One-and-done poll

[JasonEvans]

A poster named hustleplays who is not able to make polls asked me to post this for him. He said:

My rationale for a poll on OADs is that while the issue has been thoroughly discussed, we don't have a current statistical profile of DBR member attitudes. I think it would be highly interesting to learn the percentages, along with follow-on commentary.

So, vote early and often so we can see what percentage of us favors each of these possible outcomes.

-Jason

[BD80]

Don't see the poll, so I'll write in: "No more discussion of the merits of OADs, in any form whatsoever. The topic has been run into the ground, treated like the Romans treated Carthage."

[mattman91]

Let them go straight out of high school. That was the way it was before and there were no issues with it.

I've never liked the idea of making kids commit to at least 2-3 years before leaving school. IIRC, athletic scholarships are technically one year commitments from the school that are (usually) renewed each year. It is not guaranteed over the one year, so why make the students commit to the institution longer than that? Sounds a bit selfish to me.

If you allow kids to go pro (NBA or abroad) there won't be as many one and done players because the kids that are concerned with making money immediately will pursue that goal without wasting time in college.

[left_hook_lacey]

Just put it back the way it was before the madness. If they want to go, let them go straight out of high school.

[kako]

Remove all age/educational requirements for NBA entry! I'm a free market guy. Putting restrictions on any given market creates problems and messes... like we have now in college hoops. If the market is free, it will evolve naturally.

I'd also go one further to stipulate that any player should also be able to enroll/re-enroll in college even if they have gone pro - assuming they have eligibility left. They would need to meet school entry requirements and keep up their academic standing. Again, no restrictions on the market...

[Wander]

The last option is closest to what I want, but not exactly.

With exceptions for over-the-top talents like Bagley, I think Duke should not recruit guys who know for sure they will be OAD regardless of how their season turns out. If a guy who wasn't 100% sure he would go pro has a good enough season such that declaring makes sense (like Tyus Jones), that's cool. But I'd like to avoid cases like Duval, Trent, and Jackson. I don't blame any of these individual players for going pro, but from the program's basketball-only perspective, they weren't good enough in one year of college to be worth the resources we invested into them.

[Reddevil]

Let them go if they want to go. The last option is not enforceable. The rest are at the mercy of the NBA and NBAPA. The only thing the NCAA can do is make freshmen ineligible or recreate the old JV program, and either option makes it more expensive because the scholarships would have to be expanded back to 17 or so which is why frosh eligibility was created to begin with. My wish is that they would make the minimum age 21, but that is purely selfish for my fandom. Letting kids that have no immediate interest in college skip it is best. Only a dozen or so will go each year and the college game will be fine.

[Troublemaker]

It's a layered answer from me. Speaking strictly as a Duke fan, I want OAD to last as long as Coach K's career lasts. I don't think a 71-yr-old like him is interested in building a team over a 3-4 year span 2010-style anymore (assuming he can even properly identify and successfully recruit those players that can become a champion in 3-4 years, as opposed to players who develop too fast and leave for the NBA early [Kennard] or are too impatient and transfer before the 3-4 year process is complete. [Remember that beloved 4-year guys like Nolan and Quinn both had transfer thoughts at certain points in their careers, and while we were lucky that they stayed, who knows if the next hypothetical 3-4 year would-be-champion will make the same choice?]).

But if I were choosing a system from scratch and didn't have a 71-yr-old legend coaching my team, I'd choose differently. I would hope the NBA removes the OAD restriction. And everyone should keep in mind it is an NBA rule, not a college rule.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Speaking strictly as a Duke fan, I want OAD to last as long as Coach K's career lasts. I don't think a 71-yr-old like him is interested in building a team over a 3-4 year span 2010-style anymore (assuming he can even properly identify and successfully recruit those players that can become a champion in 3-4 years, as opposed to players who develop too fast and leave for the NBA early [Kennard] or are too impatient and transfer before the 3-4 year process is complete. [Remember that beloved 4-year guys like Nolan and Quinn both had transfer thoughts at certain points in their careers, and while we were lucky that they stayed, who knows if the next hypothetical 3-4 year would-be-champion will make the same choice?]).

But if I were choosing a system from scratch and didn't have a 71-yr-old legend coaching my team, I'd choose differently. I would hope the NBA removes the OAD restriction. And everyone should keep in mind it is an NBA rule, not a college rule.

This ^^^^...right on all counts.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Free market, clap clap clap! Free market, clap clap clap! Free market, clap clap clap!

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Let them go straight out of high school. That was the way it was before and there were no issues with it.

I agree, go straight to the pros if you want. But, the idea that there were "no issues" is mistaken.

NBA execs count on that year in college to weed out high school talent. They draft these kids very high in the draft, for fear of missing out on Kevin Garnett. But sometimes you get Robert Swift. No way you draft Robert Swift if he has a year of college tape on him.

The one and done rule was implemented to protect NBA GMs from themselves. Which is smart.

It just butchers college ball. So I think it should go away.

[azzefkram]

Let them go if they want but have a 2 year commitment should the choose to go to college. Change the scholarship to 4 years instead of year to year.

[English]

I agree, go straight to the pros if you want. But, the idea that there were "no issues" is mistaken.

NBA execs count on that year in college to weed out high school talent. They draft these kids very high in the draft, for fear of missing out on Kevin Garnett. But sometimes you get Robert Swift. No way you draft Robert Swift if he has a year of college tape on him.

The one and done rule was implemented to protect NBA GMs from themselves. Which is smart.

It just butchers college ball. So I think it should go away.

Preface: I'm also among the free market voters.

I'd add that the straight-to-NBA system also had some negative impacts on the college game...namely that the NCAA had difficulty establishing a mutually agreeable declaration date for kids entering the draft. IIRC, Coach K (and others) publicly criticized the timeline by which players would need to enter their names in the NBA Draft, participate in the NBA pre-draft process, withdraw their names from NBA Draft, and retain NCAA eligibility because he cited difficulty recruiting players who were potential early entrants. He would sink time and resources into recruiting a kid, and there was a sort of built-in uncertainty that could be mitigated if the NCAA and NBA worked to sync their respective schedules. The uncertainty would still be there, just as it is now with OADs, but back then, it was rough on coaches.

And for anyone that might say, sure the current system is better for college coaches and NBA GM/owner interests, but what about the kids...there are plenty of cautionary tales about HS players who made questionable choices to enter the draft. It may be counter intuitive, and I don't want to get all paternalistic, but there's something to be said for providing more complete information for both sides (players, NBA teams) when making decisions of this magnitude. Maybe a year in college is too much to ask a kid to give up, but a week of NBA Combine and some team workouts may not be enough.

[UrinalCake]

I don’t like the 0-and-2 rule, there are too many cases of guys like Tre Young or Corey Maggette where they weren’t ready straight from high school but after one season in college it is clear that they are. So I vote for just removing the one year rule.

I will say that those who expect this to solve all of college basketball’s problems will be severely disappointed. Back before the OAD rule was implemented, we had one or two guys each year making the straight-from-high school jump. That was a while ago and maybe guys are more ready now. But that means maybe five guys go each year. It’s not like the top 25 of every class will skip college, there just aren’t enough spots.

So if the top 5 of every class goes straight to the pros, you still have the issue of what to do with everybody else. The question of paying players will still be there, as the NCAA will still be making millions and the players getting none of it. Agent involvement will still be there, as the best available players still have tremendous value to the schools and to the shoe companies. Kids who don’t want to go to class will still choose not to go, and some schools (cough, cough) will find ways to make that possible. Five kids every year will be happier than under the current system, but all of the same issues will remain.

[brevity]

Don't see the poll, so I'll write in: "No more discussion of the merits of OADs, in any form whatsoever. The topic has been run into the ground, treated like the Romans treated Carthage."

This seems overly harsh. Here is a fair compromise:

From this point on, everyone should be allowed exactly ONE post on the one-and-done issue. AND then they're DONE.

The one and done rule was implemented to protect NBA GMs from themselves. Which is smart.

Memo to NBA teams: eliminate the OAD rule, open the draft to high school graduates, and hire smarter GMs.

[camion]

So if the top 5 of every class goes straight to the pros, you still have the issue of what to do with everybody else. The question of paying players will still be there, as the NCAA will still be making millions and the players getting none of it. Agent involvement will still be there, as the best available players still have tremendous value to the schools and to the shoe companies. Kids who don’t want to go to class will still choose not to go, and some schools (cough, cough) will find ways to make that possible. Five kids every year will be happier than under the current system, but all of the same issues will remain.

I agree with part 1 of the bolded, but not with part 2. For the vast majority of college athletes a college scholarship and a college education are a good deal while a small percentage could make more in a free market. How do you balance the gain of the majority with the loss of the minority? An interesting question.

[Ian]

It's a layered answer from me. Speaking strictly as a Duke fan, I want OAD to last as long as Coach K's career lasts. I don't think a 71-yr-old like him is interested in building a team over a 3-4 year span 2010-style anymore (assuming he can even properly identify and successfully recruit those players that can become a champion in 3-4 years, as opposed to players who develop too fast and leave for the NBA early [Kennard] or are too impatient and transfer before the 3-4 year process is complete. [Remember that beloved 4-year guys like Nolan and Quinn both had transfer thoughts at certain points in their careers, and while we were lucky that they stayed, who knows if the next hypothetical 3-4 year would-be-champion will make the same choice?]).

But if I were choosing a system from scratch and didn't have a 71-yr-old legend coaching my team, I'd choose differently. I would hope the NBA removes the OAD restriction. And everyone should keep in mind it is an NBA rule, not a college rule.

I'm sorry, but that is not a particularly flattering picture you're painting of Coach K.

If Coach K being 71 prevents him from doing the traditional job of being a college coach, which is building a team of players who are also real college students who stay 3-4 years for a degree. Then maybe he shouldn't be a college coach at the age of 71? Maybe he should coach the NBA, or just stay the US National Team coach, positions that doesn't require him to recruit and develop young teams, just get the most of the talent given to him?

I love Coach K and he's the main reason I am a Duke fan at all, so I'd rather not belive that Coach K is no longer capable of some of the responsibilities of being a head coach but is finding ways around that so he can be the head coach a little while longer, hanging on like Bowden instead of gracefully walking away like Wooden, Smith, or Calhoun. (Who incidentally all left teams that were championship contenders, all made the FF the year after they retired)

I'd rather believe that Coach K choose this recruiting strategy because he genuinely believed it would be in the best interest of the Duke program (he could be mistaken, but that's a separate debate), not because it would extend his coaching career.

[Troublemaker]

I'd rather believe that Coach K choose this recruiting strategy because he genuinely believed it would be in the best interest of the Duke program (he could be mistaken, but that's a separate debate), not because it would extend his coaching career.

Huh? I definitely believe Coach K thinks this is in the best interest of the Duke program. Nowhere did I suggest that he's using this recruiting strategy to "extend his career." 71 is 71. He basically has limited years left no matter what. How does he want to spend them?

I'm sorry, but that is not a particularly flattering picture you're painting of Coach K.

If Coach K being 71 prevents him from doing the traditional job of being a college coach, which is building a team of players who are also real college students who stay 3-4 years for a degree. Then maybe he shouldn't be a college coach at the age of 71? Maybe he should coach the NBA, or just stay the US National Team coach, positions that doesn't require him to recruit and develop young teams, just get the most of the talent given to him?

I love Coach K and he's the main reason I am a Duke fan at all, so I'd rather not belive that Coach K is no longer capable of some of the responsibilities of being a head coach but is finding ways around that so he can be the head coach a little while longer, hanging on like Bowden instead of gracefully walking away like Wooden, Smith, or Calhoun. (Who incidentally all left teams that were championship contenders, all made the FF the year after they retired)

He's capable of a gradual build but he understandably wants to do it another way. Maybe he's wrong about that for reasons X, Y, or Z, but I doubt he'll be changing course.

[El_Diablo]

This seems overly harsh. Here is a fair compromise:

From this point on, everyone should be allowed exactly ONE post on the one-and-done issue. AND then they're DONE.

Your system is untenable and unfair. I think some people should be allowed to not make any post on the issue at all. But if they do decide to post about it, they should be required to make at least two posts on the topic.

[Bob Green]

I vote to allow them to go straight to the NBA out of high school. That eliminates the players who never unpack their bags.

This option befuddles me:

Players can go pro out of high school, but if they go to college they must stay at least 2 years

Why two years? The precedence has been set by both football and baseball which require players to stay 3 years. Why would basketball be different?