The NCAA's Amateurism Rules -- Who Benefits?
by Glenn Logan on Apr 27, 2010 9:40 AM EDT
in Kentucky Wildcats Basketball
Email
PrintThe recent change in the amateurism rules that are likely to allow Enes Kanter to play immediately for the Kentucky Wildcats next year got me to wondering -- if a "professional" basketball player accepts no money from a team for playing basketball, is he really a "professional?"
That's the thinking behind the recent rule changes that mainly effect foreign players. In Europe and other foreign countries, professional basketball clubs exist, but sometimes young people play with them without accepting any money in order to improve their game and raise their standing for professional leagues both in the United States and elsewhere. Such was the case for Enes Kanter.
Extending this question further, I have to wonder if the NCAA is not doing grave damage to the future of a lot of young men who, for misguided or misinformed reasons, decide to leave early for the NBA and get caught up in its gears, going undrafted and sentenced to wander the comparative wasteland of the NBADL or try to get contracts overseas.
Here is the premise of my question -- If a player does not accept money from a professional team in America or elsewhere, why should he be ineligible after entering the draft and staying in past the deadline? Kentucky player Randolph Morris exploited just this principle a few years back, but the NCAA quickly closed that loophole by enacting legislation that makes you a professional if you don't withdraw by the deadline.
More after the jump.
Here's the problem as I see it -- If it is going to be okay for foreign players to be associated at some level with professional sports and be able to retain amateur status, it's hard to explain why a college player could not do the same thing -- i.e. return to college after the draft failed to select him or her.
Now, the NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement currently prevents players from entering the draft more than once, and effectively grants players free agent status after not being selected in the draft. If those players were allowed to return to college, it would create the same problems as Randolph Morris' eventual reinstatement did -- any team at any time could offer him a job as a professional basketball player at anytime during the season. That's really intolerable, because it wouldn't be long before NBA teams with playoff needs started raiding colleges for players when they wound up short personnel due to injury or some other problem. More on that coming up.
My main point here is that the NCAA's amateurism rules are highly arbitrary and potentially have nothing to do with actual professionalism. So why not allow players to return to school (assuming they repay any money put up by teams for workouts, etc.) with a stipulation on their grant in aid agreement that prohibits them from playing the sport for which they receive scholarship consideration professionally for the duration of the grant in aid offer (i.e. 1 college year). Any college could offer them a scholarship -- of course, the transfer rule would fully apply, requiring them to serve a year in residence, just like for other transfers.
The benefit to the players would be obvious -- return to school (assuming a school still wants them) and progress further toward a degree, as well as honing their basketball skills. The benefit to the schools would be much more problematic, as they would wind up waiting until June to know if the player would be eligible for reinstatement. And if the player was not offered an NBA contract next time around (remember, he could not enter the draft), he could sign another grant in aid agreement under the same terms, assuming one was offered.
I expect that some players would not be able to return to college because coaches would be unwilling to hold open their scholarship for so long, but most surely would. "But what's to prevent every player in America from entering the draft," you ask? Nothing. But if they do, the coach could decide which of them to pick back up after the draft, leaving the rest to fend for themselves. In other words, the coach could recruit freely, and just offer the best of those who declared the opportunity to return if they are undrafted. Whoever suggested that there should be zero risk in such a decision, especially if players decided to try to exploit it? The other undrafted players could always accept an offer from another institution and sit out a year in residence.
It's a difficult situation, for sure, but I do think that if you accept no actual money for playing a sport, there is no rational way you can be considered "professional." That's the message of the rule change Enes Kanter will benefit from. Why should only foreign players get the benefit of the doubt?
At the end of the day, if the NCAA is going to be about maximizing opportunities for students, be they athletes or not, the current amateurism rules are highly arbitrary and greatly slanted against the best academic and future success interests of the student athlete. Of course, the colleges and NCAA have interests here, too, which must be balanced.
The NBA has no interests that need be considered by the NCAA, except as they impact the viability of their amateurism rules. The NBA certainly doesn't care about the NCAA's problems, so why should the NCAA be whatever concerned about the NBA? The job of NCAA institutions is to educate, and increasing that opportunity should be a fundamental objective. The job of the NBA is to make money.
In the end, my question is this -- why do foreigners get to play without pay and retain eligibility, but Americans (who, theoretically, are the main subject at interest here) lose their amateur status for merely declaring themselves eligible for the draft whether they take money or not?
The floor is open for discussion.
75 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Somehow I get the feeling that the job of the NCAA has become making money as well, not just the NBA,
no matter what the intentions were behind it’s creation.
Any college could offer them a scholarship — of course, the transfer rule would fully apply, requiring them to serve a year in residence, just like for other transfers.
Does this make everyone “free agent scholarship athletes”?? Just wondering??
As you would tell me about some other thingsTru, thinking that the NCAA and the NBA do not serve each other’s purposes is a bit naive, isn’t it?
I think the idea that you put forward is sound, but I wonder if this rule change concerning european athletes is not another case of the NCAA simply reacting to pressure from some outside influence, and not thinking past tomorrow morning’s headlines?
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
Response:
Does this make everyone "free agent scholarship athletes"?? Just wondering??
The answer is clearly explained. If they desire to come back to school, they must, as part of their grant in aid, agree not to turn pro during the school year. So how could they be “free agents,” since they would have surrendered their right to free agency for the year by accepting a college grant in aid?
As you would tell me about some other thingsTru, thinking that the NCAA and the NBA do not serve each other’s purposes is a bit naive, isn’t it?This question tells me you either did not read all of my article, or you did not understand it. I suggest you re-read it carefully, and this question should be answered for you.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Actually Tru you asked the questions that I have already asked before.....
At the end of the day, if the NCAA is going to be about maximizing opportunities for students, be they athletes or not, the current amateurism rules are highly arbitrary and greatly slanted against the best academic and future success interests of the student athlete. Of course, the colleges and NCAA have interests here, too, which must be balanced.
Balanced how?…..It seems that everything that is happening with the NCAA serves them and no one else….Admittedly, I believe that this last rule change was a good thing, if for no other reason than it gets rid of a stupid differentiation between European athletes and American athletes. Either a kid takes money to play or he doesnt, the rule should be that simple, but things are never that simple in life, ever.
My second question was more rhetorical than anything……personally I think they have all lost their minds, but they are all doing whatever lines their pockets….that in and of itself should be fairly easy to understand I guess.
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
and on the free agent front,
I expect that some players would not be able to return to college because coaches would be unwilling to hold open their scholarship for so long, but most surely would. “But what’s to prevent every player in America from entering the draft,” you ask? Nothing. But if they do, the coach could decide which of them to pick back up after the draft, leaving the rest to fend for themselves. In other words, the coach could recruit freely, and just offer the best of those who declared the opportunity to return if they are undrafted.
this statement was what raised the question…..if they are not offered by their coach, what are they??
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
They are ...
… either a free agent with no current employment opportunities (pretty much like everyone else who quits school without a job offer), or if they are offered a scholarship by another school, a transfer student.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
makes sense.....but could it end up benefitting someone who doesnt go back to their
original team, for whatever reason, and also, whould a player be able to decline that offere from his coach under any circumstances and still be eligibale to play that season?
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
Well ...
Balanced how?…..It seems that everything that is happening with the NCAA serves them and no one else
That’s a matter of opinion. The NCAA claims to be about educating kids and protecting amateurism in college sports. Whether they actually accomplish that is primarily the purpose of this article to discuss.
My point is that declaring someone a professional who never actually gets paid for playing is arbitrary, and works against their stated mission.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
I think it makes more since that if a player isn't drafted and has accepted no money from
an agent or NBA team then he should be allowed to go back to school if he isn’t a senior, but I also think the school should have the right not to hold a scholarship open for him should he declare for the draft.
The Morris rule is one thing, but he got lucky.
You asked and answered: “But what’s to prevent every player in America from entering the draft,” you ask? Nothing.
I disagree. For some, the risk would be getting drafted in the second round. Now you are ineligible to go back to college and not guaranteed anything in the NBA. The Morris loophole was seldom used b/c it was unsual for an underclassman to be so stupid as to declare when they were not going to get drafted at all. I suppose you could annouce that if you aren’t selected in the first round, “don’t pick me at all” – but it still sounds risky. Ask the Colts how that John Elway pick turned out.
But otherwise – declare and not get drafted, still be eligible – I have no problem with that and think it should be the rule. I agree that there should be some way to prevent the player from jumping to the NBA during the college season, and I don’t know how you do that without some agreement from the NBA. I suppose you could put a liquidated damages clause in the scholarship agreement, but that might be difficult to enforce if it was big enough to actually be a deterent.
Why not the same method as baseball?
Players get drafted as early as out of high school, but stay in college, usually on the pro team’s dime.
Win/win for everyone – pro team locks in a talented player, but instead of paying $$$$, only pays college costs; players gets to develop and there’s less pressure to make the jump before they’re ready; colleges are more likely to retain players for longer.
If I’m inaccurately stating the way it works in baseball, please correct me.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
--O.W.
It doesn't quite work that way
If a high school player is drafted but chooses to go to college then the team that drafted him is basically out of luck. The player can re-enter the draft after his junior year and be drafted by another team.
However, if that high school player signs with the team then there is a provision in the rules that the team pays for college, but the player can’t play college baseball. This is basically what happened with Xavier Henry’s brother – the Yankees drafted him and are now paying his tuition. He can play basketball (or any other sport) but not baseball.
3 > 2, except for very large values of 2.
Baseball also has rules further restrictions
that tell when a player can and cannot leave school. If a player is drafted out of high school, thats fine. He can then choose whether or not to sign the contract. If he doesn’t sign, he is free to go to school and play if he wants to. However, if he chooses to go to a 4 year school, he isn’t permitted back in the draft until his 4 years have passed. But, if he doesn’t sign a contract realizes he still needs to play somewhere to keep his skills and plays for a junior college until the next draft then he doesn’t have to stay any certain period of time.
by BigBlueFan16 on Apr 27, 2010 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks to both of you.
I was obviously way off on my baseball comparison. I still think the way I THOUGHT baseball worked would work well for college basketball. Heh.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
--O.W.
Nationality is also a question
Many individuals hold dual citizenship. Born in Germany to German mother and American father, etc. Grew up in Austria, HS in California, etc. Is this kid eligible for European requirements or does he have to follow US rules?
Can a US kid out of HS go to Europe and play, unpaid, and then return?
I agree with you Tru, sounds like the NCAA needs to define what their mission is, then set the rules up to support the mission, vs a reactionary set of rules to battle/stave off the NBA…who clearly has a different mission.
Agree blbskue about baseball. They never seem to have this issue. Football either.
Would changing the date of the NBA draft make a difference?
Making the draft later in the summer would allow all kids, even those intending to declare, time to finish their post-NCAA tourney schoolwork. Right now, I really don’t understand the need/desire for kids to leave school in mid-April to preen for the draft.
Other than that slight additioin, I appreciate the thoughtful essay here, Tru.
By the way, I don’t believe the baseball draft works the way blbskue remembers it. I think the rule is that a kid can be drafted right out of high school, but if he chooses to go to college, he has to stay 3 years before being eligible to be drafted again. He does not remain the “property” of the original drafting team.
This Rule Caught UK In 2003 Recruiting
Kentucky signed a talented C from Lithuania in April 2003 but NCAA ultimately judged him ineligible to play as amateur because he played on team with professionals.
UK wound up signing Lukascz Orbzut in his place. The other player went on to win medals in international play and enjoyed a nice pro career in Europe.
by FortyYearCatFan on Apr 27, 2010 11:15 AM EDT reply actions
There has to be some line drawn in the sand.
If not, you could have a player enter the draft, be picked up by a NBA team, and then chose to defer payments. Let’s say that he regrets his NBA decision and decides to go back to the college team in February. That would be crazy in this extreme example.
Even short of this extreme, you need to set a deadline. If not, you’d have all sort of ‘uncontrolled’ back and forth between the NBA and NCAA. Not good.
Of course, if a school chose not to recruit all one-and-doners this would not be an issue at all. :)
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
Obviously
there would have to be thought put into a revision of the rules. The point here isn’t to make a dig against another team, but to examine the fact that it’s unfair for foreign players to be able to retain amateur status in situations where an american player wouldn’t retain that status.
by Clint Phelps on Apr 27, 2010 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
That is so incorrect and not true.
Schools all across the country are looking at the early entry issue and how it affects them. True, we are dealing with it on a large scale, but your school is looking at it with Samuels. Heck, Butler and Morehead St. are dealing with it and we all know they did not recruit those guys thinking they would leave for the NBA this early.
You guys need to bone up on the meaning of the little 'smiley face'.
'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'
You were doing so well...
then you had to get that last jab in there. I wonder how we are to distinguish high school basketball players so that we would KNOW definitively that they are one-and-done? It would be very helpful to have “one-and-done” tatooed on their foreheads so we wouldn’t make these silly errors in judgement.
Since chemistry majors, math majors, and business majors...
can all go out and test the waters for job prospects between semesters, and come and go as the please, depending on how the job prospects go, I would probably want to go a little bit softer on those college students who happen to also play basketball and are testing the job prospect waters of the NBA.
I would just have each student declare a “Minimum Draft Position” along with declaring for the draft. If a team selects them at or above their declared minimum position, the player is done with college. If no team thinks that highly of them, then they are removed from the draft after their position goes by, and they return to school like all of the other students who tested the waters but are coming back.
-- Tim . http://HomeSalesLexington.com/barn
It's the draft, and the NBA's rules, that make basketball different.
Also, the fact that basketball is a team sport.
It doesn’t hurt the chemistry department (much) if a chem major leaves early or mid-year for a job with DuPont. It also doesn’t really hurt the other chem students. It can hurt a basketball team, and be detrimental to the prospects of the other basketball players.
What is the issue?
I’m all for working with players to give them flexibility in testing the draft waters.
I am not in favor so much flexibility that they leave teams mid-season after being given that new flexibility to take advantage of a mid-season NBA offer. The school is fronting some expenses here, so it is fair to expect some level of compromise from the student-athlete.
The issue is allowing players to return to school if not drafted,
not leaving mid-season. Although I would have no problem with that either. The schools do not exist to provide me with a quality sporting event to watch. They exist to educate and help people obtain career goals. As someone else stated in this thread, there is no crying when a chem major leaves school to take a great job. It is the school’s fault that it has decided to treat one student different than the other.
By the way, I know that my view is a definite minority opinion and does not fly in the world of economics. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Surely no one disagree with this
The schools do not exist to provide me with a quality sporting event to watch. They exist to educate and help people obtain career goals.
Well said lawdog. I certainly hope this isn’t a minority opinion.
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
dont anyone tell the NCAA and their new multi BILLION dollar contract
for their basketball tournament…….
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
They can like it or not,
Some aspire to develop the big miracle cure all, the next big technological wonder, or be the next great basketball player. They are called dreams and require hard work and determination. ;-)
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
not my point there a2.....my point is in the fact that the NCAA seems to be more
concerned with its multi billion dollar contracts than with the purpose which it was founded for.
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
NCAA
National Collegiate ATHLETIC Association.
I think the purpose of the NCAA has something to do with sports – I don’t see student or academics or education in its name.
It is well accepted among social scientists that schools, even Ivy league and little “smart schools,” get more alumni money when their sports teams are successful.
Then you can read the actual ncaa website under ’history":
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/about+the+ncaa/overview/history.html
What you see there is a clear purpose of ensuring that the sporting events were successful and well attended. So I disagree with lawdog. The NCAA does exist to to provide me with quality sporting events to watch. And if it didn’t, someone else would fill the void.
To say colleges have only one goal related to education is not supported by the evidence. It certainly would not get summary judgment. :)
Ahhhh, then let me clarify.
The purpose of a university (especially a state run, state supported one) is to educate …
wklawdog, I think your line that says it all is this one:
The schools do not exist to provide me with a quality sporting event to watch. They exist to educate and help people obtain career goals.
There is definitely some cherry picking going on as to when we call these guys “students” and demand that they are treated no different from your average business major, and when we call them “something else”.
All I really wanted to see is the system that is in place now whereby students like Eric Bledsoe have to pretty much GUESS as to what their prospects are, would be allowed to actually see the REALITY of their prospects by declaring a Draft Position of their own choosing. If they are high enough, they are drafted and go. If not, they return.
When the business major looks between semesters he at least gets to see a number written on a piece of paper, and if it turns out he overestimated his value, he simply returns with a new sense of reality.
I understand that this requires the NBA to implement it, and I understand that it will never really happen. I am just stating what I think, same as everyone else.
-- Tim . http://HomeSalesLexington.com/barn
I don't think trying out and if not high enough returning,
would work, for either side. I think then there would be the potential for more than half, at least, of college ball players, testing the waters every year. How could coaches recruit within the current time tables, not knowing how many were leaving or staying?
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
Well, it wouldn't be that many.
NBA teams don’t need to see everyone. The lack of invitations would be enough to send many players back to school before a few weeks.
Tru, you're asking too many questions
What were you thinking? Make posters…., tee-shirts…, even bumper stickers…; but, for God’s sake man, don’t ask questions.
I suggest you go into hiding. keep a diary. we’ll let you know when the coast is clear.
No matter where you're at, there you are
Haha!
I am now safely secluded in my top-secret bunker on Willow-Wane.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
The NCAA showed where its priorities lie when they changed the rule on the evaluation period.
The rule used to favor the players by giving them more time to see where they stood with the NBA and learn what their odds of being drafted were. The NCAA limited that time period because the ACC coaches complained that they did not have time to replace the guys that took the entire period to make up their mind and then stay in the draft. The deadline was moved up, kids have less time to make an informed decision and coaches still do not have time to replace players since their is no one left to go get (they do have more time for golf though).
Tru’s proposal would be the absolute best thing for the students, but the worst for the coaches and since the coaches are the paid employees who run the programs, they are the ones listened to.
Would it really, though?
The coaches would be free to recruit whomever in order to replace the early entrants. Should some of the early entrants want to come back (assuming they were not drafted), the coach could pick and choose which ones he wants to offer a scholarship. Of course, the players not drafted could accept offers from other schools if they prefer, with the transfer rule being fully applicable.
I think it would be really good for coaches, but the players still take a significant risk if they decide to declare. The coach may bring in better players than them, and if they go undrafted, they would either have to transfer or simply try to make it the hard way.
I see no hardship for coaches there.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
the coaches would have the best of both worlds.....and honestly I believe it puts an unfair
burden on the athlete.
My synopsis on this is as such:
Employee is employed by employer A. Employee puts a resume on Monster to find out
- If he is being paid adequately for his services
- If there are better opportunities out there for him/her.
Employee meets and interviews with employer B who offers employee better pay, but less benefits, resulting in a net zero gain for the employee. Employee turns down the offer.
Employer A sees the resume on Monster and begins to inquire with some of his or her contacts and finds out that employer B has indeed made an offer, so they start searching for and find a replacement.
Employee returns to work, is confronted by the employer who says they heard that the employee was searching for work and they have already found their replacement, but cannot hire that person because the employee doesnt want to leave after all. Hostile work environment is created, multiple problems insue, etc.
Now, before all of the lawyers jump all over this, my point here is not about employees, or amateur athletes or such as that. My point here is that if this kind of thing occurs there are going to be situations come up that are not in the best interests of that student-athlete, and that is what the NCAA is supposed to be there to do, ensure their best interests.
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
Why unfair?
The athlete puts the burden on himself. Nobody holds a gun to his head and makes him surrender his scholarship by putting his name in the draft.
I think you have to balance the interests of the school, the coach, and the athlete. The athlete is not entitled to any more consideration than anyone else in this scenario.
He has a scholarship that is basically (not actually, but in practice) guaranteed for four years absent a coaching change or other strange upheaval. If he wants that, all he has to do is play four years.
On the other hand, if he opts into the draft, he becomes vulnerable. If he gets drafted, jackpot. If he goes in the second round, well, we know what that’s like. If he goes undrafted, he can remain eligible for college, but because he put his coach in an unfair position recruiting-wise, there has to be a balance of the equities. There is no free lunch in life, and there should not be one for a college student taking what he knows to be a chance. So if the coach recruits his replacement and no longer has a roster spot available, he becomes eligible for college — but only under the transfer rule.
This accomplishes three very important things:
- it discourages players from entering the draft until they are ready;
- it gives players who do make a mistake a chance to get their education and play basketball, if not under the most favorable possible terms for them;
- it gives players who are ready an opportunity to earn their living playing basketball.
This is not like an employer-employee relationship, so I think your example isn’t really a good one.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
I agree with Tru.
There is a good reason the employee-employer analogy isn’t so good here.
The most free employees are typically the least valuable employees. Valuable employees often have contracts of employment – they can’t just up and leave to whomever they want without consequences often. They may be able to quit but have non-compete clauses that prevent taking the same job in the same part of the country for a reasonable time period. And in sports, of course, teams own the rights to players. If you want to play for someone else, you may have to go to an entirely different country or league.
This is the reality of sports. The players aren’t fungible office workers or day laborers easily replaced by driving up to the local Home Depot. They have to give some things up in order to play in the system.
What I am getting to is that they already have a lot of those things that you are claiming to be
employer-employee exclusive in their scholarships already Jack.
1) Non compete clauses are a part of a scholarship
2) The scholarships are already only guaranteed for 1 yr at a time, which in and of itself in a way is a contract.
3) The kids have performance related clauses, grades, behavior, etc.
Is this not the case?
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
ok.....throw out my analogy....it's point was simply to illustrate that any time
you have 2 sides who have different interests in this kind of a situation then the burden is going to fall on a person, not an institution. And that is fine if everyone agrees that is an equitable position. I believe that if you have that kind of a situation to arise, then someone is going to come out on the short end of the stick, in almost any event. And it will fall to the athlete not the school. And that is something that the NCAA is supposed to try and prevent. I am not saying they are being taken advantage of, I am saying that it becomes a more one sided situation. Now your point being that the athlete is taking a chance is a good one, but why should the kid not be able to look into their possibilities without repercussions? Why should kids be discouraged from entering the draft if they a)dont sign with and agent and b) dont take any money?
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
I'm not sure what point we are debating, but I agree with your last sentence.
To reiterate and summarize, hope and change, thousand points of light, its National Championships stupid.
Hope that clears things up. :)
LMAO.............actually this one was a response to Tru.....but funny nonetheless
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
Question
I may have missed it somewhere in the discussion but what does it do to recruiting? How would the returnee fit in the number of scholarships? I believe it would hinder the teams that are dangling why they wait to find out if the guy is going or coming back.
I have be correctly accused of having a 'football fetish'. You know, someone who doesn't think football is the warm up sport to basketball season.
The coach ...
… does not have to allow an undrafted player who wants to return to do so. He can recruit replacements as he will.
If he has an open scholarship, and an undrafted player wishes to return, the coach may agree to offer it. Otherwise, the undrafted player is on his own. He could accept a scholarship with another school (transfer rule applicable) or simply update his passport and head to the Euroleagues or the NBADL.
In other words, returning players who do not declare for the draft and are in good academic standing are more or less presumed to have a scholarship waiting for them. Those who declare early are presumed NOT to have a scholarship waiting for them, but are eligible should there be one available and the coach be so disposed.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Really that is the rule now.
We did that to Rod Rhodes I believe.
And we all know from last summer that scholarships are renewable yearly at the discretion of the school.
No, not so.
If they declare for the draft now and stay in, they become professional whether they are drafted or not.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
I misread your post.
I thought you were talking about a kid that declared but then withdrew – I see now you were talking about “undrafted.”
Anyway, I was right – just about something else entirely. :)
No perfect rules
There are no perfect rules for any of the scenarios that are being proposed. All choices have consequences (good or bad). IMHO, the NCAA should set rules that protect the integrity of the amature game (I know there will be those who cry that it’s way too late for that) and then let the chips fall where they may. College athletes who make a poor choice and try to go pro, when they have no business doing so, need to live with consequences of those choices. Coaches who recruit and lose players early, need to live with the consequences of those choices. In the end, everybody has to do the best with what they have or what they can get… within the rules.
It isn’t right, though, to have one set of rules for non-American players and a different set of rules for American players. That needs to be cleaned up in a hurry.
by BluebloodinNaptown on Apr 27, 2010 1:56 PM EDT reply actions
Breadth Of The Subject
Arranging my poultry entrails and using my considerable Delphic talents I still get only a somewhat undefined view of the future for NCAA rules on amateurism. It appears that the newly contrived regulations are somewhere between the 1,600-page finance reform bill and the nearly 3,000-page healthcare makeover. Doubtful anyone will read all of them, of course, but that’s not a requirement, as experience shows, for putting them into effect. Despite the lack of clarity a few things are quite clear:
1) One cannot confuse youth basketball (organized from practically toddler age) in the U.S. with that of other countries (virtually limited to hoop-on-the-wall), hence one cannot have identical rules for amateurism (NOTE: Enes Kanter began playing with pros from just past puberty because that was the only effective option).
2) As long as the hypocrisy of the NCAA, stating on the one hand that they’re all about the student athlete (realistically and functionally an oxymoron in the high-revenue sports) and on the other basing their decisions on what is economically and conveniently best for the institutions, their employees and supporters, exists there will have to be tortuous rules to justify the discrepancy (See wklawdog’s comment on the change in evaluation period).
Finally, and speaking of wklawdog, his comment regarding the purpose of schools — assuming he meant post-secondary — is a bit utopian and not quite accurate: Tell the 100,000 fans who jam The Big House or Neyland Stadium, or the 24,000 in Rupp Arena for that matter, that an entertaining sports program isn’t a purpose of the school; and even if that were not the case and it was all focused on the education of the individual that preparation isn’t, nor should it be, limited to career goals — but that is another argument for another time and another thousand pages.
"There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." --James Madison
I don't think this is really a pro vs am situation
As I understand things, overseas the pro teams basically serve the same function as AAU squads do here in the states. If you are a young player in Europe, Australia, Russia, etc and you want to play outside of high school teams, then the pro teams are who you play for.
To me the NCAA rule changes are less about what it means to be a professional vs being an amatuer and more about confronting the reality that basketball is run very differently outside the US and that college bound players shouldn’t be unfairly penalized simply because the system they grew up under is different.
This does not mean that all of a sudden we’re going to start seeing an influx of foreign players who have been making a nice living playing basketball overseas, just that it’s possible to play with professionals and not be one yourself – in much the same way that NBA players return to their alma maters during the summer to play pickup games with current student-athletes.
3 > 2, except for very large values of 2.
Wonder what the budget is of a top flight AAU team?
I doubt they are riding around in a broken down school bus. Do they stay in camp grounds and eat peanut butter sandwiches?
I really don’t know, but lets look at the life style these young me live. I’d say going to some colleges is a lot worse.
I have be correctly accused of having a 'football fetish'. You know, someone who doesn't think football is the warm up sport to basketball season.
Polson Is A Cat
Jarrod Polson foregoes Liberty scholarship to be a preferred walk-on at UK.
"There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." --James Madison
That's 4 G And 1 C In 2010 Class
Need 2 F now.
by FortyYearCatFan on Apr 28, 2010 7:02 AM EDT up reply actions
What is a preferred walk on?
Does that means he gets upgraded to scholarship if one is available? A better interest rate on his student loans?
I have never seen this term before it was used with respect to Polson this last month. Can anyone enlighten me?
...
When a coach says that they want to offer you a preferred walk on spot, they are saying that they will eventually have a spot for you on the roster when school gets underway in the fall. You have been given the green light to at least be on the team during the first year and be a part of practice.
by Clint Phelps on Apr 28, 2010 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Preferred = Invited Walk-On
UK examples include Junior Braddy, Jody Thompson, Cameron Mills, Jason Lathrem, Steve Masiello, Matt Heissenbuttel, Preston LeMaster, and Mark Coury. Braddy, Mills, and Masiello ultimately received athletic scholarships for 1 or 2 years.
Ravi Moss is another example but he attended UK on academic scholarship.
by FortyYearCatFan on Apr 28, 2010 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm happy for Polson
but I just cant get myself too overly excited about a preferred walk-on. IMO – if we had the numbers, this kid would be at Liberty.
It is not worth an intelligent man’s time to be in the majority. By definition, there are already enough people to do that.
by kentuckygirl0724 on Apr 28, 2010 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
UK Took Walk-Ons Pretty Often In Years Past, Too
Bo Lanter and Chris Gettelfinger are two names that come to mind.
Even if UK had 12 or 13 on scholarship, 1 or 2 walk-ons won’t hurt and MAY help.
by FortyYearCatFan on Apr 28, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah
I guess knowing the way Cal feels about walk-ons, it makes sense that he might go out and hand pick the ones he prefers.
It is not worth an intelligent man’s time to be in the majority. By definition, there are already enough people to do that.
by kentuckygirl0724 on Apr 28, 2010 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Just remember - every now and then one of these guys gives a real contribution.
No one has remind anyone of Mills and Moss.
Considering we have only one other true point guard on the roster next year (assuming no Bledsoe), this walk on may get some opportunities.
In 2011-12, when we could have three top-10 PGs (if Knight stays and Wrotten ends up at UK), it is probably bench city.
I think this may be a bit about Cal trying to find that "balance" everyone keeps harping on
I AM THE CAT......The Cat In The Hat!!!
Brey Has Zipper Problems At ND
Mike Brey rumored getting heat for off-court behavior. Brey out, Pitino in? Nah.
"There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." --James Madison
Two Things, Tru
1) I signed in to tell you that you logic is – as usual -impeccable. Great read! The NCAA is not bound by logic. They are driven only by self-interest.
2) How can I avoid the long wait in loading the entire site? I think it is loading pictures (?), but I dont really know for sure. It is an impediment that is a real pain.
Keep up the good work, and don’t mistake my complaint as an attack on your excellent site.
Thanks for the comment.
We have been having some site loading problems lately due to a faux pas by our service provider — they restarted one of our main database servers right in the middle of the day, without telling a soul. Anyone with a smattering of IT knowledge will tell you that is a Bad Thing.
To speed up site loading, there are a couple of options:
- use http://mobile.aseaofblue.com — that just gives you the text and ability to comment without all the fancy stuff. It has almost no features that the regular site has, but you can read posts, fanshots/fanposts, etc. and comment on them. It’s basically a text version of the site with few pictures.
- Use Firefox and a tool like Flashblock to block the loading of the flash ads. That will speed it up some, also.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
[UPDATED 01/18/2012]
Related FanPosts on A Sea Of Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
