The NCAA eliminating the testing the waters process would be terrible for the players

We've talked at length, numerous times, about the stupidity of moving the deadline for collegiate players to withdraw their names from the NBA Draft to May 8th.

Well, the NCAA is on the verge of making an even worse move:

The Division I Legislative Council adopted a proposal on Wednesday that would “require student-athletes interested in testing the waters of the NBA draft to remove their name from consideration before the first day of the spring National Letter of Intent signing period." (Ed. Note: Today was the first day of the NLI signing period.)

The change, which will take effect next year, isn't final until April 28th, after the Division 1 Board of Directors' meeting. But if this is what they ultimately decide on, its just about the worst possible scenario for the actual student-athletes themselves.

This would completely eliminate the process of testing the NBA Draft waters. For those unfamiliar, before last season, players were allowed one opportunity to declare early for the NBA Draft with a chance to pull their names out prior to a mid-June deadline. It allowed them to gauge their standing on draft boards, giving the players a chance to see if it was worthwhile for them to give up their remaining eligibility. They were able to workout for NBA teams and get feedback from front office types about where they stood to get picked. If you were a first round lock, you stayed in the draft. If you got feedback that it was in your best interest to return to school, you pulled out.

Last year, that deadline was moved up to May 8th, which handcuffed the players. The teams that were drafting weren't prepared to start evaluating prospects, and based on the rules for retaining eligibility (players can't miss class and they can't start working out for teams until after the deadline to declare has passed) it created a microscopic window for these kids to make potentially life-altering decisions.

And now that window will be closed.

This is nothing more than an effort to protect the coaches.

Having a player test the waters is difficult for coaches to handle. With a limited number of scholarships available to give out, coaches were left in limbo. Should they hope that the player testing the water returns, or should they recruit a player to fill the vacated scholarship in that player decides to leave?

Roster stability -- or, as Mike DeCourcy puts it, an opportunity for coaches to "play golf or go fishing in May without having to call NBA general managers and coaches on behalf of players trying to determine the best course for their futures" -- is valuable to coaches.

But allowing these kids the opportunity to make the best, most informed decision for their future should trump that.

College basketball (and football) players are already getting the short end of the stick. They are forced by the NBA to compete for at least one season -- with the new collective bargaining agreement, it may end up being two seasons -- at the collegiate level, where their talents generate revenue for the school and the NCAA instead of building up their back account. Personally, I believe that there should be some form of monetary compensation for players at this level of the sport, but that is far from a universal opinion.

What should be universal, however, is the opinion that forcing these athletes to make an uninformed and rushed decision about entering the NBA Draft less than two weeks after the national title game is completely unfair.

If this rule was in effect in 2008, North Carolina would not have had Ty Lawson, Danny Green, or Wayne Ellington return, meaning that the Tar Heels would not have won the national title in 2009.* It would have forced a guy like Scottie Reynolds, who played in the 2009 Final Four as a junior, to make a rushed decision on his draft status. This year, kids like Ashton Gibbs and Kim English would have had to make their decision on their basketball future by today.

*(The most ironic part of this mess? It is the coaches in the ACC that pushed the hardest to reduce, and eliminate, the process of testing the waters.)

"All this stuff: For the good of college basketball? This should be about these kids," Kentucky head coach John Calipari told DeCourcy. "They've done their good for college basketball. This should be about, 'How can we help these kids make a good decision?'"

And that's exactly right.

The draft process should be about coaches helping their players make the best decision for their future.

It should not be about the coaches making their job easier.