Some of the bigger news from earlier in the week came from Dr. Mark Emmert, the man set to take control of the NCAA Presidency effective November 1st, gave an interview to a Seattle radio station. During the interview, Emmert came right out and said he supported change to the NBA Draft model. Specifically, he mentioned baseball's model, where a high school player is allowed to enter the draft, but is that kid decides to go to school, he must spend at least three year's there.
I much prefer the baseball model, for example, that allows a young person if they want to go play professional baseball, they can do it right out of high school, but once they start college they have to play there for three years or until they are 21. I like that a good deal, but what you have to recognize is that rule isn't an NCAA rule. That's a rule of the NBA. And it isn't the NBA itself, its the NBA players association. So to change that rule will require me and others working with the NBA, working with the players association. We'll be having those conversations because I think it will be good for young people and good for basketball.I'll be honest: I'm torn when it comes to the 19-and-1 rule, the rule that forces our most talented hoopers to be 19 years old and 1 year removed from high school to be draft eligible. As a matter of principle, I don't think it is right to deny someone a chance to capitalize on their earning potential solely so the man (the NCAA and the NBA) can maximize the amount of money they can make off of that person. For us, professional sports are entertainment, someone to cheer for, something to watch. For the players, sports is their job. It is a profession. A business. I just don't think it is fair to deny a qualified and capable candidate -- believe what you want, but there are high-schoolers out there that are capable of playing in the NBA -- for the job the right to work it based on their age.
That said, I am first and foremost a die-hard college basketball junkie. If my life was The Wire, ESPN would be Marlo Stanfield, my 52" flat screen would be the needle, Big Monday the drug. Me? I'm Bubbles. I'm a junkie, and as a junkie I want the best product possible. I don't want that stepped on, cut-with-caffiene garbage that can't feed my fix. I want the new package, the WMD, the Blue Magic. And in the case of college basketball, the dope is the most potent when its laced with future NBA stars. In other words, I enjoy watching the best players in the country. As a fan, college hoops is better when we get the John Walls and Blake Griffins, even if it is for just a year or two. The same goes for me as a writer. Sports are more entertaining to cover when they are played at a higher level, and say what you will about them being freshman, having one-and-done's in college hoops makes it better.
Regardless of my personal feelings on the matter, the one-and-done rule is here to stay. In fact, its more likely that the rule gets extended to two-and-done before anything is repealed.
Why?
Everyone's favorite anagram -- RTMSF at RTC -- put together an excellent piece on this very subject. And while he absolutely nails it, the bottom line is that the rule is good for the bottom line.
The NBA doesn't want no-name high schoolers coming into the league. They want kids that have name recognition. They want their future stars to already be stars. They want Oden vs. Durant and Rose vs. Beasley, not Howard vs. Okafor. I live in DC and work at a bar that has become a spot for locals to grab a beer and watch the game, and I can tell you from the many conversations I've had on the subject that people are much, much more excited about the arrival of John Wall, the kid that starred at Kentucky while playing on national television on a weekly basis, than a 6'10" kid from Georgia that no one has heard of.
The star power is good for the NCAA, too. Like it or not, amateurism be damned, college basketball needs these stars. I'm going to watch college basketball regardless of who is on TV. I've been known to stay up to 4am to watch a replay of a Patriot League game. (Like I said, junkie.) I will, without a doubt, watch every second of the 24-Hour Tip-Off Marathon.
But people like me are the minority. Most fans are casual fans or die-hards for their particular rooting interest. A friend of mine is a huge Duke fan, but he didn't know who Ekpe Udoh was until the Blue Devils played Baylor in last year's NCAA Tournament. College basketball, which is fresh off signing a massive, 14-year, $10.8 billion deal with CBS and Turner to televise the greatest spectacle in sports, needs a reason for those casual fans to tune into Big Monday and Super Tuesday. They need those fans to argue about whether John Wall or Evan Turner is the Player of the Year. They need people to be excited about Selection Sunday and filling out a bracket.
They need that discussion. Because where there is discussion, there is viewing interest. Where there is viewing interest, there are TV ratings. And with TV ratings come the dollars, and that is all the NCAA and the NBA care about.
Posts
2 comments:
Nowhere in the discussion of the MLB rule working for hoops is the idea that players who go to college for a year might actually pick up information from their classes that will help them become better businessmen and professionals when they get to the NBA.
Forget the fact about the NCAA grooming future stars. How about thre NCAA preparing student-athletes for the real world.
If I was a owner/gm/coach I wouldn't want to hand some 6'10 HS senior from Georgia a $2.5mil check knowing that his senior schedule consisted of HomeEc, shop class, algebra 3 and senior english.
John Wall might have had a zero-point-zero-zero in colelge, but he probably showed up to atleast one business101 class. Even if he didnt focus or participate, some knowledge had to go through one ear to get out the other. And there is always the chance that the knowledge gets stuck.
I'm anagramtastic!
Post a Comment