"Pay for Play" a.k.a. "One and Done" a.k.a. "The Problem"

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

There's been lots of discussion on threads about these issues. I'd like to get a sense of where we stand.

[kAzE]

IMO, the NBA needs to allow players to go pro out of high school. It wouldn't fix the problem entirely, and it would create some new problems, but I think All things considered, it's a net positive.

[dukebluesincebirth]

The love of money is the root of all evil...the NBA, NCAA, AAU programs, shoe companies, agents, financial "advisors," crooked coaches, athletic directors, university admins are all branches that have grown from this tree. When potential money gains outweigh any other motives for most involved in a process, that process becomes corrupt. Basketball is not exempt.

[swood1000]

None of the options is a vote for paying players. Option 3 is true for people who think that the NCAA should be more vigilant.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

None of the options is a vote for paying players. Option 3 is true for people who think that the NCAA should be more vigilant.

Exactly. I'm trying to go "bigger picture" since all other discussions get bogged down in "Where's the money coming from?" and "what players get how much?"

[sagegrouse]

The model is generally good and workable for players, schools and fans. It needs better regulation and enforcement.

[PackMan97]

None of the options is a vote for paying players. Option 3 is true for people who think that the NCAA should be more vigilant.

I voted for #3 with "doing something" being paying the players. I have no doubt that NC State is a loser in the "pay for play" world...but that's ok with me.

[sagegrouse]

Article by Jeff Goodman on ESPN (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/20905951/mike-krzyzewski-coach-duke-blue-devils-discusses-state-college-basketball) site.

Money quotes:


Krzyzewski, 70, is in favor of players being able to go to the NBA out of high school and reiterated his desire for someone to run college basketball, but he also said Tuesday that several organizations -- including the NBA, the players' association, the shoe companies and those from college -- need to get together to make improvements in the game because there has been "no progress" recently.

"The landscape of college basketball for the player, from middle school to high school to college to the pros, keeps changing," Krzyzewski said. "We in college have not changed as much as the landscape has changed....

Coach also said that a speaking invitation had been canceled because the organization "did not want anyone involved in college basketball."

[wsb3]

Let them go straight out of High School but if they sign on the dotted line at a college. 3 years just like baseball. Now many kids would declare early & they would no doubt lose out because they were not ready but over time maybe wiser decisions would be made. Look how many declare early now that do not get drafted or get drafted in the second round with no guarantee.

[Henderson]

I propose that when discussing this issue, each person's proposal should contain at least one genuinely new idea. Everyone should be required to begin her/his post with, "Here's an idea no one has mentioned before:" If it's not new, the poster pays a quarter to DBR and has to write an essay no longer than his post explaining how to solve Middle East peace.

It's not that the topic isn't interesting (it is) or important (oh howdy) or ripe for valuable insights (where better than here?). It's just that after a while... well... you know.

[Indoor66]

Gee, Middle East peace may be easier....

[DukieInBrasil]

The model is generally good and workable for players, schools and fans. It needs better regulation and enforcement.

agreed. there is one big flaw in the model though, and that is imposed on the NCAA by the NBA. If players could go to the NBA directly, as they could in the days of yore, then much of the temptation would evaporate. But there was crookedness before OAD, and there would be again if it goes away.
Reg & the Enforcer, certainly not an accurate name for a super-hero movie starring the NCAA.

[toooskies]

One surprising thing is hearing Coach K essentially say people other than colleges (i.e. shoe/apparel brands) are recruiting the kids too, for post-college endorsement contracts. This happens already in the form of sponsored AAU teams and high school event games put on by various brands. You could imagine a world where Nike/Adidas/Big Baller Brand/whoever "sponsor" and even pay athletes at the college level as an outgrowth of AAU sponsorship.

But to get from where we are (everyone goes to college) to there (college-level semipro teams) would probably require the NCAA to lift the ban on playing semipro teams. Then, Adidas could instead pay their future guys directly, and work in exihibitions (in-season exhibitions?) as part of the team apparel sponsorships. I just don't think there is enough to make that work.

[ChillinDuke]

The poll is in early stages, but safe to say it looks like most people round here at least agree there is a problem.

In terms of consensus, that's a start.

- Chillin

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The poll is in early stages, but safe to say it looks like most people round here at least agree there is a problem.

In terms of consensus, that's a start.

- Chillin

Pulling teeth trying to get people to agree on anything! Definitely helps that K came out today acknowledging that college hoops needs to make changes and grow.

[Indoor66]

Growth is not necessarily a good thing.

[JetpackJesus]

I think I need a "Both B and C" option in the poll.

[BlueTeuf]

The NCAA could take the following actions, independent of the NBA and NFL, to loosen the perception/reality that colleges function as development leagues.

- Continue to not pay players. Do not attempt to be the destination for the elite athletic talent unless they are pursuing a degree.
- Tie scholarship numbers to graduation rates, creating a significant, debilitating tax on programs that frequently utilize one and done and experience other forms of early departure.
- Allow post professional players to participate (as long as they are full time students).
- reduce the amount of time devoted to the sport. E.g. - no Spring football. In the off-season, let the student athletes be students.

I acknowledge the resultant climate would require an enforcement environment similar to today - schools would continue to look for an edge.

[left_hook_lacey]

The model is generally good and workable for players, schools and fans. It needs better regulation and enforcement.

No. That puts it back in the hands of the NCAA which is(apologies to Charles Barkley) a turrible idea. The only people that think the NCAA does a good job, is the NCAA.

This problem ballooned when the NBA introduced the age limit, thus, the one and done era was born. Take away the age limit, and it takes the need for regulation and enforcement out of the picture(for the most part). A high school graduate has a very simple decision tree/flow chart in this scenario.....


Do I want to go to college? Y---------Go to college, play ball, be a kid, love the school your playing for, stay as long as you like and get ready for the next step in your life/career in sport or beyond.
Do I want to go to college? N---------Go straight to the NBA and chase that life long dream.

Coaches=Happy because most kids will stay at least 2 years.
Players=Happy because they get to choose their path and are not forced to go to college for a year when they never wanted to.
Fans=Happy because they know, for the most part, they're getting recruits that are coming to play for their school because they wanted to, not because they had to.
NCAA=Who cares about the NCAA.

[Indoor66]

No. That puts it back in the hands of the NCAA which is(apologies to Charles Barkley) a turrible idea. The only people that think the NCAA does a good job, is the NCAA.

This problem ballooned when the NBA introduced the age limit, thus, the one and done era was born. Take away the age limit, and it takes the need for regulation and enforcement out of the picture(for the most part). A high school graduate has a very simple decision tree/flow chart in this scenario...


Do I want to go to college? Y---------Go to college, play ball, be a kid, love the school your playing for, stay as long as you like and get ready for the next step in your life/career in sport or beyond.
Do I want to go to college? N---------Go straight to the NBA and chase that life long dream.

Coaches=Happy because most kids will stay at least 2 years.
Players=Happy because they get to choose their path and are not forced to go to college for a year when they never wanted to.
Fans=Happy because they know, for the most part, they're getting recruits that are coming to play for their school because they wanted to, not because they had to.
NCAA=Who cares about the NCAA.


Ahhhhh, the old "I Rule The World" solution. I have at least one of those myself but will not bore you with it.

Now, back to the usual, oft repeated arguments.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

No. That puts it back in the hands of the NCAA which is(apologies to Charles Barkley) a turrible idea. The only people that think the NCAA does a good job, is the NCAA.

This problem ballooned when the NBA introduced the age limit, thus, the one and done era was born. Take away the age limit, and it takes the need for regulation and enforcement out of the picture(for the most part). A high school graduate has a very simple decision tree/flow chart in this scenario....


Do I want to go to college? Y---------Go to college, play ball, be a kid, love the school your playing for, stay as long as you like and get ready for the next step in your life/career in sport or beyond.
Do I want to go to college? N---------Go straight to the NBA and chase that life long dream.

Coaches=Happy because most kids will stay at least 2 years.
Players=Happy because they get to choose their path and are not forced to go to college for a year when they never wanted to.
Fans=Happy because they know, for the most part, they're getting recruits that are coming to play for their school because they wanted to, not because they had to.
NCAA=Who cares about the NCAA.

Well, as stated earlier in another thread, the NCAA works for the member institutions. It isn't above being reorganized/changed/empowered/dissolved. We don't have to throw the baby out with the bath water, but there's no reason no to do what can be done within the existing framework - or to rewrite the framework.

[elvis14]

Let them go straight out of High School but if they sign on the dotted line at a college. 3 years just like baseball. Now many kids would declare early & they would no doubt lose out because they were not ready but over time maybe wiser decisions would be made. Look how many declare early now that do not get drafted or get drafted in the second round with no guarantee.


I think I need a "Both B and C" option in the poll.

Here's my unoriginal take. Make these changes:



Allow players to go to the NBA out of high school (NBA change)
If players comes to school to play ball they sign a contract to stay 2 years (NCAA Change)
If a player is paid to play (AAU, HS, NBA, etc.) each year he is paid to play he loses a year of eligibility to play college ball. So if a player goes directly to the NBA and it turns out he's not ready, the next year he can go to college with 3 years of eligibility remaining. (NCAA Change)


Note that since a player signs a 2 year contract to play college ball that means that a player could only be paid for 2 years and still play college ball. So if someone is getting paid (benefits) from their AAU team, they need to be careful because if they get paid for more than 2 years they can't play college ball. So if your 12 year old is killing it and you get him paid for a couple of years and then all the guys he was killing outgrow him physically and skill wise, he's going to have to go play D2 ball or something.

Also note that all I care about with this is men's college basketball. These changes don't have to be picked up by other sports. And, sorry, cheater fans players must still take real classes and pass them to be eligible to play. We don't give up on the student-athlete concept, we strengthen it.

[ChillinDuke]

Rereading the poll options above with a clear head this morning. I voted for A but am sort of between A and C. I think a clarifying choice would have been helpful that acknowledges the existing framework is a complicated tangle of dependencies involving a wide number of stakeholders which works for many of the stakeholders but some changes would be welcomed to the extent they don't burn the whole thing down. There is too much good in the system to ruin it for (a) women's field hockey, (b) men's diving, (c) bystander students who enjoy having sports as an outlet at their university, etc. But to the extent we don't ruin that, if we can make changes that help the 1% of college bball players that are "exploited" (don't like that term), I'm for it.

- Chillin

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Rereading the poll options above with a clear head this morning. I voted for A but am sort of between A and C. I think a clarifying choice would have been helpful that acknowledges the existing framework is a complicated tangle of dependencies involving a wide number of stakeholders which works for many of the stakeholders but some changes would be welcomed to the extent they don't burn the whole thing down. There is too much good in the system to ruin it for (a) women's field hockey, (b) men's diving, (c) bystander students who enjoy having sports as an outlet at their university, etc. But to the extent we don't ruin that, if we can make changes that help the 1% of college bball players that are "exploited" (don't like that term), I'm for it.

- Chillin

I don't like that term either, and I'm open to more precise language.

[Lar77]

I voted for C for the following reasons and assumptions:


There is no incentive for the NBA to act. The one year rule benefits the NBA and the NBA PA. So would a 2 year rule. (Same with the NFL rule).
The current NCAA structure is an inefficient mess. Restructuring would help focus on the issues that revenue sports and non-revenue sports have.
It is extremely difficult for players to organize and protect their individual rights given the short time that they would benefit from any action and the cost of that action.

That all said, the power is in the NCAA to reorganize and act, for moral and ethical reasons if nothing else.

Some suggestions:

Let athletes have the right to earn money from their name and likeness. This is a right all students have. If the NCAA is concerned about losing control, let the universities be the vehicle to have funds distributed.

Be very clear that written academic standards are required and will be monitored by the school, the conference, and the NCAA (sort of like the securities industry) with some minimum standards. This may include limiting practices (formal or informal - good luck regulating that)

Make scholarships a 4 year, full cost commitment that doesn't go away unless a player transfers.

Allow players to enter pro drafts and have agents without losing eligibility.

Pass legislation (this is a federal action) that any person can sign a contract with an agent, but that contract must be in writing with a limited time frame and cancellable

There will be problems, but that's why NCAA reorganization is critical.

[JasonEvans]

As others have said, I'm having a hard time voting because I think this is both a NBA and a NCAA problem. If there was an option for the 2 of them to work together on joint solutions I suspect the 80% who voted for one or the other would pick that as the best solution. What's more I'm not sure it is possible to solve all the issues in basketball development without the cooperation of those two dominant entities.

I really like the suggestions made by Elvis14. I think almost everyone at this point feels players should be allowed to turn pro if they want but, if the do go to college, they should show some kind of commitment to the education process.

One last thought -- while some may say this is not a NBA problem, I think they are wrong. It is not in the NBA's interest to be paying young players to learn how to play basketball. The NBA wants players as fully formed and able to compete right away as possible. This past year's draft was the youngest in history and that is a trend that seems likely to continue. What's more, the NBA likes players who have a built-in marketing value and audience. It is good for the league that I care more about Boston because they have Kyrie and Tatum. Imagine how much more I would care if I had more of a connection to those guys (beyond the 40 total games they played in a Duke uniform). Adam Silver knows this which is why he often talks about the need to alter and fix the One-And-Done system.

-Jason "I'd love a system where players stayed at least 2 or 3 years in college... even if it meant the top 15-20 players in high school never bothered to go to college" Evans

[DBFAN]

I have always been sorta ok with paying the players based on the revenue it brings to the schools. It would be nice if they could do something that is on par with what Students get for work study, at least that's what it was called when I was in school, may be something diff now. Or the NCAA could also do something that would loosen the restrictions on the financial aid stuff especially for in state players. Of course with programs like ours most of the guys are going to be out of state, and I'm guessing that is more of a federal govt thing than it is NCAA. SO BASICALLY I don't really have a solution 😬 And I realized that more and more the longer I typed. I do think the NCAA needs to consider that other students who aren't athletes struggle as well, and can't make the pay for the players grotesque. We have seen what happens to 19 year olds who get lucrative deals in NBA. Imagine a scaled down version of it on a college campus

[Turk]

I'm going with E - None of the above.

The NCAA *is* the problem, and anything they do will be window dressing or mandated by court order. The NCAA is a trade association that looks to maximize revenue for its members and keep cash away from those who generate the revenue.

[Reddevil]

This is gets interesting to think about for another reason. If players end up getting paid, I would rather watch professionals at the highest level and I will not watch college BB anymore. I doubt I am alone in this mindset. It can get dangerous for employees to gripe too much. A result of the minimum wage for fast food employees is the emergence of the self service kiosk model - not getting into a public policy issue, just saying that the market will always adjust. Right now it has adjusted with a black market. Everyone needs to be careful and think about what each model will produce. For instance, I have heard some people say, "Just get rid of athletic scholarships". One problem with that is each institution can create its own standards. The reason there are no easy answers is because this is just the nature of our whack a mole reality. The best case scenario is the NBA decides to cooperate with college basketball, but they have little incentive to do so. In other words, I have no real answers, just concerns as a fan. There will always be folks trying to get a leg up, we just need a system that keeps cheating within an acceptable range. Maybe a commissioner would help. I sure would not want to be in that seat though. Cynical but hopeful...

[NYBri]

In order to solve this problem, all parties need to agree on what a "perfect system" would be and walk it backward to make it happen. That process is doomed at step one because there would be no agreement on what the "perfect system" looks like.

NBA looks at the present system and sees pretty much their "perfect system." They have a huge minor league/developmental program in the NCAA that they don't have any financial responsibility to maintain. Status Quo works well in that it gives their top tier talent a chance for one more year maturity (in all aspects) and still allows them to grab them at an early age to exploit.

From the players' perspective, a "perfect system" would mean that the earlier they get that rookie contract, the earlier they can get that first big payday in year 5. OR get rid of the rookie contract, which the NBA will never do.

Families want to get repayment for their life long investment ASAP. What would their "perfect system" look like? Pay to Play throughout their kids' childhood?

Shoe companies would LOVE to pay anyone anything at anytime as long as they make profits.

The NCAA "perfect system" would be to have a monopoly on the game for all 17-21 year olds and not pay them anything and grab all the TV and endorsement money so they can raise money for their schools from rabid fan alum.

Disagreement about the "perfect system" among the parties involved is the biggest obstacle to fixing this problem.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

In order to solve this problem, all parties need to agree on what a "perfect system" would be and walk it backward to make it happen. That process is doomed at step one because there would be no agreement on what the "perfect system" looks like.

NBA looks at the present system and sees pretty much their "perfect system." They have a huge minor league/developmental program in the NCAA that they don't have any financial responsibility to maintain. Status Quo works well in that it gives their top tier talent a chance for one more year maturity (in all aspects) and still allows them to grab them at an early age to exploit.

From the players' perspective, a "perfect system" would mean that the earlier they get that rookie contract, the earlier they can get that first big payday in year 5. OR get rid of the rookie contract, which the NBA will never do.

Families want to get repayment for their life long investment ASAP. What would their "perfect system" look like? Pay to Play throughout their kids' childhood?

Shoe companies would LOVE to pay anyone anything at anytime as long as they make profits.

The NCAA "perfect system" would be to have a monopoly on the game for all 17-21 year olds and not pay them anything and grab all the TV and endorsement money so they can raise money for their schools from rabid fan alum.

Disagreement about the "perfect system" among the parties involved is the biggest obstacle to fixing this problem.

Good breakdown. Fair points about what each side's best case scenario. The problem is, the NBA has the power and no incentive to compromise.

[flyingdutchdevil]

In order to solve this problem, all parties need to agree on what a "perfect system" would be and walk it backward to make it happen. That process is doomed at step one because there would be no agreement on what the "perfect system" looks like.

NBA looks at the present system and sees pretty much their "perfect system." They have a huge minor league/developmental program in the NCAA that they don't have any financial responsibility to maintain. Status Quo works well in that it gives their top tier talent a chance for one more year maturity (in all aspects) and still allows them to grab them at an early age to exploit.

From the players' perspective, a "perfect system" would mean that the earlier they get that rookie contract, the earlier they can get that first big payday in year 5. OR get rid of the rookie contract, which the NBA will never do.

Families want to get repayment for their life long investment ASAP. What would their "perfect system" look like? Pay to Play throughout their kids' childhood?

Shoe companies would LOVE to pay anyone anything at anytime as long as they make profits.

The NCAA "perfect system" would be to have a monopoly on the game for all 17-21 year olds and not pay them anything and grab all the TV and endorsement money so they can raise money for their schools from rabid fan alum.

Disagreement about the "perfect system" among the parties involved is the biggest obstacle to fixing this problem.

Holy hell this is reasonable. Great post.

Can I add one? Duke 'perfect system' would be winning the NCAA every year and UNC never being allowed to play basketball again.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I'd like to thanks folks for participating in my poll! It was probably overly-simplistic, but it did help me recognize that we do seem to mostly recognize that there is a problem. I think we even concur for the most part, that the biggest part of the problem would be best solved by the NBA, but in absence of that, the NCAA needs to do what they can to address things within their purview.

[ipatent]

There has always been a seedy underbelly in college revenue sports, but I would separate the problem into (1) schools cutting corners to recruit players and (2) handlers/prospective future agents and shoe companies putting their hooks in advance to a kid who is going to be a money making asset down the road. In the Louisville case you have a deal that was an intersection of these interests.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

There has always been a seedy underbelly in college revenue sports, but I would separate the problem into (1) schools cutting corners to recruit players and (2) handlers/prospective future agents and shoe companies putting their hooks in advance to a kid who is going to be a money making asset down the road. In the Louisville case you have a deal that was an intersection of these interests.

Well, and that's what makes this more interesting than just "booster X paid player Y to go to school Z." If Adidas has a lot of money in the Louisville basket, and they can coerce top tier talent to go to Louisville, putting that team's shoes on more TVs in March, then they can effectively cut the coaches/boosters out of the equation from a plausible deniability POV. You can debate whether there's a value to having your logo on a college basketball team's gear, but I know personally, that if Nike Swooshes had been all over Duke gear in the late 80's it would have made a profound impact on this young man.

[ipatent]

Well, and that's what makes this more interesting than just "booster X paid player Y to go to school Z." If Adidas has a lot of money in the Louisville basket, and they can coerce top tier talent to go to Louisville, putting that team's shoes on more TVs in March, then they can effectively cut the coaches/boosters out of the equation from a plausible deniability POV. You can debate whether there's a value to having your logo on a college basketball team's gear, but I know personally, that if Nike Swooshes had been all over Duke gear in the late 80's it would have made a profound impact on this young man.

Wouldn't Adidas meet the definition of a Louisville booster?

[smvalkyries]

I don't believe I have ever heard this proposal or anything like it before. The single biggest problem I see is that the players are being forced to make a school or NBA bench decision
without the requisite experience even to be able to choose advisors they can trust. As a practical matter economics force most to choose NBA as soon as possible. The economics include the risk of injury, risk of drop off of performance or even the risk of committing some teenage act hurting their chances of getting drafted. My solution is to pass these risks on to the pros who should be better able to assess and handle them.My method:
(1) No more requirement for kids to sign up for the draft.
(2) Let the NBA draft the kids whenever they want at guaranteed future contracts slotted at the prevailing draft rates and beginning when the player decides to enter the NBA be immediately of after actually finishing college. All these contracts are for the full drafty term starting when the player enters the nba. No monies ar paid prior to entering the nba nor are players permitted to in any way collaterize these contracts to obtain monetary advances.
(3) when drafted the player shall have a limited time say 90 days to sign the futures contract or go back in next year's draft.
(4) as a small kicker towards letting kids stay in school- let the contract be voidable by the player at the rate of one year for each legitimate year of college finished.

This obviously doesn't solve the whole problem but it does permit the player to make a decision either to stay in school or go pro on a more equal basis w/o the risks inherent with not taking the money now. Clearly it would make no difference to many but it would stop players from entering the draft and never getting drafted, it would essentially equalize the economic impact but for the timing of payment and relieve the players from being forced to make irrevocable decisions before they are ready to.
From the NBA standpoint they would be getting a more valuable and ready to contribute player in the vast majority of cases. They would "be stuck" with an 18-19 year old on the back of the bench or risk whatever trouble or attitude or confidence troubles can ensue. Sure they have to accept more risk than they did but risk is their business when drafting players.




it also opens many rioster building options and might keep up interest in the nba a couple more months a year. Finally it gives the players more control over their own lives, lets them choose to minimize the risk w/o risking the rewards and in general should make at least some of them happier, more able to handle their wealth when they get it and better educated for the rest of their lives.

I have no idea how this would work in real life but it seems like a viable win/win to me with something for the schools, something for the players and something for the nba both ownership and labor.? pretty sure this is at least new enough to avoid the middle-east penalty?

[lotusland]

Good breakdown. Fair points about what each side's best case scenario. The problem is, the NBA has the power and no incentive to compromise.

This is true but I wonder if the Feds will take an interest in rooting out corruption in college athletics and apply pressure to the NBA to at least solve OAD issue. Congress inserts itself in sports with hearings and such all the time. Government pressure could change the dynamic so that it is in NBA's interest make changes. I'm not interested in keeping kids in college for 2 or 3 years if the NBA is ready to pay them though. I'd like to have have more upper class men contributing but it's better for the integrity of the sport if everyone who's good enough to get paid is allowed to do so.

[Indoor66]

This is true but I wonder if the Feds will take an interest in rooting out corruption in college athletics and apply pressure to the NBA to at least solve OAD issue. Congress inserts itself in sports with hearings and such all the time. Government pressure could change the dynamic so that it is in NBA's interest make changes. I'm not interested in keeping kids in college for 2 or 3 years if the NBA is ready to pay them though. I'd like to have have more upper class men contributing but it's better for the integrity of the sport if everyone who's good enough to get paid is allowed to do so.

Boy, that idea makes me feel comfortable about the solution. The Feds have been so good about fixing things! Just check out Amtrak, Post Office and Health Care for a couple examples. Keep them away from College sports.

[lotusland]

Boy, that idea makes me feel comfortable about the solution. The Feds have been so good about fixing things! Just check out Amtrak, Post Office and Health Care for a couple examples. Keep them away from College sports.

Well I get that sentiment but there is no perfect solution and, to be fair, there isn't a perfect private solution to mail delivery, health care and interstate transportation either so this is the sort of thing that congress might help orchestrate a non perfect outcome that is preferable to what we have now. I'd rather have talented and patient college ball players who valued their education and were willing to wait several years to be starters but that's not going to happen anymore than unicorns are going to replace Amtrak.

[TampaDuke]

Good breakdown. Fair points about what each side's best case scenario. The problem is, the NBA has the power and no incentive to compromise.

I know many of us keep repeating that the NBA has no interest in changing the current system, but that's not really accurate. The NBA actually preferred a two-and-done rule rather than the one-and-done rule. The issue is that the NBA doesn't actually have the power to solve the proble, unilaterally anyway, they have to negotiate it with the union. The NBA would gladly implement a two-and-done rule, but the union believes players should be able to go straight to the league from high school, hence the current compromise that everyone seems to hate.

I'd like to see the parties negotiate a more nuanced compromise, maybe something similar to baseball's arrangement, but modified to allow lottery teams to draft high schoolers, but anyone not drafted in the lottery from high school must attend at least two (maybe 3?) years in college, development league, Europe, etc. before becoming eligible again for the draft. Perhaps that's a compromise (albeit an imperfect one) that gives all sides some of what they want. Just a thought.

[TampaDuke]

I don't believe I have ever heard this proposal or anything like it before. The single biggest problem I see is that the players are being forced to make a school or NBA bench decision
without the requisite experience even to be able to choose advisors they can trust. As a practical matter economics force most to choose NBA as soon as possible. The economics include the risk of injury, risk of drop off of performance or even the risk of committing some teenage act hurting their chances of getting drafted. My solution is to pass these risks on to the pros who should be better able to assess and handle them.My method:
(1) No more requirement for kids to sign up for the draft.
(2) Let the NBA draft the kids whenever they want at guaranteed future contracts slotted at the prevailing draft rates and beginning when the player decides to enter the NBA be immediately of after actually finishing college. All these contracts are for the full drafty term starting when the player enters the nba. No monies ar paid prior to entering the nba nor are players permitted to in any way collaterize these contracts to obtain monetary advances.
(3) when drafted the player shall have a limited time say 90 days to sign the futures contract or go back in next year's draft.
(4) as a small kicker towards letting kids stay in school- let the contract be voidable by the player at the rate of one year for each legitimate year of college finished.

This obviously doesn't solve the whole problem but it does permit the player to make a decision either to stay in school or go pro on a more equal basis w/o the risks inherent with not taking the money now. Clearly it would make no difference to many but it would stop players from entering the draft and never getting drafted, it would essentially equalize the economic impact but for the timing of payment and relieve the players from being forced to make irrevocable decisions before they are ready to.
From the NBA standpoint they would be getting a more valuable and ready to contribute player in the vast majority of cases. They would "be stuck" with an 18-19 year old on the back of the bench or risk whatever trouble or attitude or confidence troubles can ensue. Sure they have to accept more risk than they did but risk is their business when drafting players.




it also opens many rioster building options and might keep up interest in the nba a couple more months a year. Finally it gives the players more control over their own lives, lets them choose to minimize the risk w/o risking the rewards and in general should make at least some of them happier, more able to handle their wealth when they get it and better educated for the rest of their lives.

I have no idea how this would work in real life but it seems like a viable win/win to me with something for the schools, something for the players and something for the nba both ownership and labor.? pretty sure this is at least new enough to avoid the middle-east penalty?

Interesting idea, but I think it underestimates just how much risk it transfers to the NBA team that drafts the player, so I have a difficult time envisioning the NBA signing off.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Boy, that idea makes me feel comfortable about the solution. The Feds have been so good about fixing things! Just check out Amtrak, Post Office and Health Care for a couple examples. Keep them away from College sports.

Boy, you really love walking that PPB edge, don't you? I wouldn't care, except that I feel it is impossible to reply to your comment with anything beyond - let's keep Congress away from anything we value.

[Indoor66]

Boy, you really love walking that PPB edge, don't you? I wouldn't care, except that I feel it is impossible to reply to your comment with anything beyond - let's keep Congress away from anything we value.

I believe that your last sentiment is what I was conveying.😎

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I believe that your last sentiment is what I was conveying.😎

Ah! A point of agreement. Always refreshing. :)

[smvalkyries]

I agree my proposal does transfer probably too much risk to the nba and is a little bit of equitable thinking and probably a lot of polyanna. Still who is better able to absorb the risk, the nba who can properly evaluate the risk and afford to ensure it or teenagers with less than a full college education and maturity? Besides I suspect the cost of the risk to the nba would find its way into the draft salary slotting after a year or two anyway. Nevertheless your point is very valid and requires some adjustment to the proposal.
On second thought aren't rookie slotted salaries guaranteed and as a practical matter is the risk of injury that much greater in college than in practicing against grown men everyday and having all the travel time to get into trouble?

[TampaDuke]

I agree my proposal does transfer probably too much risk to the nba and is a little bit of equitable thinking and probably a lot of polyanna. Still who is better able to absorb the risk, the nba who can properly evaluate the risk and afford to ensure it or teenagers with less than a full college education and maturity? Besides I suspect the cost of the risk to the nba would find its way into the draft salary slotting after a year or two anyway. Nevertheless your point is very valid and requires some adjustment to the proposal.
On second thought aren't rookie slotted salaries guaranteed and as a practical matter is the risk of injury that much greater in college than in practicing against grown men everyday and having all the travel time to get into trouble?

If I understand your proposal correctly, I don't think the NBA would agree to a few items. If you allow the athlete to forego the futures contract and re-enter the draft, the team loses a valuable pick and gets nothing in return. Some undesirable destinations/organizations would never get their picks to sign.

If you allow athletes to void years off their contracts by staying in school, the teams would be subjected to losing their rights to keep players for at least the current 4-5 years, and will risk allowing the players to enter into free agency earlier as a reward for playing less for the NBA team and more for the college team.

If you don't allow those terms, what's the incentive for the student not to go pro immediately and start the clock running toward their second contract? Why would the athlete stay in school? Maybe you lessen the risk of college players getting injured or being exposed as unfit for the NBA, but the athletes still have an incentive to get paid now and, hopefully, to get that second deal as young as possible.

[SoCalDukeFan]

Duke would stop playing big time bball.

Its one thing to accept athletes who project to graduate but are not up to par with the rest of their academic peers and say that Duke or other schools accepts talented students in arts or whatever that may not exactly meet the standards of the others in their class. But how is Duke's academic mission furthered by accepting athletes whose intention is to stay one year? Maybe some of these stay 2 and maybe some everyone thought would stay leave after one, but thats not the point. We are just a bridge from high school and the NBA.

And to be that bridge we have to associate with AAU coaches, shoe companies, would be agents and a host of others trying to get richer on the back of these kids.

I love and have followed the team since the early 60's and the coach since the 80's. I am in awe of what he has accomplished. But this sport has turned into a pretty sordid mess.

SoCal

[elvis14]

Duke would stop playing big time bball.

... But how is Duke's academic mission furthered by accepting athletes whose intention is to stay one year? ...

SoCal

Duke's basketball team gets a ton of national exposure for Duke university. The athletes academics don't further the mission but the exposure created by the team helps the mission. I don't think anyone expects athletes to to further Duke's academic mission from the classroom. I doubt this is the expectation at any school. When you have an athlete that's exceptional academically, that's a fantastic bonus and I bet Duke has more than their fair share of those guys.

[SoCalDukeFan]

Duke's basketball team gets a ton of national exposure for Duke university. The athletes academics don't further the mission but the exposure created by the team helps the mission. I don't think anyone expects athletes to to further Duke's academic mission from the classroom. I doubt this is the expectation at any school. When you have an athlete that's exceptional academically, that's a fantastic bonus and I bet Duke has more than their fair share of those guys.

that the Ivy League schools, U of Chicago, Washington U, the Patriot League schools and others are doing fine academically without the exposure of big time college basketball.

SoCal

[Indoor66]

Frankly, Duke would do just fine without big time sports. I'm not sure what some on this Board would do.

That said, I am sure that the devildeac and fuse would survive. 🍺🍺🍺🍺

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Frankly, Duke would do just fine without big time sports. I'm not sure what some on this Board would do.

That said, I am sure that the devildeac and fuse would survive. 🍺🍺🍺🍺

I would be fine with this as well. If Duke stopped offering athletic scholarships and rolled out a team of four year students to play basketball against other like-minded programs, (Ivy Leaguers?) I would watch every minute of it. My affinity for Duke basketball is not attached to cutting down nets in big domes, though it is a source of a lot of enjoyment. I'd rather preserve the integrity of the program at the expense of excellence, if it comes to that.

Having said all that, it would be packing up LOTS of money, wrapping it up on a pallate, and returning it to the sender, which pretty much never ever happens.

[ChillinDuke]

I had drinks last week with someone who played D-1 hoops at an Ivy League school within the last five years. I will try my best to reiterate his statements on the matter below, as verbatim as possible. My intention is to offer first-hand thoughts on the matter from someone who very recently was involved in this universe. In no way, are the thoughts listed below my own, nor are they meant to form any coherent story. They are simply random thoughts after one beer (and eventually two beers).

- Explicit and unconstrained pay-for-play ("PFP") for all athletes is impossible in college basketball.
- It is impossible to unlink the Title IX consequences (and similar funding consequences) from PFP. Paying all players in bball would have a negative consequence, monetarily, on other sports.
- You are allowed to take your room/board scholarship money up front as a lump sum payment, for example, if you choose to live off campus with your teammates or buddies. This lump sum payment is typically large, by 19-year olds' standards. When I hear UConn players (his words, not mine) say that they are hungry or that they have no money to do anything, they are frankly lying. They used their money for something they shouldn't have. Especially with the stipend, you have money in your pocket. You're not rich, but you're not anywhere near starving.
- College basketball players have enough time to invest in their own education, but there is definitely more of this time in the offseason. During the basketball season, it's possible but more difficult. I submit that football players, given the requirements of that sport, have a much more difficult time investing in their own education while on campus. Football programs are much, much more intensive commitments than basketball.
- The best way to compensate college players is to let them profit off their own likeness and/or jersey sales. I'm in favor of that change. Anything more than that, I believe will hurt the system in one way or another.
- To say I lived anything less than a privileged life as a college basketball player is disingenuous. I stayed in the nicest hotels, ate the nicest meals, and had incredibly enriching experiences that the vast majority of my student-only peers were not privy to. I wouldn't have traded it for anything, and I stunk at basketball.

It's not necessarily saying something. But it's not saying nothing. I find his thoughts very interesting, simply as another data point on the matter. YMMV.

- Chillin

[DukeandMdFan]

I would be fine with this as well. If Duke stopped offering athletic scholarships and rolled out a team of four year students to play basketball against other like-minded programs, (Ivy Leaguers?) I would watch every minute of it. My affinity for Duke basketball is not attached to cutting down nets in big domes, though it is a source of a lot of enjoyment. I'd rather preserve the integrity of the program at the expense of excellence, if it comes to that.

Having said all that, it would be packing up LOTS of money, wrapping it up on a pallate, and returning it to the sender, which pretty much never ever happens.

As Tommy Amaker has shown, Ivy League is also big time basketball.

I haven't been to the student managers games that Jay Bilas talks about. It seems like that would be one way to cheer for "typical" students who play basketball primarily for its enjoyment.

[kmspeaks]

I had drinks last week with someone who played D-1 hoops at an Ivy League school within the last five years. I will try my best to reiterate his statements on the matter below, as verbatim as possible. My intention is to offer first-hand thoughts on the matter from someone who very recently was involved in this universe. In no way, are the thoughts listed below my own, nor are they meant to form any coherent story. They are simply random thoughts after one beer (and eventually two beers).

- Explicit and unconstrained pay-for-play ("PFP") for all athletes is impossible in college basketball.
- It is impossible to unlink the Title IX consequences (and similar funding consequences) from PFP. Paying all players in bball would have a negative consequence, monetarily, on other sports.
- You are allowed to take your room/board scholarship money up front as a lump sum payment, for example, if you choose to live off campus with your teammates or buddies. This lump sum payment is typically large, by 19-year olds' standards. When I hear UConn players (his words, not mine) say that they are hungry or that they have no money to do anything, they are frankly lying. They used their money for something they shouldn't have. Especially with the stipend, you have money in your pocket. You're not rich, but you're not anywhere near starving.
- College basketball players have enough time to invest in their own education, but there is definitely more of this time in the offseason. During the basketball season, it's possible but more difficult. I submit that football players, given the requirements of that sport, have a much more difficult time investing in their own education while on campus. Football programs are much, much more intensive commitments than basketball.
- The best way to compensate college players is to let them profit off their own likeness and/or jersey sales. I'm in favor of that change. Anything more than that, I believe will hurt the system in one way or another.
- To say I lived anything less than a privileged life as a college basketball player is disingenuous. I stayed in the nicest hotels, ate the nicest meals, and had incredibly enriching experiences that the vast majority of my student-only peers were not privy to. I wouldn't have traded it for anything, and I stunk at basketball.

It's not necessarily saying something. But it's not saying nothing. I find his thoughts very interesting, simply as another data point on the matter. YMMV.

- Chillin

As a former non revenue sport scholarship athlete I echo much of this. Thanks for sharing.

[swood1000]

I would be fine with this as well. If Duke stopped offering athletic scholarships and rolled out a team of four year students to play basketball against other like-minded programs, (Ivy Leaguers?) I would watch every minute of it. My affinity for Duke basketball is not attached to cutting down nets in big domes, though it is a source of a lot of enjoyment. I'd rather preserve the integrity of the program at the expense of excellence, if it comes to that.

Having said all that, it would be packing up LOTS of money, wrapping it up on a pallate, and returning it to the sender, which pretty much never ever happens.

Looked at from that perspective, allowing salaries and fees to college players could have a positive net effect, in that it would split college basketball into two groups: the schools who allowed such payments and the schools who chose to remain amateur. I think there would be a great number of fans like you (and me) who would maintain huge interest in the amateur teams, now unencumbered by one-and-dones and associated drama. There probably would continue to be cutting down of nets in big domes on the amateur side of things. In fact, I wonder how many teams the players who are legitimately salary-worthy would allow, or how many programs would ‘go pro.’ The amateurs would probably continue to be governed by the NCAA, which would continue the current post-season competition. The ‘pro’ teams would have to create their own tournaments. Maybe such tournaments would eclipse March Madness the same way March Madness eclipsed the NIT, but maybe not.

I actually don’t think that this would completely solve the corruption problem in the amateur branch, since if amateur college basketball retained a lot of fans then it would still generate big money and the enticement to cheat would still be there (e.g. get somebody good enough to be paid to join an amateur team in exchange for secretly getting to him the salary he would be giving up).