In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 304
Online now 638 Record: 9097 (3/2/2012)
The No. 1 'Bama fan community on the Internet
BOL message board for off-topic posts
Tailgating, recipes, cooking, food & drink
Buy, sell or swap tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
After watching Lattimore go down in his junior year and Noel get his freshman season cut short by awful knee injuries, I have really started to think about the rules that prevent these kids from going pro.
I think with basketball, because I can remember when Kobe and Lebron went straight to the league, it is an easier sell that kids should be able to jump straight to the league. Why make kids go to school for a year? Brandon Jennings played his first year out of high school overseas and was then drafted 10th in the draft, so will that route become the norm for can't miss prospects? Why take a risk, playing for "tuition, housing" when you can make money overseas? It's not like these "one and dones" are even studying much, if at all, during the spring semester, so is their fall semester supposed to really provide them an education? What is the point?
As for football, I 100% understand that kids need strength and conditioning programs (even DJ Fluker who came in with NFL size). They need to be conditioned to take the pounding they will be subjected to at the next level. But why 3 years and not 2? Why does Clowney really need to be at USC for another year?
While the Noel and Lattimore injuries are being called "flukes", the larger point is that the NCAA is playing with these kids' livelihoods. Why regulate and dictate when a kid is ready to go pro? Yes, there are many stories about kids who got bad advice and went pro too soon. Those who went undrafted and threw away their chance to play in college because they declared. But there are also stories about sophomores and juniors who declared too soon.
As a nation that is free market about everything else (or so it used to be), how can we really place regulations on these kids?
This post was edited by FlightSuitUp 14 months ago
Its not the NCAA that restricts kids going pro. They have no say in the matter. It is the individual institution itself, I.E. NBA, NFL and so on.
Solid point - not sure why I thought the NCAA was involved in these policies. So is it the players union or David Stern (in the case of the NBA) that doesn't want these kids jumping straight to the league?
I think there are some NCAA guidelines here. Look at Baseball--you can get drafted right out o HS or after your 1st or 2nd year of Juco. If you go to a 4 year school you have to wait till your 3rd year or your 21.
Thats because MLB has no restrictions. The NCAA can not regulate whether a kid goes pro or not. All it can do is restrict you once you become a member of the NCAA or want to become a member. The NCAA could not do crap if a kid wants to go to the NFL in yr one and the NFL allowed it.
With a few exceptions, there aren't many players who'd be able to jump straight from high school to pro football. Most would be late draft picks or sign as FAs,
To the OP pretty sure its all league rules. The NCAA can't stop a player from dropping football and getting a job regardless if the job is playing football or not
I like the rule for football. Players are not physically ready for the NFL out of HS and their chances of injury I think goes up if they went straight to the league because of the huge physical gap.
Don't like it for basketball. Kids can be ready out of HS for NBA and it waters down college basketball with 1 and done.
Baseball is different with the expansive farm/minor league system.
Never Gets Old
The leagues regulate. I look for the NBA to make it two years soon and it should be.
The reason it went to one year was that it hurt nBA teams and it hurt the game. There were a bunch of 18 year olds sitting at the end of the bench making a lot of money.
What does the two year rule do to the college game? Make it better or worse?
I think it leads to 10 high school players going overseas the first year, with exponential increases every year (as players see the contracts those guys sign - and then subsequent NBA success).
How about for the future of college basketball? Does what we are seeing in the SEC become the norm? Low-scoring affairs with one or two good teams?
Basketball should go back to the way it was, football is fine and baseball is fine. I dont like the basketball rules due to, as mentioned before, all the one and done guys...what's the point?
The rules are part of the labor agreements of the NFL and NBA. In other words...the players have agreed to the terms.
I like the idea of kids going straight from high school or after their 3rd year of school. Nothing in between. That just an opinion.
It has to make it better just for the fact that it will give more consistency to a program.
If they go to Europe it is no different than going for high school. I don't think many European teams are going to invest money in players just to send them back when coming from high school. That being said, players are going to want to stay in America just like they do now.
If a program gets two years with a player it can only help. UK would get very hard to beat, but so ate we in football.
I dont see how a two year rule could possibly hurt the current college game.
That's because the NBA has some of the worst GMs in all of sports. If you don't want a bunch of young players then don't draft them. But you can't get mad when you draft a bunch of young guys, and then other high schoolers go. Also, doesn't the NBA draft 17-18 year old players from Europe? How's that any different?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports