I like it. http://espn.go.com/dallas/nba/story/_/id/10538276/mark-cu...

Isn't setting the age limit at 21 "age discrimination"?  I don't see how this would pass legal muster.  I'll let some of our BA lawyers answer this more definitively, but that's my layman's opinion.  

 

Really?  That's interesting.  Is that by statute?  Could age discrimination for younger people be challenged in court?  I assume that the current 19 limit hasn't been.  I suppose that the 19-year-old age limit could be justified on the basis that the lack of complete bone development, etc., might make the rigors of the NBA dangerous for one younger than that age.  I can't see that for a 21 age limit, given the fact that the previous limit was 19.  I guess the word that is at the forefront of my mind on this issue is "arbitrary."  These are all questions that come to my mind on this issue.  

I have long thought the one and done was really not a good rule. Watching the farce that is a 5 star commit being recruited to a U and ever having an intention of even going to class once he gets on campus if he can help it. I personally know and have seen papers friends wrote for players and several major programs.

The one and done takes a kid out of circulation for a year and does little to nothing for his development as a player. WHen a kid is a pro he can be coached up 24 hours a day. When he is in college there are rules for off season contact, in season contact, who can be in those sessions, how many players can be toghether....all those things go into a situation where a coach has very little time for individual skills development as most of those contact hours are spent with 4 players at a time teaching a frosh your system and philosophy. Once a kid in the D league or the NBA he gets the keys to the practice facility and  he can be there with a coach as much as he wants.

I agree with the maturity issue and have long said the NBA needs to have a rookie academy or course of education if they want to make their product better. Kids need a couple of courses to include Public Speaking.. I think Tommy had a professional presence course at OU....that would be a good start with many of these athletes. Most need a lot of polish and instruction as to what they say and how they say it. Understanding of how they represent the league and how their actions reflect on the bigger picture seems to be a good tool for the league in growing their acceptance. 

THey need a comprehensive course in Business that introduces them to basic accounting, contracts, law and would enable them to have a basic understanding of where their money is. I am not so silly as to think they have the accumen or desire to get an in depth educations but learning  the finer points of what the contract means and budgeting/interest/net worth and the legal implications of how their actions have consequences would grow the product. Given the fact  that they just basically got handed a winning lottery ticket and we know how many lottery winners don't keep their act together why not give the kid a fighting chance to take charge of his future? Keeping some money for himself and understanding how many pieces there are to the pie while the fam leeching off him are leaving him broke is kind of paramount.

A general course of living....substances, sexual health, guns, automobiles and safety issues. Health, nutrition and individual workout habits that many have never had as they have been told where to be and when to be there their entire athletic career ....most of these things none of them learn in going from HS to living on your own is kind of important. One of the best courses I ever took in HS was an experimental course offered initially to the members of the Varisty lettermans club called Bachelor Basics. The home ec teacher came to us and wanted to teach a course for male and thought if the lettermen set the example learning to cook, sew, keep a budget, shop and keep house that other males would find it acceptable. We laughed and guffawed but took her course thinking it would be an easy credit. Little did I know that in less than 4 months I ould be living on my own with a bunch of guys on the North Side of Chicago. I was the only one who had any skills in taking care of organizing the homestead. I can't imagine how valuable that would be to  most of these pampered athletes living on his own for the first time.

I like the fact that Cuban sees the wasted year but am more impresssed that he see that you will need to have some system of suspensions in order to have those future NBA prospects take the education and preparation to get to the league seriously. If each athlete in the NBA understands they are a part of a bigger product and not some superstar that is going to have to take his lumps and learn all those lessons one by one individually I suspect you may get more buy in.

It is stupid to send kids to school that do not want to be there. We are never going to get rid of the "what if they don't make it" situation even though, in any other profession ....if you skip school and don't make it ....you are on your own but that seems to be of concern and gets brought up a lot. Seems like all the little ballers tug on heartstrings and there is some sort of safety net needed for some idiot who skips college for Hoop Dreams.

Grow the D league....get those kids that do not benefit from class out of school and into professional life. I like the thought there. Get the schools that are throwing lots of money and resources at getting the next one and done and have no intention of getting him any of their stellar academic wisdom imparted out of the picture.

Well, I think there's a concern some kids get pushed through high school whether or not they're learning anything. So if they don't work out as athletes, they're really up against it. I like the idea of covering school tuition if the kid doesn't work out as a player.

[[/QUOTE]

Well, I think there's a concern some kids get pushed through high school whether or not they're learning anything. So if they don't work out as athletes, they're really up against it. I like the idea of covering school tuition if the kid doesn't work out as a player.
[/QUOTE]

I think this is workable depending on cost modeling. I don't know if this is common, but we know a player entering his second full season in the minors and his initial MLB draft contract includes a payment clause for his final year of college if he is released or suffers a career ending injury. 

Unless I read this incorrectly, a kid could have five D grades in Ohio and be eligible to play unless local standards are higher.

http://www.ohsaa.org/eligibility/EligibilityGuidelinesGuidanceCounselors.pdf

The list below  is the class of 07 kids ....the one I am most familiar with as we passed through 6 years of summer ball with them and their coaches, mentors and parents. Draft class/Lottery of 08 declared/eligible freshmen. 

If b-ball and football didn't have all the TV and other money tied to them, nobody would care if a kid went from high school right to the pros.  MLB drafts high schoolers all the time and nobody cares.  If a kid is good enough for pro soccer or golf or lacrosse or tennis or anything else, they can go pro right out of high school and nobody cares.  Yes, there is a higher degree of physicality involved with football and b-ball.  But there are probably some kids -- like LeBron -- who can handle it.  I would add one aspect to Cuban's plan -- they should also help educate the kids while they're in D ball, not just pay for college afterwards.  Too many kids who are athletically gifted come out of high school barely able to read or write, and some colleges won't improve them while they're on scholarship -- they just perpetuate the problem by faking grades (looking at you, UNC).  And if they're basically illiterate, few colleges will take them if they have no NCAA eligibility left.  The kids should take a real literacy test before being drafted and if they can't pass it, they get real tutoring.

I don't know if it is still the standard protocol here, but when I was a freshman here in 1998 we had to take (going by memory here) INCO 103, which was public speaking.

As for the rules and "age discrimination," a large part of me can't understand why a business can't have a standard for work qualification.  I'm obviously not a legal expert, but if a company has an educational requirement, is that discrimination against those who do not have that education?  The NBA is a business, if they would require a player be 20-21 years old (or whatever standard that may be) I struggle to see how that is unfairly treating someone.  It is their business, is it not?  If I apply for a job and don't get an interview, it's not automatically discrimination against me.  If I don't meet the standards, I don't get in.  Why does the NBA have to be different?