Add Comment

• KatKat said July 11, 2008

  Good for Lute! I like where he's coming from. On the other hand, I'm not suggsting I'd be for a blackballing of guys who are suspected one-and-dones.This is a complicated issue and coaches are always looking for a leg up. Hence the comments from Boeheim and (Tubby) Smith. Sure you want to field the best team, but is it worth it to take a guy if you're not "one player away from being a Nat'l Championship contender"? Also, two questions are: 1) Do you really now whether or not a guy is only staying for a year. And 2) Can you change his mind and convince him to stay once he's in school?

  Reply

  
  • ctdomschke replied July 11, 2008

    You're exactly right. Especially since Bayless had originally planned to stay 2 years. He and Jennigns played AAU ball together and he was excited about the prospect of teaming up together again. Until the Agents were in his ear tellihng him he was a top pick (rightfully so). I personally think they need to abolish the one and done rule and re-open the Prep to Pro thing. I mean so many of those guys failed and are out of the league but at least the college game was better back in 04 and 05 before the rule changed.
    • KatKat replied July 11, 2008

      Agreed. It is a tough issue. I don't like the one-and-done rule, either. But there are a lot of things wrong with men's basketball . You have take into account the domino effect of every decision - which obviously they did not, and do not. What to do? But basketball was mos def better a few years back.
• dsheridan said July 12, 2008

  Lute recruited both Bayless and Jennings and he knew the risks involved with each player. Lute needs to put a lid on the whining. College basketball is a cess pool and he's just starting to realize that. Will Lute Oson refuse to recruit the next O.J. Mayo or Michael Beasley because it could be a one and done deal? We'll see about that.

  Reply

  
  • MattRandle replied July 13, 2008

    I thikn he is doing the opposite of whining, he has said he is taking action...Kudos to him for taking that stance
• arlen_simmons said July 12, 2008

  I think the rule should be extended to three years, and players can make their choice to play overseas or the NBDL OR go to college. But I am tired of watching watered down NBA basketball that sixteen years of early drafts has created. Everyone agrees the current system ain't working.

  Reply

  
  • soolphillyfoot replied July 12, 2008

    The water-down basketball is the result of the number of teams that is in the league. The less chance of making a team, the more quality the league. Expansion and $$$ is whats destorying the league. You got the 30 teams, NBDL, foreign teams linked to NBA teams. Its giving more chances for scrubs to make it. The less likely the make a team, the longer the career of a college athlete. You also have to check your stats. From the last 16 years, there is about 10 to 15 all star NBA players with 1 yr of college or less. So you get off your soap box and, take that hidden KG jersey for the back of your couch now.
• Zersbaby said July 12, 2008

  I think the NBA should adopt MLB's policy. You either turn pro out of highschool or you commit to at least three years of college. Much like the minor leagues if a player is ready to make the jump but still needs time to develop the team can get him minutes in the NBDL and bring him up in injury situations to see some time. It seems the only other option is one no one ever wants to consider; actually giving these kids some kind of percentage of the money that the college is making off of them, or maybe allowing endorsement deals???? Its ashame that Stern has so much influence over college basketball.

  Reply

  
  • MattRandle replied July 13, 2008

    This is with out question the way to solve this...MLB has been doing this for years and we see both immediate successes(Alex Rodriguez) and kids that walk on in college(Mike Piazza) and end up being all stars
• soolphillyfoot said July 12, 2008

  Its not the players fault, thats for sure. You go the college to make a sound choice in a career or take advantages of the opportunities in said institutions. If a college computer student gets a call from Apple after a internship for a job making 70k, his going to take it and finish school later. Thats wilth any financial family situation. The twist is that we all know the revenue these schools make of these kids (ie merchandising, television deals, shoe deals, etc.), leaving the kid with just a scholarship that he might not be academically ready for. So just like anyone of you, the kid is going to go make that money the best way he knows how with the opportunities presented. Its funny how a kid from america needs a rule to hold him back from making a leaving for himself, and you got foreigners that are practicually born in basketball institutions, where the sport is a core academic lesson. You turn around and that said foreigner is picked number #1 in the NBA draft. Go figure.

  Reply

  
  • KatKat replied July 13, 2008

    Lots of truth in your statement, Sool. But there are a couple of items that are a bit oversimplified. It is nice to say go ahead and let them get the money, but there is - as is being played out now - a huge impact on the college game, the pro game, and the athlete when letting them get the money is the only thing taken into consideration. And the difference for foreign players is that their system has ALWAYS been set up the way it is. They don't field college teams, they have always played for club teams, and been groomed in spots institutes.
    • soolphillyfoot replied July 13, 2008

      KatKat, respect your response. Like all things natural, there is a progression that happens. Technology is an example on why we dont use the 8 track anymore. With the emergence of the CD, no one cried about the audio tape. The same with the NCAA. All these big money deals done, while using the same guidlines that your grandmother's grandmother (if she was a athlete) had to go by?? There is a dynamic here. Its not about the game anymore, it's about money. Thats why you have your ESPN's giving you just highlights to attract the casual fan, so they can charge ad $$$ on viewership. Its funny how the athlete is always judged when it comes to getting his. Just by playing, its about 6 other people (ie basketball camps, reporters, merchandisers, universities, etc.), eating. Like wise with the NBA. Just like the response I made a few comments up, if you want to point the finger on the game being the way it is, blame Stern. The expansion teams that gives a chance for water-down talent that wouldnt make a major roster to play minutes that they otherwise wouldn't get. The NBDL league being created so kids would not have to go to college a full 4 yrs, because before that the NCAA was in a sense a minor league. Think about it. Its like the NBA owners making the cap, then crying after they made all the money to a loser going over said cap. Again go figure.
      • KatKat replied July 14, 2008

        Ahh, I agree about the layman blaming the athlete. I think the league banks on that too - that they'll come way looking like they're making an effort to do the right thing (versus just making money), and the athletes will come away looking like they're really the greedy ones. Dig it. BLAME STERN! I think that should be the battle cry. I'm totally on board with you on this point, Sool.
        
        Just FYI... As a minor league conspiracy theorist, I actually talked about Stern and the money example in an earlier thread about the playoffs.