[HitsterParticipant]

With the NFL requiring guys to be 21 years old ( 3 years out of High School) before they can be drafted and the MLB having effectively an 18 or wait until 21 draft policy. I wondered what would happen if the NCAA simply said if players attend college then they must stay for a set number of years!

Of course a person could not be made to stay in college but if the NCAA threatened sanctions against teams where players opted out after a year then effectively teams would only be able to recruit players who stayed for the minimum time. I know that the NCAA would be unlikely to do such a rule but they seem to move about the eligibility date as they are free to do and they have their own agenda regardless of what the major sports do.

If the NBA went to the MLB model then you would have players potentially all having their best development option being college in the 3 major US sports.

[mikeyvthedonParticipant]

I think that each sport is radically different and that the comparison to the baseball ruling is ridiculous. In baseball, no matter where you are drafted, you are going to be in some type of farm system. I do not know the average age of a rookie player in the MLB, but I am sure that it is probably over however old one would be when they would reach their junior year in college. Yes, there are cases of young players making the majors (Andruw Jones, Ken Griffey Jr., more than likely Bryce Harper), but on the whole, they have the farm system that brings draft picks through a process of readiness.

The NBA does not have this system. I think it is pretty clear that no matter the changes you would make to the D-League, it would not mimic this system. The simple reason? There have been to many cases of players being able to contribute at a young age. Yes, they would be more ready with more time and physical development. But, as of late especially, players are able to play huge roles in the NBA with very little time spent in college. Kevin Durant, Derrick Rose and Tyreke Evans definitely proved that, not to mention Amare Stoudemire and LeBron James, all of whom won rookie of the year with one or less years in college.

So, in baseball, I think the fact that it has a farm process of A, AA and AAA, plus I am sure the other leagues that exist inside these clubs, helps the draft rule make sense. In football, I would say, the VAST majority of players, would get completely destroyed if they permitted early entry. They need that time to work on their bodies and minds, most rookies even need time to adapt once they are in the league. Now, you could ask why baseball has this in place, and I would probably say that it would make college baseball a barren joke. There are a TON of rounds in baseball, so you could see entire teams jumping ship, it would more than likely be a total epidemic if the rule were not in place. That is why I think the "3 year rule" exists in both of these sports.

I think basketball has displayed very little need for this to exist. I feel that the "one and done" rule, is more than likely not even necessary, but is a fair compromise, especially if the three year rule were to come into effect. The NBA owners simply gain more on their investment than these other leagues would by drafting these young players. If you were to pass up Derrick Rose for the reason of him having only played one year of college, well, odds are, that would have been an awful decision. These other leagues have reasons to have these rules that the NBA simply does not have. Not only that, but as much complaining as there is about the "one and done" rule, on average, there have been around 7 or 8 per draft. Considering that there are over 300 D1 schools, that is not exactly an epidemic.

[Author]

Posts