Posted by some alternatives on April 30, 2018 at 12:55:01:
In Reply to: Re: "One and Done" is Finished says Condoleezza Rice posted by truth on April 29, 2018 at 15:34:31:
: : : Some big changes coming to college and NBA basketball?
: : Condi knows this will put the ball in Mark Emmert's court. By suggesting taking away the one-and-done, this puts the onus on Emmert to "fix" the hypocritical amateur requirements that have no bearing on being a student athlete. NCAA revenue has increased tenfold in the last quarter-century, while the value of a scholarship has not (and with student loan interest rates up and full employment rates down, you could even argue that value has dropped).
: : Not allowing NCAA players (especially top prospects) to make a dollar while the NCAA and universities make far more money off each one-and-done than said one-and-done receives in return isn't capitalism, it's exploitation. If the past is any indication, Mark Emmert will scramble to defend the one-and-done after Rice's statement. If he refuses to consider any new alternatives, the great and powerful Oz may see his curtain slowly torn away.
: 1) One-and-done is an NBA rule- not an NCAA rule.
: 2) Who determines who gets paid what? If you're a 5-star recruit, do you get $XXXX? Based on what rating system? Rivals? ESPN?
: 3) do the "Power 5" schools get to pay more than mid-majors? If so, you may as well get rid of "D1" or "FBS" divisions, because the mid-majors will never be able to compete- which means that college football will be completely turned upside down- elimination of mid-level bowl games (Holiday, Las Vegas, etc) because the MWC, WAC, OVC, etc would no longer be FBS. San Diego State already has a hard time getting top level recruits, now they'd be recruiting offering a lot less $$ than a Power5 team? So San Diego State football- how many players drafted this year- would be paying less than, say, Kentucky. Much higher caliber of football at SDSU, but UK is in the SEC and therefore paying more?
: If it's a tiered pay scale, no more NCAA tournament as we know it. May as well just have an open bracket and fill in with power 5 teams and all the others have their own tournament.
: 4) If you don't have a tiered scale, then you have ask this- who gets paid? Football and basketball fund ALL the other sports. But with Title IX, you would have to pay all the athletes- even if they are money losers. So the women's row team would have to get paid the same as the football and basketball players.. that's what gender equity in Title IX would dictate.
: It's not as easy as "well, they need to get paid, so pay them."
If athletes in profit-making collegiate sports were given an equal share of their sport's profit, that would satisfy Title IX requirements as I understand. Only Women's Basketball and Softball (and Men's Gymnastics) would get a share under Title IX, as the opposite gender's sport is profitable. Men's Golf team isn't making $ so the Women in that sport wouldn't be paid either.
Agree fully on points 1-3, though players should be able to make money off of endorsements and sales based on their own likeness without losing their collegiate eligibility. The rules preventing them from making money have become increasingly unfair and against the free market concept, and the illegal payments have undermined the very reason for not paying players in the first place.
Although NBA Owners & GMs prefer the age restriction for their league, perhaps a better option would be to allow the G-League to draft players who have completed High School. These draftees would be limited to the G-League for one year, and unable to sign with an NBA team as a free agent unless waived by their G-League team after going undrafted in the subsequent year's NBA Draft. These players couldn't be called up by their parent club until a year after High School.
Post a Followup