NBA quickly moving to lower draft age to 18
- Thread starter Delco Lion
- Start date
As they should. College football should do it as well. These players get very little in return compared to the schools, coaches, media, and apparel companies that profit from them big time. Quite an archaic system if you ask me.
CFB is much more problematic, from the physical standpoint.
Agreed. That and many unions have a minimum age to join, helps protect the older members
Then they can join the new AFF or whatever it’s called. They can start making money right out of high school. Otherwise, colleges should start paying these kids.
What kids should get paid? There is this little thing called Title IX....be prepared to pay ALL athletes. Good luck with that.
18 year olds are not physically ready for the rigors of professional football. When college players start getting paid six figure salaries then it’s no longer college football and there’s no point in subsidizing their education anymore considering the payments they’re receiving.
True, but it should be the person's choice if he wants to pursue the NFL at any age.
I see no reason they couldn’t be drafted by the NFL at 18 and still go to college.
AAF has the same requirement as the NFL that students are out of high school 3 years before joining their league. Maybe the XFL won't have that requirement but the AAF does.
I always hear that colleges are making all of this money from these kids, but every study I have seen related to football shows that very few programs make money on their football program.
Additionally, many of the schools that "make money" on a program use that money to pay for all of its non revenue sports. Under this scenario, the school isn't really making money, the revenue sport athletes are subsidizing the non revenue sport athletes. It's kind of like taxes, the rich subsidizing the poor.
By in large sports scholarships are a huge financial windfall for college athletes. When you look at how few actually make the pros, this fact is readily apparent. Now, do some of the elite kids not make as much as they would by playing these sports in college sure, but they are the distinct minority of athletes.
Additionally, many of the schools that "make money" on a program use that money to pay for all of its non revenue sports. Under this scenario, the school isn't really making money, the revenue sport athletes are subsidizing the non revenue sport athletes. It's kind of like taxes, the rich subsidizing the poor.
By in large sports scholarships are a huge financial windfall for college athletes. When you look at how few actually make the pros, this fact is readily apparent. Now, do some of the elite kids not make as much as they would by playing these sports in college sure, but they are the distinct minority of athletes.
why would any NFL team waste time, money and resources to scout high school kids to draft when they wouldn’t be available to play for a few years, no guarantee of their development, instead of college juniors and seniors who are physically developed and mentally prepared to help your team win now, in a league that demands that you win NOW.
You really have no idea apparently. These kids live better than minor league athletes in other sports who do get paid. It’s funny that some people still think these kids live in squalor.
Pay them but no scholarship, they have to pay their own tuition and taxes on that tuition, so it’s really a wash.
I hadn't considered that side of it. Getting rid of 85 football scholarships and reclassifying them as employees would make Title IX compliance much easier. The ratio of female to male scholarships would immediately tilt to the female side. I'm not saying that's good, bad, or anything in between but rather schools struggling with Title IX would get a huge lifeline. Or at least that's how it seems.....
OTOH, if everyone in every sport gets paid then Title IX would never be an issue.
So make kids eligible to be drafted out of high school like baseball. Almost zero would get drafted. None would be good enough yet. So then what do they do? They go to college.
The only thing that needs to happen is stop putting it on the kid to make the decision. Too many make the wrong decision, go undrafted and end up nowhere and without a degree. If a NFL team thinks a kid is good enough to draft, he probably is good enough to make the roster.
The only thing that needs to happen is stop putting it on the kid to make the decision. Too many make the wrong decision, go undrafted and end up nowhere and without a degree. If a NFL team thinks a kid is good enough to draft, he probably is good enough to make the roster.
The Alston case, which will be ruled on any day now, could make this a mute point. And the Conference it may affect the most is the ACC wrt their long term GOR with Notre Dame, and the potential inability for all the little brothers and privates to compete.
The AAF is showing just how good the players have it in college. The AAF is already having trouble meeting their payroll, and no one gives a crap about watching them. The three year contract is not guaranteed even if they ARE able to meet payroll, so a player could be gone in year two with absolutely nothing to show for it except what's left of his roughly $80,000.
It's kind of like taxes, the rich subsidizing the poor.
How rich would they be without the poor slobs doing the grunt work?
How rich would Andrew Carnegie have been without the poor slobs getting maimed and killed to produce all that steel?
Archaic? Unfair? Maybe - but if you're a fan of college sports, and from a purely selfish perspective, this is a horrible idea. College b-ball and FB were better when players stayed for 4 years.
The whole pay the players idea touted by every talking head on ESPN is unworkable. Does a college swimmer work any less hard than a college FB player? Do you only pay players in "revenue" sports? Do you only pay the really good players in "revenue" sports? If there are no cash positive women's sports, do you end up paying only men? Can big $ programs pay more than those D-I schools that are barely staying afloat financially? Does the SEC then get to convert from under the table cash payments to above-board direct deposit?
that maybe but it is the NFL PLayers Union that does not want them, its been collectively bargained, so why would the NFL try to change that?
It's not the union, it's the owners. The age/eligibility restriction existed for at least ten years before it was memorialized in the CBA.
And do you think that Jeff Kessler would argue against the interests of his most important client?
Yes those are all legit questions that need to be figured out by those in charge. But to use the reasoning that these issues are too hard to figure out therefore they shouldn't try is a complete cop out and a BS argument. None of us on this message board, or any of the talking heads, have the specific answers to any of those issues which is why it's fun to debate/argue about it. It's the college presidents / athletic directors / coaches / athletes and dare I say the NCAA are the ones that need to sit down and hammer out the issues.
Imagine if in the early days of the space race scientists had the attitude that it's too hard to figure out things like "Do you use solid or liquid rocket propellant?" "How do we get the capsule back to earth safely?" "Won't people's eyes float out of their head in zero-g?" so let's not try to go to space.
None of these questions are that difficult to address and it's being done so as we write by the powers that be of which the NCAA isn't one.
True.... but you need competent people on the job. And folks with the proper motivation and goals.
Surely, you wouldn't want these folks involved.
You surely wouldn't expect them - and their ilk - to meet the criteria of competence and righteous objectives.
Right?
Oh I agree with you 100%, it's not on our local glorious leaders, it's on the collective group of college athletic stakeholders. Or at least a committee of learned individuals since that's what they like to use for the football "playoffs".
There are some bad individuals, but that doesn't mean there's no hope nor should we not try.
Ah, the most common conundrum of transfer pricing: what does the university make v what does the athletic department make? Question would be moot if the model that a) isolated the athletic department in its own impenetrable silo; b) used monies from revenue-generating sports to fund money-losing ones were abandoned and the AD would every so often be called on to justify the existence of every varsity sport. That is only done at a small handful of schools of which I'm aware.
I think the space analogy is more like - why don't we build a civilization on the sun?
My only perspective on all of this is as a fan. I foresee no changes to the system (encouraging kids to go pro earlier or paying "significant" sums to "student" athletes) that won't make college FB and BB worse. College BB has already been considerably worsened by the straight to the pros period, and then the 1 and done / phony student period. Remember Bird vs. Magic in the finals? Phi Slamma Jamma vs. the Hoyas and Pat Ewing? Those days are long gone in college hoops. CFB will be seriously diminished if the top talent bypasses CFB altogether or leaves after one year.
...and I reject the argument that a full ride scholarship + the perks and spending $ they already get is trivial / an insult. It certainly isn't for the 98% who don't go pro. Ok, can we pay them a bit more? Maybe ... but I think you'll have to pay the kids on the track and fencing teams as well - and I think that breaks the bank at most schools.
OK then, offer a solution that doesn't enslave them to college football. Why should they not be able to earn money in their prospective discipline? Why should they have hone their craft (aka- give their services away basically free of charge) at the collegiate level?
From 1990 to 2006 it existed merely as a memorandum issued by the Commissioner's Office and appeared nowhere in the CBA NFL's lawyers thought it would be better to include it in the CBA and voila.
Fine. XFL. Wherever. Let these young men earn a living instead of risking injury while lining the pockets of billion dollar institutions.
To have control of their rights when they come out of college. It’s done in other sports.
The revenue comes in through 1 or 2 channels, and is spread around to everyone. Yet the "talent" in those 1 or 2 channels sees nary a dime. Seems fair.
Isn't that up to the kids and teams to decide?
Why are they physically up to the rigors of CFB... an every down back for Penn State for example playing 12 plus games a season, vs playing in the NFL as a special teams/occasional back while they develop?
LdN
Aside from completely misrepresenting what I said....
OK, let's just give them just enough so they don't upset that apple cart. God knows the fans of these institutions want what's best for the players and not their rooting interests.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Football Four thoughts on Penn State's 2025 Schedule, Who's The Whiteout?
- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley