I am not sure. We will find out soon enough.
I can see Bilas appreciating that the commission doesn't let the NCAA off the hook by saying it is an NBA rule. He will certainly be in favor of licensing rights. He might be upset that they didn't flat out say "pay the players," but absent a great fleshed out explanation of how that would be feasible, it is a had line to take.
I don't think Bilas is as illogical as most folks here seem to; I do think he is a staunch player advocate and he is extremely cynical about anything the NCAA does. Here sure isn't an idiot though.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...endations-ncaa
A summary of the report.
Looks like a good effort.
The OAD and AAU are squarely under fire. If the NBA and NBAPA don't end OAD by the "next" season, potential for NCAA action, freshman ineligibility or locking a scholly for 3 or 4 years if a player leaves after 1.
I do like the proposed "lifetime ban" for cheating coaches, whatever that means. Zero impact on the NBA, but does seem like impactful.
Looks like the NBA/NBPA are taking it seriously. They are looking into an end of the OAD rule by the 2020 draft.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...aign=editorial
Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."
That's all well and good, but if they do, it will either be for their own reasons ($) or out of goodwill for the game. To suggest that the NCAA has any weight in this is naive, as I see it. They are the younger sibling wanting their older brother to let them ride in their Porsche.
And yes, that is one of my worst DBR analogies ever. And I have espoused many.
I completely agree with the bolded text, at least as a potential permanent solution.
However, if having Bagley sit the bench (or, more likely, threatening to have the future Bagley's of the world sit the bench) gets the NBA to change the one-and-done rule to something more favorable to the NCAA and future top 10 prospects, then I can see how there may be beneficiaries (though, I don't see much upside for Bagley himself or the 1000 or so other Freshmen who may have to sit out).
The threat of Freshmen ineligibility could be a bit like the threat of a worker's strike. Sure, it is probably not in the worker's interest to stop working permanently, but a temporary work stoppage can be an effective tool for improving work conditions going forward.
Now whether the the elimination of the one-and-done rule is a good enough cause to temporarily institute Freshmen ineligibility is an entirely different question.
Last edited by House P; 04-25-2018 at 10:32 AM.
But, we thought we were only recruiting one OAD in Okafor’s class, but ended up with 3 because Jones and Winslow played so well, while also earning academic honors. So, we should be penalized 3 scholarships for the next 3 years?? Or infinity times the punishment for decades of systemic academic fraud and free rental cars from felons? Should we not recruit any top 50 players to be safer (though still not entirely safe)?
I think one of the intended side effects is a disincentive to recruit OAD players, because they would be costly for your program. But again, none of this would actually fix the issue of OAD players not belonging in college, it would just spread them out so that programs cannot build their system around OAD’s.
Before we can have a solution, we need to see what we want. We, in the collective, the consensus, or as close at one can be reached:
The bargain college fans, athletes, administrators, coaches and media have made over the past 40 years or so is that the football and basketball revenues will pay for the entire athletic department, all the immense costs of not only providing a big time football and basketball program, but all the non revenue sports costs as well.
Non rev sports have taken tremendous strides forward thanks to FB and BB money. All athletes have as well, for example, the 55 million dollar Clemson athletic complex for students recently opened. This is where we are. For crying out loud, I think Duke baseball has new uni's for every game...(okay, exaggeration, but you get the point). They're not paying for any of that. Neither is this new softball team.
Now you can make the argument that the FB and BB team shouldn't pay for those others. You can make the case that coaches and administrators are over paid. Those are points to be considered.
But the irony is, many of the hardest core pay the player types are also very much adamant about Title IX and other non revenue sport benefits.
What you can't do is have the cake and eat it too...and it seems to me that a lot of pay the players advocates seem to think the money is there to do that, while not touching the rest of the sports. That's absurd. As Boeheim said, at Syracuse, even with big time revenues in FB and BB, much of it the ACC contracts, their athletic department barely breaks even.
And we have a post from Jim Sumner - paraphrasing - where Kevin White said Duke can't afford to renovate Coombs Field...unless Jim writes the check...because the money isn't there.
So before a solution can even be discussed, we need to figure out if we want a vibrant non revenue sports sector in addition to the revenue sports, or not?
BTW, this would include probably every women's team in the nation not named UCONN basketball. Or do we want to pay the rev sport players and let the others become club level sports again. Unless you can fill an 80,000 seat football stadium 7-8 times a year, and get a big bowl check, you can't have both.
I can live with either outcome at this stage of life. What I really don't like is the notion, and it's widespread, that "the NCAA is making billions" and not sharing it. The NCAA shares it with the schools, and the schools run their entire athletic departments off of it. I can't stand the NCAA for the most part, but this is how the system works. To hear Jay Bilas, one would have to assume he's not aware of it.
The broccoli analogy is excellent. If the threat is not taken seriously, it is meaningless.
I do wonder if there are other potentially effective 'negotiating positions' which might be taken seriously enough to influence the one-and-done decision makers. I have some ideas, but they are probably completely unworkable.