Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: One-and-Done May Be Coming to an End
Page: 2 of 3
rpbobcat
General User
R
Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,661
person
mail
rpbobcat
mail
Posted: 6/5/2017 2:10 PM
To some extent,I'm surprised the NBA Players want to allow 18 year olds to play.

To me,that just increases the number of people trying to take your job each season.
The Better Ohio Bobcat
General User
BOB
Member Since: 3/28/2017
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 196
person
mail
The Better Ohio Bobcat
mail
Posted: 6/5/2017 5:00 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
To some extent,I'm surprised the NBA Players want to allow 18 year olds to play.

To me,that just increases the number of people trying to take your job each season.
They take your job either way
100%Cat
General User
Member Since: 1/17/2013
Post Count: 2,725
mail
100%Cat
mail
Posted: 6/6/2017 9:25 AM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
Name some. It won't be MLB or NHL player. If a special skill or certification is required, then it would rule out 18 year olds. That is not the case here.

Oh, and you can join the army and fight in a war when you're 18.
President of the United States (35).
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,682
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/6/2017 11:34 AM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
Name some. It won't be MLB or NHL player. If a special skill or certification is required, then it would rule out 18 year olds. That is not the case here.

Oh, and you can join the army and fight in a war when you're 18.
President of the United States (35).
United States Senator -- 30
United States House of Representatives -- 25
BA Poster -- Mental age of 2
rpbobcat
General User
R
Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,661
person
mail
rpbobcat
mail
Posted: 6/6/2017 12:07 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Name some. It won't be MLB or NHL player. If a special skill or certification is required, then it would rule out 18 year olds. That is not the case here.

Oh, and you can join the army and fight in a war when you're 18.
President of the United States (35).
United States Senator -- 30
United States House of Representatives -- 25
BA Poster -- Mental age of 2
So if,theoretically,you have a very young Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate,neither one could become President.
Guess that would make the Secretary of State the next President.
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,650
person
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/7/2017 1:11 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
The NBA GMs like the rule because they want more information before they draft a player. One or two years in college let them see improvement in skills and physical strength. The NBA players association is trying to protect their union brothers, so more new possible players in the draft changes things for their constituency. Marginal players might not sign their second contract. The NCAA wants the high school superstars for as long as they can have them. When you add it all up, it looks like 18 years olds won't be playing in the NBA.
For the record, I think this misses the point. Ending one and dones is beneficial to the NBA, but not because they assume people will go to college and they'll have more insight into the player's games before they're drafted. In fact, I think the NBA and NBA owners are fed up by how little the college game does by way of player development.

It's not a coincidence that the NBA is initiating this conversation the same summer they're introducing expanded rosters, rebranding the D-League, and introducing new contracts that allow for simple player movement between the D-League and NBA teams. The NBA is clearly taking steps towards letting those one and done guys enter the league immediately, and letting teams develop their own players directly. There's a lot of work to do, but if you give Ben Simmons the choice between getting paid an NBA salary for two years as a minor leaguer without impacting his place on the NBA salary scale, or being forced to go to LSU for two years. . .

well, I think that's a losing proposition for the NCAA.

College basketball should tread very carefully here. Because while 18 year olds won't be playing in the NBA, the NBA just announced a system that allows them to get paid without playing in the NBA or the NCAA.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 6/7/2017 3:24 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
College basketball should tread very carefully here. Because while 18 year olds won't be playing in the NBA, the NBA just announced a system that allows them to get paid without playing in the NBA or the NCAA.
College basketball will be fine with that system. In fact, I would think they might prefer it. The one-and-done is really hurting the product because fans are having a hard time getting to know the players. All the NCAA needs is competitive games and players you can get behind.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,682
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/7/2017 3:40 PM
OUVan wrote:expand_more
College basketball should tread very carefully here. Because while 18 year olds won't be playing in the NBA, the NBA just announced a system that allows them to get paid without playing in the NBA or the NCAA.
College basketball will be fine with that system. In fact, I would think they might prefer it. The one-and-done is really hurting the product because fans are having a hard time getting to know the players. All the NCAA needs is competitive games and players you can get behind.
+1

I think that this might be the best thing to happen to college basketball since they replaced the the peach basket with the modern hoop.
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,650
person
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/7/2017 5:29 PM
OUVan wrote:expand_more
College basketball should tread very carefully here. Because while 18 year olds won't be playing in the NBA, the NBA just announced a system that allows them to get paid without playing in the NBA or the NCAA.
College basketball will be fine with that system. In fact, I would think they might prefer it. The one-and-done is really hurting the product because fans are having a hard time getting to know the players. All the NCAA needs is competitive games and players you can get behind.
The alternative would be much better for the NCAA: just start paying players, already.

Best of both worlds.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 6/7/2017 10:14 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
The alternative would be much better for the NCAA: just start paying players, already.

Best of both worlds.
I assume you mean other than what they are already being paid. It would be great for the 40 or so schools that are making money at this. The rest of us, not so much.
100%Cat
General User
Member Since: 1/17/2013
Post Count: 2,725
mail
100%Cat
mail
Posted: 6/8/2017 8:51 AM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
College basketball should tread very carefully here. Because while 18 year olds won't be playing in the NBA, the NBA just announced a system that allows them to get paid without playing in the NBA or the NCAA.
College basketball will be fine with that system. In fact, I would think they might prefer it. The one-and-done is really hurting the product because fans are having a hard time getting to know the players. All the NCAA needs is competitive games and players you can get behind.
The alternative would be much better for the NCAA: just start paying players, already.

Best of both worlds.
I can't see how this is a feasible solution in any way. Where does it stop? Is it high majors only paying players? How will struggling mid majors with thin budgets now afford to pay players? If basketball players get paid, what about other sports? What about women's hoops players? Where does it stop and how can you justify that stopping point?
bornacatfan
General User
Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,752
mail
bornacatfan
mail
Posted: 6/8/2017 9:50 AM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
College basketball should tread very carefully here. Because while 18 year olds won't be playing in the NBA, the NBA just announced a system that allows them to get paid without playing in the NBA or the NCAA.
College basketball will be fine with that system. In fact, I would think they might prefer it. The one-and-done is really hurting the product because fans are having a hard time getting to know the players. All the NCAA needs is competitive games and players you can get behind.
The alternative would be much better for the NCAA: just start paying players, already.

Best of both worlds.
I can't see how this is a feasible solution in any way. Where does it stop? Is it high majors only paying players? How will struggling mid majors with thin budgets now afford to pay players? If basketball players get paid, what about other sports? What about women's hoops players? Where does it stop and how can you justify that stopping point?
yeesh. There is no good that comes of paying male players in 2 sports. I understand everyone who advocates paying players but the bigger picture of running athletic departments far outweighs those select athletes the media has made bigger than life at the expense of the thousands of athletes that are using the chance or the money they get to go to school to prepare for life via participation and a degree.

I do not think players opting to go to the D league or Europe out of HS is a problem. Let them go....who cares? The schools will still field competitive teams, the games will still be exciting and those guys who do not want to be there in the first place can sink or swim with their handlers decisions. Eff em. The argument that kids are getting left behind because they did not have a chance to get a degree has long been gone. Their choice....just like anyone else in society.
OU_Country
General User
Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,401
mail
OU_Country
mail
Posted: 6/8/2017 10:13 AM
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
yeesh. There is no good that comes of paying male players in 2 sports. I understand everyone who advocates paying players but the bigger picture of running athletic departments far outweighs those select athletes the media has made bigger than life at the expense of the thousands of athletes that are using the chance or the money they get to go to school to prepare for life via participation and a degree.

I do not think players opting to go to the D league or Europe out of HS is a problem. Let them go....who cares? The schools will still field competitive teams, the games will still be exciting and those guys who do not want to be there in the first place can sink or swim with their handlers decisions. Eff em. The argument that kids are getting left behind because they did not have a chance to get a degree has long been gone. Their choice....just like anyone else in society.
I agree with you - they can't pay players, especially with the quickly increasing costs of tuition. There are thousands of students who would be happy to have 4-5 years of paid tuition. I get some of the arguments for compensating players for the use of their image, and I don't have the solution to that. The number of those are FAR outweighed by the number of players in all sports who are truly student athletes.

I've often thought that the way to go on this related to the NBA might be one of a couple options I think that are used in other leagues:

1) draft a kid out of HS, and retain the rights to him while allowing him to play two years of college if they think it's better than coming to the league immediately. The team pays his tuition in lieu of a salary. I believe the NHL does something along these lines, right?

2) treat it like baseball - you go pro out of HS, or you wait until after your junior season. Your choice as a player. The farm team system is obviously very different from the D-league at this time, which makes this tougher.

Something else that I think would be beneficial, and I don't pretend to know the rules on is this: Why not allow a HS kid to be eligible for the draft, not hire an agent, and if he's not drafted, be eligible for college ball? Treat them in a similar way that college kids declaring are treated, where they get a look in camps, get feedback, and then decide.

The key in all of this is that the NBA probably wants a two and done to allow players to mature more. They want guys who are ready to contribute right away after they're drafted. One and done, or players right from HS generally don't seem ready to do so.
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,650
person
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/8/2017 10:58 AM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
College basketball should tread very carefully here. Because while 18 year olds won't be playing in the NBA, the NBA just announced a system that allows them to get paid without playing in the NBA or the NCAA.
College basketball will be fine with that system. In fact, I would think they might prefer it. The one-and-done is really hurting the product because fans are having a hard time getting to know the players. All the NCAA needs is competitive games and players you can get behind.
The alternative would be much better for the NCAA: just start paying players, already.

Best of both worlds.
I can't see how this is a feasible solution in any way. Where does it stop? Is it high majors only paying players? How will struggling mid majors with thin budgets now afford to pay players? If basketball players get paid, what about other sports? What about women's hoops players? Where does it stop and how can you justify that stopping point?
There are plenty of reasonable options.

You could adopt the Olympic model where players are free to generate income through endorsements, autographs, and control over their own likeness. OSU wants to sell Braxton Miller jerseys? Braxton Miller gets a cut. More than fair.

You could also cap the compensation of coaches and athletic department personnel in order to free up funds. Is there any rational reason that the highest paid state employee in 40 some odd states is either a football or basketball coach?

You could put the money in a trust. You could pay a low, but livable wage as if they were washing dishes in the dining hall.

As for other sports, it only needs to be a free market. Schools that can pay should be able to do so. Sports that can pay should do so. If a high ranking women's golf recruit can't find an offer that comes with a stipend, she won't get one. Seems pretty simple to me.

Hell, you could just create a salary cap a la the NBA. You have no obligation to spend the money, but it's there if you can afford to.
Last Edited: 6/8/2017 11:01:17 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
rpbobcat
General User
R
Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,661
person
mail
rpbobcat
mail
Posted: 6/8/2017 10:58 AM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
I can't see how this is a feasible solution in any way. Where does it stop? Is it high majors only paying players? How will struggling mid majors with thin budgets now afford to pay players? If basketball players get paid, what about other sports? What about women's hoops players? Where does it stop and how can you justify that stopping point?
This has been a hot topic out here on sports radio.

They've had a number of atty's give their opinion on it.

The are a number of issues that would have to be worked out to even consider it.

A few things that have come up:

1.Legally,especially with title IX,the consensus is that,to pay any player,in any sport,you'd have to include all D1 men's and women's sports.

2.Most people feel payment would be in addition to a scholarship.
Rosters have people on partial scholarship or no scholarship at all.
Would every athlete on your roster have to be paid ?

3.Paying an athlete makes him/her and employee.
So now you get into all kinds of issues with labor laws,unions,benefits etc.

4.There's no way this works unless it is applied to all D1 schools equally.
That would mean the "haves" ,or the NCAA, contributing to a pool for the "have nots".
bornacatfan
General User
Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,752
mail
bornacatfan
mail
Posted: 6/8/2017 11:27 AM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
4.There's no way this works unless it is applied to all D1 schools equally.
That would mean the "haves" ,or the NCAA, contributing to a pool for the "have nots".
That would mean the "haves" would have to realize there are 250 or more have nots.
giacomo
General User
G
Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,761
person
mail
giacomo
mail
Posted: 6/8/2017 12:26 PM
I still maintain that when coaches make 1-8M per year, something is wrong in the way players are compensated. If coaches made something along the lines of what professors make, then the scholarship is fair. My earlier example was Bo Schembechler making 100k in 1981. That would translate to 345k today. Harbaugh is at 8M!
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,682
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/8/2017 5:55 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
I still maintain that when coaches make 1-8M per year, something is wrong in the way players are compensated. If coaches made something along the lines of what professors make, then the scholarship is fair. My earlier example was Bo Schembechler making 100k in 1981. That would translate to 345k today. Harbaugh is at 8M!
I agree that coaches' salaries are way out of line. The solution is not to start paying players but to start reducing coaches' salaries. I don't have a good solution as to how to put that genie back in the bottle, but there has to be a way. Otherwise, we are really talking about colleges running professional sports franchises. That would jeopardize the non-profit, educational status of colleges. We are close to a rubicon moment, and if we cross over, all college athletics -- from big time to small time -- will suffer as a consequence. This is the moment for big, bold decision making. Unfortunately, that's not something the NCAA has a great track record on. This may be a story that doesn't end well for anyone. A hundred years from now folks may look back, scratch their heads, and say, "College's used to have students play in organized sports? That's really strange. Why would an educational institution get involved in the sports world?"
giacomo
General User
G
Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,761
person
mail
giacomo
mail
Posted: 6/10/2017 11:50 AM
You may be right. I've thought for awhile that higher ed was in a bubble. Saw two articles this week that said many colleges had to severely discount tuition because of falling enrollments. And many kids are going to two year schools and vocational schools because they've seen their friends and family rack up debt. Of course, this is not happening at the top schools, but it makes you wonder about the facilities arms race and coaches salaries and how that may play out.
HeHateMiami
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Mason, OH
Post Count: 492
mail
HeHateMiami
mail
Posted: 6/12/2017 11:53 AM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
Name some. It won't be MLB or NHL player. If a special skill or certification is required, then it would rule out 18 year olds. That is not the case here.

Oh, and you can join the army and fight in a war when you're 18.
Truck driver. You have to be 21 to get certified to drive interstate and I believe some of the higher classes of CDLs may carry age limits beyond that, this is part of the reason it's rare to find truck drivers younger than 30.
Big Willy
General User
BW
Member Since: 12/29/2004
Post Count: 197
person
mail
Big Willy
mail
Posted: 6/12/2017 6:48 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
Name some. It won't be MLB or NHL player. If a special skill or certification is required, then it would rule out 18 year olds. That is not the case here.

Oh, and you can join the army and fight in a war when you're 18.
NFL football.
giacomo
General User
G
Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,761
person
mail
giacomo
mail
Posted: 6/13/2017 3:45 PM
I don't believe playing pro basketball and football equates with finishing law school, medical school, truck driving school, being president of the US, serving in congress, etc.

Maybe there should be an age equivalent requirement to posting on this site. Say 6 years old.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 6/13/2017 4:20 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
I don't believe playing pro basketball and football equates with finishing law school, medical school, truck driving school, being president of the US, serving in congress, etc.
You are correct. There is a much larger monetary commitment to professional basketball players.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,682
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/13/2017 9:14 PM
giacomo wrote:expand_more
I don't believe playing pro basketball and football equates with finishing law school, medical school, truck driving school, being president of the US, serving in congress, etc.

Maybe there should be an age equivalent requirement to posting on this site. Say 6 years old.
I posited the following in a previous post in this thread:

United States Senator -- 30
United States House of Representatives -- 25
BA Poster -- Mental age of 2
The Optimist
General User
Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,610
mail
The Optimist
mail
Posted: 6/14/2017 8:50 AM
There is an age minimum of 13 to post on BA. Didn't any of you read the fine print when you signed up!!!
Showing Messages: 26 - 50 of 52
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)