Hey Guys, what do you think of the NBA rule that requires kids to be at least 19 and one year removed from High School. I've been watching another thread at a different web site with all kinds of opinions and theories. Here's my take on the subject.
This rule has nothing to do with looking out for high school kids, personal freedom, or any other issue. It simply gives the NBA an opportunity to utilize college basketball for their future "One and Done" players, who have no interest in getting a degree, as a minor league SCOUTING service.
When an elite player is in high school, he's a physically gifted athlete playing against kids who have very little talent. It's very hard to gauge someone's potential against inferior competition. That dilemma was driving NBA GMs crazy. To rectify that problem, Stern decided to use college basketball as their "One and Done" minor league system. Now they can see a guy play for one year against the best in the nation.
I think its a stupid rule. If these same 18 years can go fight in a war for the country why cant they get paid for doing what they do.
It was nice seeing what Durant, Rose, and Eric Gordon did to student-athletes but why stop them from supporting their families. College isnt for everyone. They shouldnt be forced to be babysat for a year for SCOUTS to gauge how good they are. At the end of the day, its all about $$$$ for the NCAA who milks these cash cows and $$$ for Stern and the NBA
Along with scouting this rule helps big market colleges make money off these "One and done" players. Coaching staffs are going all out for these players for the hope of taking the title home for that one year of service. It's not helping the athletes nor the schools in the long run. Look at all the scandals coming about after these players leave I.E (Derrick Rose and OJ Mayo) If the NBA wanted to help the schools and the players possibly pursue their degrees they would expand the rule and make it similar to NCAA Football (3 years removed from high school)
I agree with this man. Hell, make them have a college degree to play in the NBA. Every other company in the world does it, why can't the NBA
Mel, I agree with all of your comments. I think you nailed it, especially the part about 18 year olds who can fight for their country, but they can't earn a living as a professional basketball player. And you're also right in that everyone doesn't need nor want to attend college.
thats david stern's take on the jim rome show that was aired the other day
Make it like baseball where you either go stragiht out of high school or have to play 3 years of college. it works both ways then.
I hate the one and done rule. I agree with Yup Yup, let the players go right out of high school or have to play 3 yrs of college. The only ones who benefit from the one and done are the college athletic departments. I don't like the argument that 1 yr. gives the NBA scouts one more year to evaluate them. They end up drafting these players based on potential rather than performance anyway. If they really like a player in high school, more than likely they will draft them high after one year of college no matter how they played. Jrue Holiday, Demar Derozan, BJ Mullens did not have great college years, but they are still expected to go high in the draft.
It is interesting though that there isn't much criticism about the NFL requiring 3 yrs out of high school. I'm not sure why this rule is in place. Maybe because football is such a physical sport and teams want them when they are physically ready to come in and play right away? I don't know.
I copied this post from another website because it's right on time.
No where else in the world do they tell an 18 year old kid that he doesn't have the right to work except in the NBA and the NFL. Once you are 18 you should be allowed to work wherever whenever. And if you don't have the skills then like most normal Americans you go to college, junior college, a trade school, etc. to polish up your skills. That's what the NBDL was supposed to be designed for I thought. And there is the option of going overseas to play. Look, the kids are one and done now and they are not buying the NCAA's fake bullcrap of student athlete anymore.
The NCAA has longed pimped these kids for their commercial and financial benefit and the kids have figured it out and are now outsmarting the NCAA to the detriment of the Universities who choose to play with fire and recruit these kids.
That's the dumbest comparison!
Basketball players are in the entertainment industry, not in combat!
Another part your missing out is....These guys can go to the D-league and play a year.....Stern said it on a espn show
the rule is dumb but it means good. what i propose is the nfl rule. these guys should go to school for 3 year. this way kids can mature and learn the game. why not use a rule that the most successful sport in the US uses. it works out fine for them and sometimes you have sure fire top10 picks go back for senior seasons. guys like kobe, lebron, dwight and amare have been successful but for every one of them have been 4 or 5 others who havent made it. the rule would do wonders for 99.9% of guys. I agree about the 18 year olds can fight in the war so they should be able to make a living playing basketball but you can't legally drink or gamble until your 21 either. Its not going to hurt guys like kobe, lebron, dwight and amare but it will help the kwames, eddy currys, and telfairs of the world. and if it turns out they arent good enough for the nba, they can get their 4 year degree for free.
yeah i dont agree with the rule but i do understand what david stern is saying about teams likeing the rule so they can see how a player does against good competiion...basically the rule benifits the teams more then the highschool players which is understand able because its a buisness and in buisness you make decisions that benifits you the most...it doesnt hurt the teams to have to wait another year..but it does exposes some of the players who would have made the jump once they play against better competiion...what i didnt agree with when he was on jim rome and jim rome said "look at most of the top players they are straight to the pros guys "..and david said" well everyone list those players but what about the players that didnt make it"...refering to players like korleone young and lenny cooke.....well for one lenny wouldnt have survived in college or even made it because of grades and koreleone young has had contracts over in europe for 6 figures so i wouldnt put him in a catagory of making that bad of a decision
Yesterday it was reported that congress was trying to push Stern in the next CBA -
also - keep an eye on the work of sonny vaccaro. he is one of the strongest advocates against the minimum (mind you he has gained significantly financially from teen basketball) - http://nbadraftdaycountdown.com/2009/05/14/more-on-sonny-vaccaro/
i wrote about 1K words on the subject specifically - http://nbadraftdaycountdown.com/2009/05/08/the-age-limit-debate/
I clicked on the link but couldn't read the story. Nonetheless, I think anyone who understands the dynamics of what's happening, realizes this rule was implemented solely for the benefit of the NBA. This is not a rule designed to help the young men.
Here's the reason for the rule. Instead of scouting elite H.S. players going up against vastly inferior competition, now they can spend an entire season scouting them while playing against the best in the nation.
Stern had to do this because GMs were wasting draft choices on high school guys without the ability to see how they do against top flight competition. That also goes to show you how stupid some NBA GMs are.
huh why should they make them have a college degree?..theres alot of JOBS where u dont need a college degree and the nba is a JOB..you should never make some one stay 4 years in college if they can get a job that sets them up for life by going for none or 1,2,3 years
I don't agree with forcing people to attend college when they have no interest, aptitude, or desire. There's another point I think you're missing. If a young man is actually good enough to play in the NBA, making him wait 4 years would cost him millions of dollars. Would you want to give up that kind of money for some stupid rule?
Overall, Stern knows what he's doing. He is allowing these guys to play each other...Think about it..
These are the conferences these 1 and done players are going...so they will play some NBA talent...at least instead of letting HS players come in...they sometimes never player NBA talent unless its in a meaningless all-star HS game.
yeah he knows what hes doing..hes doing whats best for his company(nba)..its definatly fair for him
Yea but the places that don't make you have college degrees aren't billion dollar companies either. Invalid point. And if they stay the 4 years and get a degree and the NBA doesn't work out they will have something to do with their lives.
Im confused...what do u mean?
I disagree. I think the amount of HS we dont remember or dont talk about (Bender,Telfair,Wright) will always be a lower number because most guys went to college for 1 season
no the adults are allowed to work. look at it this way some jobs require you to have so many years experience at a certain level before you can be considered for that particular job. look at college as getting your experience. getting a scholarship is similar to going into the military. your schooling, and housing are paid for. its not a big deal for the nfl. im sure there high school football players that think they can play nfl ball right now and could use the money but they have to go to school for 3 years. and if they need money they can work part time while attending school. alot of college guys do it.
I'm fine with the rule. Prior to this rule, there were too many kids coming out of highschool who were unprepared. The GM's were having a tough time evaluating these kids and were concerned about making long term commitments to these guys who are too often busts. So they decided to make them go to college in order to get a better feel for the kids before drafting them. It is in the best interest of the league and last time I checked, any billion dollar corporation is entitled to do what is in it's best interest.
Besides, it is only one year, and if the kid really wants to work and make money, they can go overseas, or the NBDL and play basketball for a living for 1 year. They are not being stopped from making a buck like of some of you guys are trying to claim.
Secondly, there are some benefits for the players from this rule as well. Guys that are not ready for the NBA have somewhere to work on their game and improve their draft stock instead of getting stuck on a bench and never developing. I like the rule.
but where are these numbers coming from? over 10 seasons?
If you say 10 seasons...i may agree but if your going off 10 years...you have to show the total of HS guys to Freshman guys
and also...what is truly not working out in your eyes?
( also i notice that email dude, come holla at me then)
Football is that way because you have to be much tougher physically to play. I wouldn't want to go out of high school and meet Ray Lewis across the field. Football needs the 3 years just so players can be physically ready, I guarantee a lot less high school players are ready for the NFL then the NBA. It's just based off of the toughness of the sport.
In addition to the other reasons pointed out in this thread, please don't forget that NBA scouts don't want to attend high school games. They have enough on their plate trying to scout as many college games they can attend in a season. Going to high school gyms isn't where they want to be.
I seriously think if your the no. 1 and 2 HS prospect in the country you should be allowed to put your name down for the draft your senior year. because that way kids will work harder at there skills in HS to be the best so they can skip the one and done.
I agree if you're one of the top choices in high school. If you have the talent and are told you'll be selected in the top five of the lottery, I think it's a good move. Why should anyone have the right to deprive those young men of millions of dollars if they're selected in the first 4-5 choices?
Why go to college for one year and pretend to be a student?
And let's also remember all of this is purely voluntary. No one is making these young guys apply for the draft. They still have the option of taking a college basketball scholarship.
I think one year is pretty good middle ground between what the owners and the athletes want. The owners want to see these kids play at a higher level of competition so they can better evaluate them before committing millions, and the players want to make money. The players should'nt complain about one extra year, because if they are any good they will be making millions. And if they are so desperate to make immediate money or are too dumb to pass the minimum requirements to get into college, then they have the right to play in the NBDL or overseas. Or that does'nt sound good, then work a regular frickin job. I'm tired of hearing people complain about how the system is unfair and takes advantage of the kids and keeps them from making money, boo frickin hoo, cry me a river. Life is so unfair for these poor athletes that get screwed by the system. What a joke. A billion dollar corporation is loking out for what is in it's best interest, that's life.
LLPerez22, you made some good points, but it's more than a question of fairness or feeling sorry for them. For me it's the hypocrisy of these guys going to college for one year while taking Basketball 101 and 102. They are NOT students, so it makes a mockery of the term "student athlete". These guys do not belong in college, they have no interest in school, so they should be allowed to just start their professional career right away.
And if they fail, that's their problem.
I agree the whole concept of them being student/athletes is ridiculous, but you have to look at it from a business stand point. The athlete has the option to go play in the NBDL, but they know that they are more likely to improve their stock by playing in college instead of against grown men in a league with no exposure. The athlete get's the benefit of being treated like as star on campus, increasing his exposure if they choose to go to a major college, and that exposure increases both their draft stock as well as endorsement stock. And when it's all said and done, it is just one year. The player is'nt being screwed and the league is'nt being screwed. The fans and colleges all benefit. Guys like LeBron who are ready to contribute immediately after Highschool are rare, the one year rule works for everyone except the extremely dumb athletes who can't qualify, or the athletes that were'nt that good to begin with and only get exposed as frauds that one year in college and never reach the same level of stock as they would have had right out of highschool.
you made no sense..of course some companies require you to go four years in college because you need the education..you dont NEED college education to go to the nba so youre " players shoul dbe required to go to college for four years" makes no sense..and as far as the rule im just not agreeing with it from the players stand point and a lil from the nba stand point because even with one year some o fthe players didnt prove much it anything (mullans,holiday) in that one year yet they are still gonna get drafted in the lotto or high so the one year is still flawed in that reguard..then you look at rubio and jennings..both played o.k over in europe but both will still go lotto so for players going overseas or dleauge for a year it doesnt prove much because so far if they are ranked very high in hs and on the draft board even if they play average they still are gonn aget drafted high...if john wall or the tyler kid thats going to europe after his jr year plays average they still are gonna go high in the draft based off there hs pedigree