ADVERTISEMENT

My cure for one and done

I don't know why athletes should become indentured servants

They're attending the school at the time they're wearing the uniform, if they decide they have better options elsewhere, why shouldn't they be allowed to stop being part of the school and pursue them.

If you loved watching people build computers, would you have a right to argue that Steve Jobs shouldn't have been allowed to leave college to pursue a better opportunity?

The above example and everyone's ambivalence as to whether any non-athlete student chooses to drop out evidences that it has nothing to do with academics and 100% to do with you wanting to see the same guys playing the sport for 1 team over a longer period of time. I'd venture to guess that 95% of those who hate one-and-dones also hate professional sports' free agency.
 
The NBA should allow teams draft players at any time....

And hold their rights till the begining of their senior season. Gives the players some options if they don't like their draft position or get drafted at all.
 
Its a lot easier than that....


scholarship counts for 4 years....period.

Easy-Peasy-Japaneasy. If NCAA wanted to address the problem you can get it done in 5 minutes.

Its so GD simple and obvious - it frustrates the hell out of me to listen to any bloviations that make it out to be some difficult issue. Even the NCAA "brass" aren't so GD stupid that they don't realize the issue could be mitigated in a matter of minutes.


If the kid is so good that it is worth it to get him for one year....then play with one less scholarship player for 3....so be it.

Of course, the NCAA does not want to address the problem.....so they will instead bluster and bloviate, rather tan solving the problem in 5 minutes.

Its so GD simple "even a caveman could do it"...........but not a conflicted caveman who is perfectly fine with exploiting ignorant, gullible youngsters in order to line their soulless, hypocritical pockets.

End of Story.



This post was edited on 4/7 4:34 PM by bjf1984
 
Re: Its a lot easier than that....


Originally posted by bjf1984:

scholarship counts for 4 years....period.

Easy-Peasy-Japaneasy. If NCAA wanted to address the problem you can get it done in 5 minutes.

Its so GD simple and obvious - it frustrates the hell out of me to listen to any bloviations that make it out to be some difficult issue. Even the NCAA "brass" aren't so GD stupid that they don't realize the issue could be mitigated in a matter of minutes.


If the kid is so good that it is worth it to get him for one year....then play with one less scholarship player for 3....so be it.

Of course, the NCAA does not want to address the problem.....so they will instead bluster and bloviate, rather tan solving the problem in 5 minutes.

Its so GD simple "even a caveman could do it"...........but not a conflicted caveman who is perfectly fine with exploiting ignorant, gullible youngsters in order to line their soulless, hypocritical pockets.

End of Story.



This post was edited on 4/7 4:34 PM by bjf1984
So you would inevitably create significantly less opportunities for many disadvantaged kids? I dont think that's a great solution
 
Re: Never happen. No basketball coach,

Originally posted by Art:
even those who would like to see players stick around for 3-5 year, would support it, making it a non-starter.
I think you would be surprised. Remember it would help out the little guys. There are far more Penn State type of Basketball programs then Kentucky.
 
NO...you wouldn't

Not even a little bit. But I'm not about to try to explain it to folks again.
 
Bad idea

College basketball is a minor league professional sport that's primary purpose is to prepare kids in the NBA. If a kid leaves for the NBA after one year, then the school did a great job in preparing the kid for the NBA.

It is a terrible idea to take away scholarships from schools because the school succeeded in getting the kid to the NBA. If anything these schools that do such a good job preparing kids for the NBA should be able to train more kids.
 
No - they are a pro team (nothing semi about them)*

The same holds true for the vast majority of D-1A basketball schools.
 
Re: Bad idea

Originally posted by RestonChester:
College basketball is a minor league professional sport that's primary purpose is to prepare kids in the NBA. If a kid leaves for the NBA after one year, then the school did a great job in preparing the kid for the NBA.

It is a terrible idea to take away scholarships from schools because the school succeeded in getting the kid to the NBA. If anything these schools that do such a good job preparing kids for the NBA should be able to train more kids.

I recently saw a Drexel billboard where they were touting the amount of engineers they had in the workforce. It's obvious why they paid for that billboard, to show that if you come to Drexel our instructors and co-op program will likely get you a job.

For years many on this board have suggested that linebacker recruit "X" should come here because of our track record of putting LBs in the NFL.

How does Bama, USC and schools like that recruit so well year after year?

All schools are proud of their stats for putting however many young adults in whatever profession. For some reason basketball coaches should be ashamed of this?

Coach K has basically said screw it...I'm in.
This post was edited on 4/7 6:23 PM by PSURAHJ
 
Actually, I wouldn't.

Kids flunking out, transferring. Must never happen.
 
So many teams have less scholarships, but no kids lose scholarships...ok

Doesn't take a math major to figure out that less kids would get scholarships if Duke had 4 fewer to hand out the next 3 years.
 
Re: So many teams have less scholarships, but no kids lose scholarships...ok

I guess if your goal was creating parity this could help.
 
NO


I said I wouldn't go through it again....because when I did wrt football I was smothered by idiots.

But - just once - I'll go over how easy it is (if the NCAA really cared about kids/education etc)...but I'm not going to get dragged into any further idiocy from the grandstands.


You simply look at how many kids get D1 scholarships each year....take the average over the last 4, 5 years, whatever you want.
You divide that by the number fo D1 basketball programs that are out there.

Lets say, for sake of argument, there are 780 kids getting D1 basketball scholarships per year, and 200 D1 programs.....so that's 3.9 per program. Round that up to 4. Now, each school gets 4 scholarships per year. Period.

So each year you have the exact same number of kids (you can even bump it up if you want to) getting scholarships.

If all your kids leave after 1 year....you get four the next year. If all the kids stay for 4 years...you get four the next year.....no matter what. 800 kids per year get scholarships, just as it was before. NOONE "looses" a scholarship.

The difference is that the Coach/Program who brings in a lot of 1 and done kids may find that they only have 8 or 9 scholarship players. The program were kids stay all four years may have 15, 16 on scholarship.

Shouldn't we want to incentize doing the "right thing" (bringing in true student athletes who want and value an education?).

Why should a coach/program that "does it the right way" and has players who stay 4-5 years and graduate be punished (only get 2-3 scholarships to give per year), and a school that runs through 1 year wonders be rewarded (by being able to give out 6 or 7 scholarships)? WTF is it thet we are trying to reward? It is completely MFing bass-ackwards - and all of the "fan" knuckleheads, all of the NCAA brass, and all of the overpaid gym teachers who SAY they want to respect the "student" part of the student athlete are either: dumb as a bag of hair...or full of hypocritical crap.

With an equal number to give for each program - every year - eventually, coaches will have to decide if a 1 and done kid is a better bet than a good player who actually wants to be a college student and get an education.....and hopefully will skew things towards taking the kid who will be a legitimate student. If what "we want" is to have more student athletes and fewer mercenaries....its a no-brainer.

The only way you don't have a system like that....and we don't....is if the powers that be in the NCAA DO NOT value student athletes - but instead prefer mercenaries. It ain't mother humping rocket science. It's clear that the NCAA and the overpaid gym teachers don't give a damn.



If anyone doesn't "get it"...they are either to conflicted - like the NCAA and the "Elite" (LMAO) Coaches - and don't give one damn about the "student" part of the student-athlete.......or they are too damn stupid to process a thought.



One decent person in charge could - in one day - largely solve this problem. The problem is.....not one MFer involved cares one lick about anything other than getting a bigger chunk of cash....or satisfying their personal, petty desires. That goes for the NCAA, the coaches (as a group), the fans (as a group), the media, the University Presidents (as a group), the players (as a group) etc etc etc.
It ain't rocket surgery.


Now...we will open the floor to the mouth-breathers.



This post was edited on 4/7 9:50 PM by bjf1984


This post was edited on 4/7 9:55 PM by bjf1984

This post was edited on 4/7 9:56 PM by bjf1984
 
Re: Bad idea

Coach K is just like the others in the fraternity. He wants to win and to hell with doing things the honest way.
I have lost a lot of respect I have had for Duke. They are just like the other shills for NCAA.
 
This problem is not solvable! Too many conflicts due to big $.

Winning coaches and programs make big dollars as we all know. With this goal in mind, often the only goal, talented prospects are hunted by all programs whether or not they qualify for admission. Moreover, NCAA is also on the receiving end as well.

In summary: coaches, programs, and NCAA want more and more of the fan $. Talented prospects are lured by big future pro contracts. Conflicts! $$$$$$$$$$$$
 
Re: NO


Originally posted by bjf1984:

I said I wouldn't go through it again....because when I did wrt football I was smothered by idiots.

But - just once - I'll go over how easy it is (if the NCAA really cared about kids/education etc)...but I'm not going to get dragged into any further idiocy from the grandstands.


You simply look at how many kids get D1 scholarships each year....take the average over the last 4, 5 years, whatever you want.
You divide that by the number fo D1 basketball programs that are out there.

Lets say, for sake of argument, there are 780 kids getting D1 basketball scholarships per year, and 200 D1 programs.....so that's 3.9 per program. Round that up to 4. Now, each school gets 4 scholarships per year. Period.

So each year you have the exact same number of kids (you can even bump it up if you want to) getting scholarships.

If all your kids leave after 1 year....you get four the next year. If all the kids stay for 4 years...you get four the next year.....no matter what. 800 kids per year get scholarships, just as it was before. NOONE "looses" a scholarship.

The difference is that the Coach/Program who brings in a lot of 1 and done kids may find that they only have 8 or 9 scholarship players. The program were kids stay all four years may have 15, 16 on scholarship.

Shouldn't we want to incentize doing the "right thing" (bringing in true student athletes who want and value an education?).

Why should a coach/program that "does it the right way" and has players who stay 4-5 years and graduate be punished (only get 2-3 scholarships to give per year), and a school that runs through 1 year wonders be rewarded (by being able to give out 6 or 7 scholarships)? WTF is it thet we are trying to reward? It is completely MFing bass-ackwards - and all of the "fan" knuckleheads, all of the NCAA brass, and all of the overpaid gym teachers who SAY they want to respect the "student" part of the student athlete are either: dumb as a bag of hair...or full of hypocritical crap.

With an equal number to give for each program - every year - eventually, coaches will have to decide if a 1 and done kid is a better bet than a good player who actually wants to be a college student and get an education.....and hopefully will skew things towards taking the kid who will be a legitimate student. If what "we want" is to have more student athletes and fewer mercenaries....its a no-brainer.

The only way you don't have a system like that....and we don't....is if the powers that be in the NCAA DO NOT value student athletes - but instead prefer mercenaries. It ain't mother humping rocket science. It's clear that the NCAA and the overpaid gym teachers don't give a damn.



If anyone doesn't "get it"...they are either to conflicted - like the NCAA and the "Elite" (LMAO) Coaches - and don't give one damn about the "student" part of the student-athlete.......or they are too damn stupid to process a thought.



One decent person in charge could - in one day - largely solve this problem. The problem is.....not one MFer involved cares one lick about anything other than getting a bigger chunk of cash....or satisfying their personal, petty desires. That goes for the NCAA, the coaches (as a group), the fans (as a group), the media, the University Presidents (as a group), the players (as a group) etc etc etc.
It ain't rocket surgery.


Now...we will open the floor to the mouth-breathers.



This post was edited on 4/7 9:50 PM by bjf1984

This post was edited on 4/7 9:55 PM by bjf1984
This post was edited on 4/7 9:56 PM by bjf1984
Seems to me you aren't solving the "problem" of one-and-dones, you're just spreading them around. So Kentucky maybe takes 1 or 2 less of those types so that they can make sure they stay around 10 scholarship players. Well another school will gladly take those 1 or 2 players to boost their programs since any program trying to reach the next level would gladly take 2 less scholarship players if it meant they brought in NBA caliber talent. So while I think your system would broaden parity in college hoops, it wouldn't decrease the total number of one-and-done players at all.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT