can go report ehmunro?
> 
> this was posted by TheKEAF :
> 
> ...


You can send me a private message detailing your many and vast grievances, and I will convey them in the moderators forum. Alternatively you can private message any of the other moderators, that are conveniently listed in that little box in the upper right hand corner of the board marked "moderators", and give them a list of your grievances.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> One or two people? There's a lot more millionares and billionares than one or two people who haven't had or needed an American college education.
> 
> If you work in the entertainment biz, you do not need a college education. That's just a fact. Does Lindsay Lohan need a college education to make millions of dollars? What about Angelina Jolie? I would say in the entertainment biz, which professional sports is a part, a college degree is an exception not the rule.
> 
> ...


I am baffled by the above post tbh! I am willing to wager with you that every major studio head has some type of college education. Jolie might be a millionaire but the guy who is signing her checks is probably 10 to 20 times richer than her. 

Lets throw out a few names here, you know the guys who actually have a stake in the movie industry. Last I checked Steven Spielberg is a billionaire, you know he has a college degree in film production right? You know that George Lucas, the billionaire behind the star wars franchise, he happened to attend the USC film school. Look we could go back and forth about the merits of having a college education or not, I'd probably wager that the 10% or so people that control the world's wealth have some type of college education. You dont need a college education to succeed, but chances are you are going to need someone with a college education to manage your assets if you are successful.

If you work in the entertainment as you say, you might not need a education but you sure as heck want a college graduate managing your funds, dont you think?


----------



## MeetTheMan (Apr 10, 2008)

Thanks, I guarantee I will. This whole problem began when esbee called that post 'worst in internet history'. everything after that was angry defensive responses and you had the nerve to go and ban and moderate -1- poster and not the other, on top of that, while breaking the rules yourself.

I'll go ahead and get away from this thread and begin the process now. Thanks.
Oh, and since I still have not seen your post or esbee's post have been moderated, I will get this problem directly to the highest members of this staff instead of to you. Since there seems to be a problem with you or other moderators refusing to moderate you or esbee.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HB said:


> I am baffled by the above post tbh! I am willing to wager with you that every major studio head has some type of college education. Jolie might be a millionaire but the guy who is signing her checks is probably 10 to 20 times richer than her.


But isn't that the exact same relationship that exists between the players and the owners/NCAA? The players are the ones that people pay to see and whose gear they're looking to buy.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Oh thats true, but like I keep saying this players have options. Its not the doom and gloom scenario we are trying to paint here.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

MeetTheMan said:


> Thanks, I guarantee I will. This whole problem began when esbee called that post 'worst in internet history'. everything after that was angry defensive responses and you had the nerve to go and ban and moderate -1- poster and not the other, on top of that, while breaking the rules yourself.
> 
> I'll go ahead and get away from this thread and begin the process now. Thanks.
> Oh, and since I still have not seen your post or esbee's post have been moderated, I will get this problem directly to the highest members of this staff instead of to you. Since there seems to be a problem with you or other moderators refusing to moderate you or esbee.


And your calling of another poster, _not essbee_, a caveman, that's justified by your anger as well?


----------



## MeetTheMan (Apr 10, 2008)

Excuse me, I do not think the general board is the place to discuss this any further. I have been told where to go, and I will do that.

Lastly, please do not disgrace yourself any further. I did no such thing. I do, however, know that the member in question was banned by you and he was very upset. So upset, that I came here to see what happened. I have read this thread and apparently he is not innocent, but he clearly did not start it and you are guilty of selective moderation and breaking the rules yourself.


I will contribute to this thread :

I do not agree that the NBA should force players to go to school. It is not their place to tell them how to live their lives.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HB said:


> If you work in the entertainment as you say, you might not need a education but you sure as heck want a college graduate managing your funds, dont you think?


Which of course brings us back to the main point that basketball players, do not need to go to college.

Or are you just debating the merits of college in general? On that topic I would just say that the benefits of college are in networking, there are very few actual skills that you learn in college that you can't learn elsewhere. When you go to USC film school for instance, you're not going because USC is going to teach you how to hold a camera better than anyone else, you're going because USC is going to get you face time with Steven Spielburg.

College is basically about having the money to pay the gatekeepers of society enough so that they will allow you into the middle class, or if you're rich or lucky, the elite.

Most people do not work jobs that have anything to do with what they studied in college. Otherwise we'd have way more anthropologists than bank tellers.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

HB said:


> I am baffled by the above post tbh! I am willing to wager with you that every major studio head has some type of college education. Jolie might be a millionaire but the guy who is signing her checks is probably 10 to 20 times richer than her.


And I'm willing to wager that every NBA owner has some type of college education too. What's your point? Players are much more like actors than studio heads. They are the talent putting butts in the seats. Tim Duncan doesn't run the day to day finances of the San Antonio Spurs.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

This was the first post of futur regarding the millionaires dont need college example



futuristxen said:


> To be fair, Magic's rookie contract was nothing compared to JR Smith's. And Lebron James is already pursuing a business career while moonlighting as a basketball player.
> 
> Jay-Z didn't go to college, and now he has record labels, sports teams, and clothing lines.
> 
> ...


Of which I responded with this



HB said:


> Using one or two people who are the exception is weak. How about the millionaires and billionaires out there who have become successful because of the knowledge they gained in college. Magic and Jay-Z for that matter are probably surrounded with people who have college educations and are helping them make smart financial decisions. What do you think attorneys are for?
> 
> Regarding your last statement, NO ONE is forcing these kids to go to college. I have said it numerous times now, there are highly profitable options out there for those two or so years that the NBA is supposedly going to mandate.


which lead to this



futuristxen said:


> One or two people? There's a lot more millionares and billionares than one or two people who haven't had or needed an American college education.
> 
> If you work in the entertainment biz, you do not need a college education. That's just a fact. Does Lindsay Lohan need a college education to make millions of dollars? What about Angelina Jolie? I would say in the entertainment biz, which professional sports is a part, a college degree is an exception not the rule.
> 
> ...


and then my last response



HB said:


> I am baffled by the above post tbh! I am willing to wager with you that every major studio head has some type of college education. Jolie might be a millionaire but the guy who is signing her checks is probably 10 to 20 times richer than her.
> 
> Lets throw out a few names here, you know the guys who actually have a stake in the movie industry. Last I checked Steven Spielberg is a billionaire, you know he has a college degree in film production right? You know that George Lucas, the billionaire behind the star wars franchise, he happened to attend the USC film school. Look we could go back and forth about the merits of having a college education or not, I'd probably wager that the 10% or so people that control the world's wealth have some type of college education. You dont need a college education to succeed, but chances are you are going to need someone with a college education to manage your assets if you are successful.
> 
> If you work in the entertainment as you say, you might not need a education but you sure as heck want a college graduate managing your funds, dont you think?


And then you jumped in and said this



Nimreitz said:


> And I'm willing to wager that every NBA owner has some type of college education too. What's your point? Players are much more like actors than studio heads. They are the talent putting butts in the seats. Tim Duncan doesn't run the day to day finances of the San Antonio Spurs.


So if you had followed the back and forth arguement between me and futur you would realize I was making more of a general comment. Which is why its always advisable to read through a thread instead of just the last few comments

And anyways from the get go, I have said the two year mandate is not about the education. No athlete is getting a college degree in two years regardless of what the NCAA or NBA might say


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

You tried to say "well maybe Jolie doesn't have an education, but the guy signing her checks does!" If you weren't equating the guy signing checks to basketball players I am baffled at what argument you are making. The education of studio heads has nothing to do with this argument at all.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

The point I was trying to make is that, you can cherry pick and say so and so did this without a college education but then you will always find so and so that did have a college education and is doing just as well. 

Anywhoo the notion that basketball athletes arent gaining anything from going to college is baffling.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HB said:


> The point I was trying to make is that, you can cherry pick and say so and so did this without a college education but then you will always find so and so that did have a college education and is doing just as well.
> 
> Anywhoo the notion that basketball athletes arent gaining anything from going to college is baffling.


No the metaphor is that entertainers on the level of actors and sports athletes do not per se need a college education.

They aren't accountants or doctors, or even directors, who have to understand complex technical procedures.

What does a professional athlete gain from going to college besides lost salary?

Which is more beneficial to the development of the athlete, spending all of their time training in their sport like they do when they are pros, or having to sparse in time to go take a sociology test?

The type of training that professional athletes require would be much better filled by nationalized sports academies in each region, as opposed to academic colleges.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> No the metaphor is that entertainers on the level of actors and sports athletes do not per se need a college education.
> 
> They aren't accountants or doctors, or even directors, who have to understand complex technical procedures.
> 
> ...



I already mentioned earlier that most of the guys drafted probably went to the top schools, who have some of the best coaches in college basketball. You dont think in two years, Coach K, Jim Calhoun and the likes can teach a few things or two to an athlete. Do you think a guy like Lawrence Frank or Sam Vincent are better teachers than the Pitinos and Williams of college basketball. (Permitted the player is willing to learn that is)

Regarding the money issue, I have said it before and will repeat it again, no one is forcing this players to stay in college. They want to make money, they can go to Europe for a year or two. Chances are some of them could even make more money than they would with a rookie contract


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

HB said:


> I already mentioned earlier that most of the guys drafted probably went to the top schools, who have some of the best coaches in college basketball. You dont think in two years, Coach K, Jim Calhoun and the likes can teach a few things or two to an athlete. Do you think a guy like Lawrence Frank or Sam Vincent are better teachers than the Pitinos and Williams of college basketball. (Permitted the player is willing to learn that is)
> 
> Regarding the money issue, I have said it before and will repeat it again, no one is forcing this players to stay in college. They want to make money, they can go to Europe for a year or two. Chances are some of them could even make more money than they would with a rookie contract


But what does any of that have to do with College academics? A sports academy system would be much more streamlined. Coach K and his lot wouldn't have to waste their time worrying about NCAA rules violations and could just teach the best talent in the US the game.

I think some of those guys are overrated though. An NBA education isn't just the coaches, it's also hall of fame piers that you practice against every day. Everyday in practice you have to go against the best there is. That's going to make you a better player than throwing down dunks on BYU.

Either way, what you're saying is that you want to use the colleges as a minor league system, and that's wrong because colleges are there to learn, not to train athletes. A sports academy would be much more efficient. Which is why we are seeing europeans do so well in their development, because they don't have to mess with the BS of going to college as a "student-athlete". Why waste the time of a prodigy with jazz appreciation class? They should be learning how to apply their talents.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Its not about college academics. I have said that before. No one is getting a college degree in two years and I doubt the NCAA is making that arguement either. At the end of the day this mandate is because of money. 

On a side note, dont you think the college fans deserve to enjoy some of these star players before bolting to the league?


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

HB said:


> Its not about college academics. I have said that before. No one is getting a college degree in two years and I doubt the NCAA is making that arguement either. At the end of the day this mandate is because of money.
> 
> On a side note, dont you think the college fans deserve to enjoy some of these star players before bolting to the league?


Only if those players want to go. You shouldn't restrict someone's rights to please others. that's ridiculous.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Look the NBA is a business and can do however it pleases. Can any of us complain about what a company like Walmart does with its business and employees? Sure we can, will it make any difference, absolutely NOT!

These guys wanna make money for those two years, go to Europe!

You guys act like they dont have options. You do know that some of them might actually make more money in those two years than they would on their rookie salaries right?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I'm not understanding your argument HB and it lost all logic when you said don't college fans get to enjoy the star players. Like college fans are owed something. That's a load of crap. If a guy wants to go to college, let him. No one will diss him for wanting to finish and get his degree. Forcing them to go by giving them options that are highly dubious, i.e. going to Europe, like an upper Euroleague team is going to pay them big money then let them leave in a year anyway.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

A year? Wont it be the two years that Stern is mandating. The players wouldnt need to spend any time in college and would just go straight to Europe from high school.

And yes college fans arent entitled to having those players, but for those who actually enjoy college basketball, it sure as heck makes it more interesting when you get to root for guys like Beasley and Durant. Isn't that a good way to build a fanbase by the way? You would think those who root for those players in college should at least be interested in watching them play in the pros


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

HB said:


> A year? Wont it be the two years that Stern is mandating. The players wouldnt need to spend any time in college and would just go straight to Europe from high school.
> 
> And yes college fans arent entitled to having those players, but for those who actually enjoy college basketball, it sure as heck makes it more interesting when you get to root for guys like Beasley and Durant. Isn't that a good way to build a fanbase by the way? You would think those who root for those players in college should at least be interested in watching them play in the pros


I just find this all interesting as someone who has expressed to me in the past that they would like to work in the Entertainment Business. You don't see something inherently wrong with unpaid servitude? Don't give me that college scholarship nonsense either, because if guys are willing to jump without going to college, obviously that 30-40K in education is not incentive. 

Regardless of whether or not the fans like to have great players to root for or against, you or I shouldn't be making decisions for other people. I think you'll see when you finally leave school and really try to work in the real world that college has prepared you for absolutely nothing and those pieces of paper you possess aren't going to help you. Especially in Entertainment. 

The real world is about relationships. You lack relationships and knowledge dies on a leaf.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

HB said:


> A year? Wont it be the two years that Stern is mandating. The players wouldnt need to spend any time in college and would just go straight to Europe from high school.
> 
> And yes college fans arent entitled to having those players, but for those who actually enjoy college basketball, it sure as heck makes it more interesting when you get to root for guys like Beasley and Durant. Isn't that a good way to build a fanbase by the way? You would think those who root for those players in college should at least be interested in watching them play in the pros


There's an old saying that goes something like

tough noogies.

If they can go to the NBA, they damn well should be able to. The NBA is the only league with a requirement that isn't really reasonable and justifiable. The NFL's age requirment makes sense, it gives players three years to get PHYSICALLY ready for the NFL.

The NBA is saying that players aren't ready to play in the NBA due to skill level, but that's just not true. The majority of HS players selected in the lottery have had good to great careers so far.

NBA fans shouldn't have to wait two years for guys like Lebron, Amare, Dwight Howard, an additional year for Carmelo Anthony just to placate NCAA fans.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

HKF said:


> I just find this all interesting as someone who has expressed to me in the past that they would like to work in the Entertainment Business. You don't see something inherently wrong with unpaid servitude? Don't give me that college scholarship nonsense either, because if guys are willing to jump without going to college, obviously that 30-40K in education is not incentive.
> 
> Regardless of whether or not the fans like to have great players to root for or against, you or I shouldn't be making decisions for other people. I think you'll see when you finally leave school and really try to work in the real world that college has prepared you for absolutely nothing and those pieces of paper you possess aren't going to help you. Especially in Entertainment.
> 
> The real world is about relationships. You lack relationships and knowledge dies on a leaf.


But I dont think its about the college education for these guys. They wont be getting a degree in two years that I know. On the other hand, I find it hard that they wont be improving their game during those two years either. I dont know that many rookies that come into the NBA and right off the bat start contributing. If you look at the high school players that have come into the league the past few years, very few of them have stepped in and provided meaningful contributions. The time they spent warming someones bench could be put to good use in college ball.

Regardless I am someone that


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

HKF said:


> I just find this all interesting as someone who has expressed to me in the past that they would like to work in the Entertainment Business. You don't see something inherently wrong with unpaid servitude? Don't give me that college scholarship nonsense either, because if guys are willing to jump without going to college, obviously that 30-40K in education is not incentive.
> 
> Regardless of whether or not the fans like to have great players to root for or against, you or I shouldn't be making decisions for other people. I think you'll see when you finally leave school and really try to work in the real world that college has prepared you for absolutely nothing and those pieces of paper you possess aren't going to help you. Especially in Entertainment.
> 
> The real world is about relationships. You lack relationships and knowledge dies on a leaf.


YES! Man you know that I know it. All that time in college didn't mean SQUAT for me. It wasn't until I took a job for free (get paid gas money and nothing more for half a year) and started to forge relationships on my own did I get anywhere. Nothing I learned in college prepared me for what I faced coming out. To add onto that, I wanted to be an editor, and in college we had AVID. 

To start nothing we did in college would be enough to be an AVID editor coming right out. To add onto that, the industry is moving towards Final Cut pro in a HUGE way, and I had to learn that program AFTER college, and it was THAT education which has me where I am now, not college.

60,000 dollars I could have done without spending. Mind you my friends are doing just as well and they left school early, and one didn't even bother with college.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Tragedy said:


> There's an old saying that goes something like
> 
> tough noogies.
> 
> ...


The bolded portion is inaccurate. I dont recall that many high school players that have come into the league and made meaningful contributions in their first two years in the league. Sure Bron and Dwight are the exceptions, but what about the Browns, Diops, Chandlers, Curry's, Stevensons etc that took a few years to get their bearing in the pros. Heck even Tmac and JO took a while before becoming all star caliber players.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

HB said:


> But I dont think its about the college education for these guys. They wont be getting a degree in two years that I know. On the other hand, I find it hard that they wont be improving their game during those two years either. I dont know that many rookies that come into the NBA and right off the bat start contributing. If you look at the high school players that have come into the league the past few years, very few of them have stepped in and provided meaningful contributions. The time they spent warming someones bench could be put to good use in college ball.
> 
> Regardless I am someone that


it wasn't about the college education for me either. Far as I'm concerned I don't need a medieval literature or english lit classes. Or all those damn theology classes I had to take at St. Johns. Spanish, I took for 6 years in HS and didn't grasp it, so I could have really done without that in college. history? Didn't we do that in High School?

In high school I took sociology classes and we had books that they used in college, it was a BORE to me when I had to relearn everything in college. What a waste of time. All I needed were my Junior and Senior years when I finally started taking classes in my field of study.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I will give you some names of out of HS players who were contributors by their 2nd years. By contributors, I mean someone who is at least as good as say Matt Harpring is right now. 

Josh Smith, Dwight Howard, Al Jefferson, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Lebron James, Monta Ellis, Darius Miles, JR Smith, Amare Stoudemire.

At the very least, the reasons for not taking HS kids should not be because they don't all become all-stars. First of all, regardless of age, less then 5 players per draft end up becoming franchise players and usually maybe two become that in this league, so all-star selections should never be the main argument. 

The argument should be are they outperforming their peers in their given draft year (relative to draft selection). Are they still in the league after their rookie contract? The players who were picked in the first round that are now out of the league (incredible since this began in 1995) after their rookie deals begins and ends with Ndudi Ebi. That's pretty amazing that every single first round HS player picked at least made it to another deal don't you think?

People seem to judge the HS kids success or failure on whether or not they turn into NBA stars. If they turn into stars, it's because they were the best in their class and they were supposed to. If they bust, it was because they were unprepared.

However, I tend to take a different route when it comes to judging NBA players. The 2001 HS class (Curry, Chandler, Kwame, Diop, Wagner) was so bad at the top, that the gurus had six different players ranked at the top, before settling on Kwame Brown. The best players in this class believe it or not are Emeka Okafor and Ben Gordon. That's a crappy HS class if I have ever seen one.

Meanwhile the 2004 class was amazing, as will be the 2006 class and the 2002 (Melo, Bosh, Amare, Deron, Iggy), 2003 (Lebron, Paul, Deng) and 2005 (Monta, Blatche, Lou Williams) were also filled with future NBA standouts.

The success of the HS kids tends to be exclusively tied to how strong a given HS class is. I'd say the 2008 HS class is benefiting from having to go to college because there isn't one kid in that class that could come into the NBA and even be decent. However the 2009 class is being penalized because they have kids in Demarcus Cousins, Derrick Favors, Lance Stephenson, Xavier Henry and Renardo Sidney who are going to dominate college for a year.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

HB said:


> The bolded portion is inaccurate. I dont recall that many high school players that have come into the league and made meaningful contributions in their first two years in the league. Sure Bron and Dwight are the exceptions, but what about the Browns, Diops, Chandlers, Curry's, Stevensons etc that took a few years to get their bearing in the pros. Heck even Tmac and JO took a while before becoming all star caliber players.


What's to say they still wouldn't take a couple years in the pros even after going to HS. Like Dunleavy. Maybe he would have been contributing a few years ago if he had more years of NBA experience. It truly works both ways, and for that reason an age limit is ridiculous.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

We're going around in circles here. Coach K might be better at teaching a player than Lawrence Frank, but is Coach K for 2 hours per day during the season better than Kareem tutoring a young big man for as long as needed each day? Do you think Calhoun would have made Andrew Bynum as prepared as he was with the Lakers?

Secondly, I will argue that the only improvement players make in college is due to jumping up in competition from high school to college, and aging. Players develop faster in the NBA, that is indisputable. DeShawn Stevenson could have made a contribution to a college team instead of sitting on a bench his rookie year, sure, but I guarantee he was better in his 4th year in the league than he would have been had he spent 3 years in college like Brandon Rush. What has Brandon Rush improved in college? For that matter what has Darrell Arthur improved? Tyler Hansbrough? Tywon Lawson? These guys have the best coaches, best facilities, and best programs in the country at their disposal and you don't notice substantial improvement from year to year. Lawson still can't shoot, Hansbrough still can't play with his back to the basket, Rush hasn't added anything to his game, Arthur looks unmotivated because he hasn't changed anything in 2 years.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Nimreitz said:


> We're going around in circles here. Coach K might be better at teaching a player than Lawrence Frank, but is Coach K for 2 hours per day during the season better than Kareem tutoring a young big man for as long as needed each day? Do you think Calhoun would have made Andrew Bynum as prepared as he was with the Lakers?
> 
> Secondly, I will argue that the only improvement players make in college is due to jumping up in competition from high school to college, and aging. Players develop faster in the NBA, that is indisputable. DeShawn Stevenson could have made a contribution to a college team instead of sitting on a bench his rookie year, sure, but I guarantee he was better in his 4th year in the league than he would have been had he spent 3 years in college like Brandon Rush. What has Brandon Rush improved in college? For that matter what has Darrell Arthur improved? Tyler Hansbrough? Tywon Lawson? These guys have the best coaches, best facilities, and best programs in the country at their disposal and you don't notice substantial improvement from year to year. Lawson still can't shoot, Hansbrough still can't play with his back to the basket, Rush hasn't added anything to his game, Arthur looks unmotivated because he hasn't changed anything in 2 years.


Already talked about the teaching part. Its 2 hours practice, 6 to 7 days a week. Plus you have video sessions where I am pretty sure coaches worth their mettle will get to teach players more about mistakes and what not. You watch the college game Nimreitz, have you never noticed that these coaches are constantly communicating with their players. Like HKF said earlier, bottom line is that it boils down to these players to show they want to learn.

Not really going to get into hypotheticals with you on the whole Stevenson and Rush thing. What I do know is that it took Stevenson a while to get a bearing in the NBA. Considering I am a UNC fan and have watched most of their games, YES there has been improvement in Tyler and Tywon's game. I dont know why you keep saying Tywon still cant shoot. He hits those open jumpers with ease. The improvement he made on his perimeter shot is quite similar to what Felton did in his final year. The knock on him the previous year was that he could not shoot. Maybe you haven't notice, but Tyler Hansbrough is actually hitting the 18 footer with consistency now. How can you honestly tell me he has seen no improvement? I do think his back to the basket game is lacking and probably will get better coaching in that aspect in the NBA. Whose fault is it that Arthur is unmotivated? Thats the players' fault not the coaches fault.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Be real HB, Tywon looked completely scared in the Elite Eight and the Final Four to take a jumpshot. It's obvious after two years of coaching it isn't a strength.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

He was knocking those jumpers down before the injury. After he returned from the injury he just looked very tentative out there. He also got injured towards the end of the WSU game.


----------



## RoddneyThaRippa (Jun 28, 2003)

HB said:


> *Look the NBA is a business and can do however it pleases.* Can any of us complain about what a company like Walmart does with its business and employees? Sure we can, will it make any difference, absolutely NOT!
> 
> These guys wanna make money for those two years, go to Europe!
> 
> You guys act like they dont have options. You do know that some of them might actually make more money in those two years than they would on their rookie salaries right?


I don't know why you keep saying that because it isn't true. The NBA cannot do whatever it pleases just because it is a business. I can understand on the surface how the age limit could be argued as a reasonable business implementation, *but I've yet to see any proof that younger players have been less successful in the league than college players.* In fact, the evidence I've seen suggests the opposite. If that's the case, the NBA damn well knows it and the age restriction becomes an abritrary rule motivated by other causes. 

As for the NCAA, players don't owe them anything. It's a cash cow. You know it, I know it. Everybody knows it. At the end of the day, there is a pool of players for NBA teams to draw from. Pick the best, leave the rest. It's that simple regardless of age.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

You ever considered that kids might not want to go to a foreign country for two years?


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

Ah the joys of college



> In the report, the players said the workout in UCF's indoor field house, which followed an hour-long weight training session, included multiple agility exercises lasting five minutes each, two runs on a 200-yard obstacle course and two sideline-to-sideline sprints. They said Plancher fell during the final sprint, as coaches yelled at him to finish the drill.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> What does a professional athlete gain from going to college besides lost salary?


Maturity. How to handle fame....

Even just a year in college could have taught Andre Blatche about groupies. That would have saved him considerable embarassment.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

MLKG said:


> Maturity. How to handle fame....
> 
> Even just a year in college could have taught Andre Blatche about groupies. That would have saved him considerable embarassment.


Andre Blatche is famous?
There aren't groupies in college?


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

HB said:


> Its not about college academics. I have said that before. No one is getting a college degree in two years and I doubt the NCAA is making that arguement either. At the end of the day this mandate is because of money.
> 
> On a side note, dont you think the college fans deserve to enjoy some of these star players before bolting to the league?


**** college fans, the don't deserve anything, certainly not indentured servitude by these players.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

for people that want a career in the NBA and have the physical abilities, the best way to learn is to go up against the best as soon as possible IMO


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

MLKG said:


> Maturity. How to handle fame....
> 
> Even just a year in college could have taught Andre Blatche about groupies. That would have saved him considerable embarassment.


Perhaps if the players were choosing to play basketball for seminary schools this might be true. However, in real colleges kids drink, party, have promiscuous sex and violate drug laws with relative impunity. (Really, at my school you really had to work to get arrested for possession, say, for example, if there were a police officer entering the lobby to complain to the desk attendant about the noise of some random party, running up to them and screaming "I have three eightballs of coke!!!" would get you arrested.) I didn't get the least bit of maturity until I had to support myself. And I'm not sure what the Andray Blatche thing is about, as his actual problem is hookers. Unless your claim is that he'd learn to use groupies instead. :bsmile:


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

lol @ college being the key to maturity.

Once again, I give you fraternities.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

ehmunro said:


> Perhaps if the players were choosing to play basketball for seminary schools this might be true.....
> 
> And I'm not sure what the Andray Blatche thing is about, as his actual problem is hookers. Unless your claim is that he'd learn to use groupies instead. :bsmile:


Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying.

In college you learn how to "handle" groupies. How to mature from the days of picking up street walkers.

It was a joke.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

<a href="http://s170.photobucket.com/albums/u252/38radiusblog/?action=view&current=gregoden2.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u252/38radiusblog/gregoden2.jpg" border="0" alt="Greg Oden"></a>

lol at the idea that there arent any groupies in college...


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

Yeah, there aren't any groupies in college. Good job with the reading comprehension.


----------



## essbee (Oct 30, 2006)

MLKG said:


> Maturity. How to handle fame....
> 
> Even just a year in college could have taught Andre Blatche about groupies. That would have saved him considerable embarassment.


It's absolutely true that certain players can stand to learn life lessons in college, but this is where scouting/general management/interviews come in. The NBA is basically trying to protect itself from its own supply and demand because it can't trust itself. It should be on them to determine who is and who isn't NBA ready instead of putting into place a system that unfairly punishes people who don't need the lessons you're talking about. This is nothing but risk management.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

By the way, if the NFL put a rookie wage scale in, more players would be challenging their rule too. This is why players in football get 55 million at the top of the draft before they ever play a down. The reward for being one of the top picks is a lot of money. Now, you get to get a franchise player for reduced salary. Monta Ellis should be making at least 9 million given his production and he's been paid 760K.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I just wanted to pas along this excerpt. These are the kind of things you learn in the pros that you don't get anywhere else. This is Maurice Lucas talking about Greg Oden.



> Others have wondered if Oden is too nice to destroy opponents. "He's very powerful under the basket,'' said assistant coach Maurice Lucas, the power forward on the Blazers' 1976-77 championship team. "You can tell a lot about guys' personalities the way they like to dunk the ball, and he loves to dunk it hard and powerful. He has that kind of Amaré [Stoudemire], early Shaq kind of thing in the post: 'Give me the ball, and whoever's in the way I'm going to dunk on him.' ''
> 
> Lucas has been showing Oden film of centers to emulate. "I compare him a lot to the great Nate Thurmond, a guy who's got great agility,'' Lucas said. "I showed him Wes Unseld, I showed him Bill Walton, I showed him Wilt [Chamberlain]. I showed him Elvin Hayes down there just for footwork, and I showed Hakeem [Olajuwon] for footwork. I want him to see all the different guys and how they played and the different effects they had on the game.'


'


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> To be fair, Magic's rookie contract was nothing compared to JR Smith's. And Lebron James is already pursuing a business career while moonlighting as a basketball player.
> 
> Jay-Z didn't go to college, and now he has record labels, sports teams, and clothing lines.


And Bill Gates didn't finish college, and he's a billionaire. There are always exceptions to every rule. 



> College is overrated. And way too expensive. Nobody should be forced to go, especially if they already have the skills to pay the bills.


Making money isn't the only purpose of college. If you want to argue otherwise then obviously there isn't much to discuss. 



> Forcing people to go to college demeans the academic atmosphere at them even further. If you are at college you should be there because you want to learn. Not because you want to leave as soon as possible. They should do away with the whole notion of student-athlete, and just do inter-mural sports. Sure it would **** TV over, but it would re-center a lot of schools onto what matters, which is education, and beer pong... not your ****ing school's basketball team.


Yeah, this is utter nonsense.


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

KennethTo said:


> http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7996718?MSNHPHMA
> 
> Good deal, now the future Derrick Rose's, Melo's an Oden' can be milked for money by their respective college teams. At the same time, get paid nothing.
> 
> God I hate the NCAA. I hope more star US players just go to Europe and get paid 5 million a year and just say **** off to college basketball.


I find it mildly amusing that NBA supporters who hate the NCAA, are so naivethat they actually believe that the NCAA is behind this. Hello, Stern is the one pulling the strings here, simpletons.


----------

