(03-30-2018 10:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  Syracuse may have gotten off easy here. Bazley had already signed his LOI, but he could have waited until much later in the year to make this decision, leaving Boeheim in the lurch. At least now there may be time to recruit a replacement, either from the ranks of unsigned high school players or from the crop of graduate transfers that always emerges at this time of year.

Unless he finds a true hidden gem...he screwed over Cuse with a late bailout. He certainly won't find a 5 star talent...obviously Cuse told other highly rated recruits No already...those guys have moved on to other schools.

(03-30-2018 10:53 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(03-30-2018 10:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  Syracuse may have gotten off easy here. Bazley had already signed his LOI, but he could have waited until much later in the year to make this decision, leaving Boeheim in the lurch. At least now there may be time to recruit a replacement, either from the ranks of unsigned high school players or from the crop of graduate transfers that always emerges at this time of year.

Unless he finds a true hidden gem...he screwed over Cuse with a late bailout. He certainly won't find a 5 star talent...obviously Cuse told other highly rated recruits No already...those guys have moved on to other schools.

Looking over the roster, Syracuse would have had more available scholarships even if he hadn't gone to the G-League, so in this case you are right. He leaves a hole that probably won't be filled. Buddy will likely walk on, so he won't use up a scholarship.

Which brings up an interesting question. If Buddy Boeheim were a 5 star recruit, but he walks on so his Dad can have an extra scholarship to give, is that really kosher? Could/should the NCAA require that such a player be counted against the scholarship limit? Or, what if he isn't the coach's son, but just the son of a wealthy alum who wants to help out his school?

(03-30-2018 11:09 AM)ken d Wrote:  Which brings up an interesting question. If Buddy Boeheim were a 5 star recruit, but he walks on so his Dad can have an extra scholarship to give, is that really kosher? Could/should the NCAA require that such a player be counted against the scholarship limit? Or, what if he isn't the coach's son, but just the son of a wealthy alum who wants to help out his school?

It's been done and it's not against any rules. Wayne Tinkle's son is on scholarship at Oregon State, but Steve Alford's son, at UCLA, and Greg McDermott's son, at Creighton, played as walk-ons for at least part of their time in college, to free up scholarships for teammates.

As for wealthy people who let their scholarship-worthy kids play as walk-ons to free up scholarships for others: Happens all the time in sports like baseball where the scholarships are much more limited. Coaches in those sports often recruit players from families who can comfortably afford to pay for their kid's college for that reason.

(03-30-2018 11:22 AM)Wedge Wrote:  As for wealthy people who let their scholarship-worthy kids play as walk-ons to free up scholarships for others: Happens all the time in sports like baseball where the scholarships are much more limited. Coaches in those sports often recruit players from families who can comfortably afford to pay for their kid's college for that reason.

Happens with lacrosse, too. Partials territory, no less.

(03-30-2018 10:28 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-29-2018 10:16 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-29-2018 09:31 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-29-2018 05:05 PM)Wedge Wrote:  As someone suggested awhile back, if the NBA doesn't open its draft to recent HS graduates, then the G League should set aside 3 roster places on each team that can only be filled by players who have graduated HS but are not yet eligible for the NBA draft. (E.g., teams could have 12 unrestricted roster spots plus 3 more that can only be used on 17-18 year old HS grads.)

Assuming the G League expands by a few more teams so that each NBA team has a G League team, there would then be 90 G League places specifically reserved for players who want to bypass college basketball.

I could see the NBA allowing its teams to draft players straight out of high school and then requiring them to play a year in the G-League before calling them up to the bigs. That would also give those teams incentive to give more minutes to the "none and done" players they have already used a valuable draft pick on.

They might adjust the G-League pay scale to give these kids incentive to actually sign with the team that drafts them instead of returning to the draft the following year.

One high school player per team is almost double the number of one and dones last year.

There are two logical ways to address this if the NBA wants to preserve the idea of keeping straight from high school players out to cut down draft mistakes.

One is for the NBA to offer the 30 or so top prospects a G League salary to go play a year and then be draft eligible after the season, maybe toss in a college scholarship like MLB does, if you sign out of high school, MLB will pay for you to get a four year degree. Can even toss out a $50k or $100k signing bonus. Remember that's cheap, NBA minimum this year is $582,180 and 30th pick gets just over $1.3 million in this draft, first pick just over $6 million.

Another is just add a third round to the draft with a low pay scale and if you get called up after a year to the team that drafted you, you get whatever salary you negotiated the year before but if there are any guarantees you defeat the point.

College athletics is at a crossroads, with challenges to its player compensation rules coming from all sides. All things considered, courts would much prefer that the NCAA and professional sports leagues sort out all their issues on their own. They would rather not be forced to make momentous rulings.

One thing is already part of settled law. Intercollegiate sports are only tax exempt if they are deemed “amateur”, and a part of the schools’ larger tax exempt purpose. But for the most part, the definition of amateurism is left hazy. To some extent, the NCAA has treated amateur status the way one would look at virginity. Once it’s lost, it can never be restored. But that’s an NCAA construct, not the IRS position.
If the NCAA were to modify its stance on this one point, it could offer a number of possible options for the NBA and NCAA to more peacefully coexist. Here is one option.

The NBA could institute a supplemental draft, for high school seniors only. It would take place before the regular draft, and ideally before the NCAA’s second signing date. No player would have to declare for this draft. It would consist of a single round, and no team would be required to use its pick. But, if they do use it, it would be in lieu of their first round pick in the regular draft.

If a high school senior isn’t selected in this supplemental draft, he may then not be drafted until he is two years out of high school.

If he is drafted, he would be assigned to the G-League. The team that drafts him would then have to sign him to a rookie NBA contract, based on the current salary scale for the position in which he was drafted. That is, if he was selected by the team holding the 10th pick, he gets the starting salary any other player would get for being the 10th pick in the regular draft. The team that drafts him must sign him to a rookie contract before the next draft or lose its rights.

At that point the player has three options: stay in the G-League in hopes of being drafted later by another team, sign with another pro league, or go to college. Here is where the NCAA comes in. After one year in the G-League, they should, IMO, allow the player to regain his amateur status by enrolling in college, and completing a minimum of 30 credit hours with, say, a 2.5 GPA. For its part, the NBA team would reimburse the school for the cost of its scholarship for that year, since the player won’t be eligible to compete that year (much like a transfer student).

After regaining his amateur status, the player would have three years remaining eligibility, and the NBA would agree not to draft him again until he has used up at least two of them.

Everybody gives up something here, but everybody also gains something. That has to happen for any deal to work.

Compensation is a big issue.

It's hard to argue that players have no choice but be in college in any sport other than basketball and football. In all other sports, they are free to pursue a professional athletic career. If you want to be paid to play there's the signup list.

The big two of basketball and football players haven't had an option and that lack of choice is not of the making of college athletics.

Puts colleges in a bad situation. These players have no choice but be here if they want to be professional and since they are forced to be there to pursue their career, they want to be compensated because the schools profit yet the schools aren't the ones holding them back from doing what they really want.

(03-30-2018 04:28 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Compensation is a big issue.

It's hard to argue that players have no choice but be in college in any sport other than basketball and football. In all other sports, they are free to pursue a professional athletic career. If you want to be paid to play there's the signup list.

The big two of basketball and football players haven't had an option and that lack of choice is not of the making of college athletics.

Puts colleges in a bad situation. These players have no choice but be here if they want to be professional and since they are forced to be there to pursue their career, they want to be compensated because the schools profit yet the schools aren't the ones holding them back from doing what they really want.

Compensation is a big issue because the most successful college football and basketball teams generate so much money, not because you have to be 3 years out of high school to be NFL draft-eligible.

It makes economic sense to not pay college tennis players just because there's no money in college tennis. The fact that the best high school or college tennis players can turn pro whenever they want to doesn't change the economics of the college sport.

Obviously the economics are different for college football and men's hoops than they are for college tennis. A home college football game for one of the top 10 teams in attendance generates more game-day revenue than a home game of a lower-attendance NFL team. A Kentucky home basketball game probably generates more game-day revenue than a Milwaukee Bucks home game. The Pac-8 and Big Ten used to split less than $1 million total from the Rose Bowl and it was the only bowl they played in, and the NCAA controlled the TV rights then; now each conference nets $60-90 million/year just from bowls and the playoff and much more than that from the conference's TV rights.

(03-29-2018 04:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Just saw this
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/22958...n-g-league

first guy to go directly from High School to the G League.

Have a feeling it won't be the last.

To add on this. The NBA is upping the G-League pay to $7,000/month or $35,000 base salary from $19,000 or $26,000 depending on status.

http://gleague.nba.com/news/nba-g-league...19-season/

This will no doubt help. Also that 53% of current NBA players have played in the G-League, making it much less of a stigma than in the past.

In completely unrelated G-League news the Reno Bighorns are about to become the Stockton Kings
http://gleague.nba.com/news/sacramento-k...ton-kings/

None-and-Dones.

(04-18-2018 12:46 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(03-29-2018 04:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Just saw this
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/22958...n-g-league

first guy to go directly from High School to the G League.

Have a feeling it won't be the last.

To add on this. The NBA is upping the G-League pay to $7,000/month or $35,000 base salary from $19,000 or $26,000 depending on status.

http://gleague.nba.com/news/nba-g-league...19-season/

This will no doubt help. Also that 53% of current NBA players have played in the G-League, making it much less of a stigma than in the past.

In completely unrelated G-League news the Reno Bighorns are about to become the Stockton Kings
http://gleague.nba.com/news/sacramento-k...ton-kings/

That 35k also doesn't include provided housing and insurance on top of (not deducted from) that number. If Bazely still goes in the first round next year and the shoe companies get in the game with two-tiered apparel deals that convert upon getting drafted I would totally understand if every year some kids who didn't particularly want to go to school and would prefer to live and breathe basketball for a full year decided to just go live a middle-class life with their own money for a year or two before jumping to the NBA.

(04-20-2018 11:13 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 12:46 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(03-29-2018 04:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Just saw this
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/22958...n-g-league

first guy to go directly from High School to the G League.

Have a feeling it won't be the last.

To add on this. The NBA is upping the G-League pay to $7,000/month or $35,000 base salary from $19,000 or $26,000 depending on status.

http://gleague.nba.com/news/nba-g-league...19-season/

This will no doubt help. Also that 53% of current NBA players have played in the G-League, making it much less of a stigma than in the past.

In completely unrelated G-League news the Reno Bighorns are about to become the Stockton Kings
http://gleague.nba.com/news/sacramento-k...ton-kings/

That 35k also doesn't include provided housing and insurance on top of (not deducted from) that number. If Bazely still goes in the first round next year and the shoe companies get in the game with two-tiered apparel deals that convert upon getting drafted I would totally understand if every year some kids who didn't particularly want to go to school and would prefer to live and breathe basketball for a full year decided to just go live a middle-class life with their own money for a year or two before jumping to the NBA.

Living in Latin America is not at all the same. What you are after is guys who have had nothing, an ability to have above the board Nike/Adidas/BBB/whomever endorsement contracts and make enough to live in the US for a year before playing in the NBA. Most of these guys will go from their homes to a G-League team for 5 months, then back home to get ready for the NBA draft and summer league. It's a bridge. A lot of one-and-done players in quarter systems never attend the Spring quarter, go home get ready for NBA draft.

(04-20-2018 11:37 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Living in Latin America is not at all the same. What you are after is guys who have had nothing, an ability to have above the board Nike/Adidas/BBB/whomever endorsement contracts and make enough to live in the US for a year before playing in the NBA. Most of these guys will go from their homes to a G-League team for 5 months, then back home to get ready for the NBA draft and summer league. It's a bridge. A lot of one-and-done players in quarter systems never attend the Spring quarter, go home get ready for NBA draft.

That's kind of the point - if Under Armor or Adidas try to eat into Nike's endorsement numbers by peppering the top-20/30 high schools kids with 50k/yr deals that convert to an NBA-level endorsement deal based on their draft position you suddenly have 17-year-olds deciding whether to go to school for(in theory) free or make 90-100k for 5-6 months work. My guess is a bunch of kids would opt for the near-six-figures in their pocket now.

In the long run, I think this is what NCAA Basketball needs. I really wish NBA would set the draft similar to baseball. You can get drafted out of High School but if you go to college, next time you can be drafted is your Jr. year.

A change for the better. This rule helps athletes that have absolutely no desire to attend college. The college game will still be great, and teams will be able to focus on three-four year players rather than having to reload every year.

Some interesting hypotheticals posed. I suspect the norm will look something different.

Yes there will be a few obvious to be real star guys who can grab a significant endorsement deal by going G League. Not because of the great exposure they will get in G but because if you are Nike or Adidas you would prefer to gamble on having the guy locked up now than scrambling to get him a year from now when he leaves college.

There will be a bunch of kids interested who would get a token deal contingent on making an NBA roster.

There will be a number of agents advising players to go to college and one-done. There is a real difference in playing at the Memphis Hustle on Tuesday and Sioux Falls Skyforce on a road swing as part of a 50 game regular season schedule vs hosting Tenn-Martin and S.C Upstate as pre-conference filler at a Blue Blood P5.

Going one and done in college against mostly inferior competition will help a close call player have a chance to post gaudy stats.

Agents just aren't guaranteed to be great advisors. Sure some will say take the cash today no matter what but others may think there is a bigger payday awaiting for pausing a year. Remember there are kids who ditch super successful AAU teams to change to a team that gives them a chance to rack up better stats.

(04-21-2018 12:44 PM)esayem Wrote:  A change for the better. This rule helps athletes that have absolutely no desire to attend college. The college game will still be great, and teams will be able to focus on three-four year players rather than having to reload every year.

Agreed. Its better for college basketball. Its better for most one and dones. There's a little less talent in college basketball as a result, but there's more continuity on the teams. I've heard more than one UK fan complain its hard to keep track of the team with all the one and dones.

Its also better for the integrity of college basketball as many of those one and dones have no interest in academics.

(03-31-2018 01:22 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-30-2018 04:28 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Compensation is a big issue.

It's hard to argue that players have no choice but be in college in any sport other than basketball and football. In all other sports, they are free to pursue a professional athletic career. If you want to be paid to play there's the signup list.

The big two of basketball and football players haven't had an option and that lack of choice is not of the making of college athletics.

Puts colleges in a bad situation. These players have no choice but be here if they want to be professional and since they are forced to be there to pursue their career, they want to be compensated because the schools profit yet the schools aren't the ones holding them back from doing what they really want.

Compensation is a big issue because the most successful college football and basketball teams generate so much money, not because you have to be 3 years out of high school to be NFL draft-eligible.

It makes economic sense to not pay college tennis players just because there's no money in college tennis. The fact that the best high school or college tennis players can turn pro whenever they want to doesn't change the economics of the college sport.

Obviously the economics are different for college football and men's hoops than they are for college tennis. A home college football game for one of the top 10 teams in attendance generates more game-day revenue than a home game of a lower-attendance NFL team. A Kentucky home basketball game probably generates more game-day revenue than a Milwaukee Bucks home game. The Pac-8 and Big Ten used to split less than $1 million total from the Rose Bowl and it was the only bowl they played in, and the NCAA controlled the TV rights then; now each conference nets $60-90 million/year just from bowls and the playoff and much more than that from the conference's TV rights.

Well its an issue when the players don't have options. They can choose a pro career in the US in a sport other than football and basketball if they don't want the college scholarship.

If the economics is good enough you'll see most of the McDonald's All Americans foregoing college, just like Baseball.

The $35K per 5 month season may well jump to $40K per season. I also think NBA teams will want the rights to guys coming out of HS, so you may get a sort of 1 round HS draft for G-League soon.

This is an evolving situation.

And yes some endorsement deals will be contingent on making the NBA, but they will pay up front money that will make college out of the question. $100K is being paid under the table now for guys in college, so $50K above board advance is nothing to these companies.

Calapari has said it in the past without saying it.......

- Kids go to college - Why? To learn the skills they need to get a job.
- What is that process? Get a rounded background with some useless classes, then more pointed study as you advance in your major of choice.
- What happens when you are done? You graduate, get a job (hopefully) that you have learned the basic skills to do and you start your adult life

College basketball is nothing more than a "Major" for some of these kids. Go to school, learn your craft, then leave and get a job in your field.

Seriously - what is the difference between going to school to become an NBA (or other overseas pro player), versus going to school to learn engineering, then getting a job as an engineer - other than doing 4 years versus less than that?

(04-24-2018 02:44 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  Calapari has said it in the past without saying it.......

- Kids go to college - Why? To learn the skills they need to get a job.
- What is that process? Get a rounded background with some useless classes, then more pointed study as you advance in your major of choice.
- What happens when you are done? You graduate, get a job (hopefully) that you have learned the basic skills to do and you start your adult life

College basketball is nothing more than a "Major" for some of these kids. Go to school, learn your craft, then leave and get a job in your field.

Seriously - what is the difference between going to school to become an NBA (or other overseas pro player), versus going to school to learn engineering, then getting a job as an engineer - other than doing 4 years versus less than that?

Because to get that "major" in athletics you are required to meet certain academic criteria to get in and then you are required to successfully complete a number of hours of credit the Fall semester to be eligible for the Spring semester.

Why not provide the player with no interest in attending ANY classes and no interest in obtaining a college education an alternative.

I know two guys who dropped out of college who were majoring in computer science. One left after his sophomore year and a year later had sold his "side gig" of developing iPhone apps to a South Korean company for seven figures. He drove a brand new Dodge Challenger his last semester that he paid for with cash and when he moved to Los Angeles to work, he paid for his condo in cash, all before he sold his side business.

The other left after his junior year and co-founded an inventory software company that has some huge clients, companies even I have heard of.

The difference between those two young men and a one-and-done basketball player is that they took classes that taught them things that they needed to learn. The one-and-done isn't there for what the classroom has to offer and is only there for lack of an alternate place to learn those skills.

(04-24-2018 03:17 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-24-2018 02:44 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  Calapari has said it in the past without saying it.......

- Kids go to college - Why? To learn the skills they need to get a job.
- What is that process? Get a rounded background with some useless classes, then more pointed study as you advance in your major of choice.
- What happens when you are done? You graduate, get a job (hopefully) that you have learned the basic skills to do and you start your adult life

College basketball is nothing more than a "Major" for some of these kids. Go to school, learn your craft, then leave and get a job in your field.

Seriously - what is the difference between going to school to become an NBA (or other overseas pro player), versus going to school to learn engineering, then getting a job as an engineer - other than doing 4 years versus less than that?

Because to get that "major" in athletics you are required to meet certain academic criteria to get in and then you are required to successfully complete a number of hours of credit the Fall semester to be eligible for the Spring semester.

Why not provide the player with no interest in attending ANY classes and no interest in obtaining a college education an alternative.

I know two guys who dropped out of college who were majoring in computer science. One left after his sophomore year and a year later had sold his "side gig" of developing iPhone apps to a South Korean company for seven figures. He drove a brand new Dodge Challenger his last semester that he paid for with cash and when he moved to Los Angeles to work, he paid for his condo in cash, all before he sold his side business.

The other left after his junior year and co-founded an inventory software company that has some huge clients, companies even I have heard of.

The difference between those two young men and a one-and-done basketball player is that they took classes that taught them things that they needed to learn. The one-and-done isn't there for what the classroom has to offer and is only there for lack of an alternate place to learn those skills.

But the basketball court IS their classroom. They are learning to be better basketball players.

I am merely being a devil's advocate here, but in basic theory they are learning things to apply to their chosen profession.... about 1/3 of college course work is a joke - it includes classes that mean absolutely zero to what you want to do when you grow up. I am in finance/banking, and I am pretty sure I have never referenced anything from my European Literature class that was A REQUIRED class for me to take in order earn my finance degree in college.

I am not arguing the theory of getting a well rounded education here (even though I kinda am), but if you gave just about any kid the option of going to school to learn about only the things that they needed to learn to pursue their chosen career path, they would jump on it and college for everyone would be 2 years instead of 4; and a good portion of the classes that are currently offered would no longer be in that school - the would not disappear, but they would centralize in specific schools.

These basketball players are skipping the bull**** so to speak, and getting a job without the actual completion of a degree from the school - when you you cut it down to basics, that is the only real difference.



If you could go to college for 1 year (for free), then "graduate" and make $30 or $40 million dollars over the following 10 years (playing a fuking game!!!) versus busting your ass in school for 4 years to average $100K per year over a 30 year career working 9 to 5 for 50 weeks a year (and 10 years of loan payments) which option are you choosing?