Freshman ineligible again.....?

[GGGG]

Yes, the second part of your post I didn't think of that, and you're right of course.

The first statement, uh, I truly wonder?  You really believe the NCAA has the wisdom to do what's right?  I sure have zero confidence.  These guys are a bunch of empty suit bureaucrats who only care about their own expansion and power. 

I think the NCAA would *love* if college basketball required at least three years like football.  Everyone knows the quality of the game has suffered tremendously due to talent leaving and lack of continuity with the players.  Can you imagine what next year's Duke team would look like with a third year Jabari Parker, and second year Okafor and Jones? 

[GGGG]

Improving their product, but they're too greedy, selfish, and short sighted to view it that way unfortunately.

Who?  The players union?  How is it being greedy for them to allow more players in the door?

[ChicosBailBonds]

You aren't really being suckered in to the horse manure these creeps are trying to peddle to the public, are you???

In my view it's a combination of them wanting to prevent kids from jumping early because it is hurting college basketball....call that selfish or just good business, but that's the main driver.  I also believe they know as well as everyone here that some of these kids are not intellectually or emotionally ready to leave that early, but because their posse, family, or overvalued self believes they need to cash in....they do.

So it's a little bit of both, but no doubt there is plenty of self interest at play here by the conferences.

I didn't understand your ACC vs Big East stuff, to be honest with you.  The enlarging of the conferences was about surviving and positioning yourself for the future.  That's just the reality of it.  If the ACC didn't do that, someone else would have (Big 12, etc).

[ChicosBailBonds]

Exactly.

I don't think that is true at all.  That is being played out right now, but first and foremost that was a UNC issue....it then became an ACC and NCAA issue, which is where it sits right now.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'm sure this has been discussed, but has basketball ever considered going the baseball route?

High school seniors can go pro; however, if they opt not to, they can only go pro after their college junior season.

Yup....good luck getting the NBA, the agents, etc to go for it, however.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Yes, the second part of your post I didn't think of that, and you're right of course.

The first statement, uh, I truly wonder?  You really believe the NCAA has the wisdom to do what's right?  I sure have zero confidence.  These guys are a bunch of empty suit bureaucrats who only care about their own expansion and power. 

The NCAA largely does what is right for the hundreds of thousands of student athletes under their auspices.  People forget about all the sports, all the student athletes and only focus on men's basketball and football.  They also forget that football had largely been governed outside of the NCAA, but people blame the NCAA anyway.

Plus, the NCAA is an organization of member institutions.  The universities make up the membership and the universities set the rules. 

[HutchwasClutch]

Who?  The players union?  How is it being greedy for them to allow more players in the door?

No, I meant the league itself.  The NBA has for a long time now been about marketing individual talent. 

[HutchwasClutch]

I didn't understand your ACC vs Big East stuff, to be honest with you.  The enlarging of the conferences was about surviving and positioning yourself for the future.  That's just the reality of it.  If the ACC didn't do that, someone else would have (Big 12, etc).

Bull, it's been about power, influence, and maximizing money and profit, while pretending it's about student athletes.  That's what kills me is their utter hypocrisy and crap about student athletes they blather on about.    The ACC started the whole domino effect in college football and basketball.  They were the corporate raiders gobbling up whatever they could sink their claws into.  Everyone else felt compelled to react to what they had done. The survival of the ACC was hardly at issue in both of their expansions.

[HutchwasClutch]

The NCAA largely does what is right for the hundreds of thousands of student athletes under their auspices.  People forget about all the sports, all the student athletes and only focus on men's basketball and football.  They also forget that football had largely been governed outside of the NCAA, but people blame the NCAA anyway.

Plus, the NCAA is an organization of member institutions.  The universities make up the membership and the universities set the rules.  

That all may be true, but seriously, reality is, it's a handful of power brokers that move and shake things.  The article you linked was an example of that.  I don't think the hypocrites quoted are too concerned about what their fellow member institutions want to do or not do.  They know they're the ones with the leverage, power, and influence to change things the way they want.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Bull, it's been about power, influence, and maximizing money and profit, while pretending it's about student athletes.  That's what kills me is their utter hypocrisy and crap about student athletes they blather on about.    The ACC started the whole domino effect in college football and basketball.  They were the corporate raiders gobbling up whatever they could sink their claws into.  Everyone else felt compelled to react to what they had done. The survival of the ACC was hardly at issue in both of their expansions.

When I say surviving, I mean positioning themselves for the future.  I don't literally mean not existing, but in order to part of the P5 future that was coming, that's what they had to do.  In some cases, the educational paradigm for some institutions will improve immensely as a result...Louisville being one. 

Let us not forget the Big East did this first with Virginia Tech, Miami (FL) and others back in the day for football.  Then added a bunch of schools, including Marquette to shore things up in the mid 2000's. 

[The Equalizer]

Sounds like a discrimination lawsuit waiting to happen if just one sport is singled out by the NCAA. 

How is this discrimination?  Football and basketball are already singled out by the way the NCAA assigns "counters" and there have been no lawsuits over that waiting to happen.

What this will do is send freshmen overseas or to JUCOs for one year.

Which is exactly what the academics want.

The schools never asked for the NBA age limit rule--this was thrust on them by a bunch of NBA owners tired of spending millions on first round HS busts. THeir logic: let them prove themselves in college for a year--all in order to protect the owners from having to take that risk.

[MU82]

Problem is that the NBA isn't.  And the rule for baseball that you reference above is MLB's rule.  The NCAA can't require a three year commitment unless the NBA gets it into the CBA with the union.  And the union has made it clear they aren't going any further than one and done.

Bingo!

The NBA loves having college basketball as a free minor league. NBA owners would make it two years (or three!) if the union would let them. But the union won't, not without the owners giving up something incredible in negotiations.

[Dr. Blackheart]

How is this discrimination?  Football and basketball are already singled out by the way the NCAA assigns "counters" and there have been no lawsuits over that waiting to happen.

Which is exactly what the academics want.

The schools never asked for the NBA age limit rule--this was thrust on them by a bunch of NBA owners tired of spending millions on first round HS busts. THeir logic: let them prove themselves in college for a year--all in order to protect the owners from having to take that risk.

As to the first part, with this potential rule, the NCAA is singling out a specific sport, not the professional leaugue and/or the unions as was explained by other posters here. Guess what:  of last year's Top 25 high school hoops recruits, who most will say are the most likely to be one and dones, 100% are African Americans who will now be excluded and singles out from making millions for a year.

A professional league and their union limiting entry is one thing as it is only for one sport.  An organization who rules over all spirts is another thing. Have to be fair and equitable or it is discrimination.

As to the academics:  lol.  This is all about the P5 locking up more of the top talent, and keep the talent and money with the as this would require more basketball scholarships. If the academics really cared, Syracuse and UNC would be blacklisted.

[Pakuni]

Weird how hockey players can get drafted before going to college, then head to college for as long as they want (or until they run out of eligibility, whichever comes first) and it hasn't ruined the NCAA or NHL.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Weird how hockey players can get drafted before going to college, then head to college for as long as they want (or until they run out of eligibility, whichever comes first) and it hasn't ruined the NCAA or NHL.

Or, how a Chris Crawford or Danny Ainge could play professionally in one sport and be eligible in another as an amateur, but Darnell Autry couldn't act or model during the football offseason while at Northwestern.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Or, how a Chris Crawford or Danny Ainge could play professionally in one sport and be eligible in another as an amateur, but Darnell Autry couldn't act or model during the football offseason while at Northwestern.

Nothing weird about it at all.   Crawford and Ainge played for other sports organizations in which those organizations had skin in the game and drafted those players.  They used draft choices to obtain their rights.

The Autry example opens up a massive hole for boosters to pay recruits to come play for them.  "Come on down and play for us, we'll let you also model and give you 6 figures to do so"

Not that hard really.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Weird how hockey players can get drafted before going to college, then head to college for as long as they want (or until they run out of eligibility, whichever comes first) and it hasn't ruined the NCAA or NHL.

Agreed.   Just wait until those hockey posses get involved, they'll change things.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Nothing weird about it at all.   Crawford and Ainge played for other sports organizations in which those organizations had skin in the game and drafted those players.  They used draft choices to obtain their rights.

The Autry example opens up a massive hole for boosters to pay recruits to come play for them.  "Come on down and play for us, we'll let you also model and give you 6 figures to do so"

Not that hard really.

Not that hard really...other than Autry sued the NCAA and won.

http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1996/Judge-Sides-With-Autry-In-Rushing-Star-Vs-NCAA/id-938ccdba2a9a106a810163738637c40d

[brewcity77]

Let us not forget the Big East did this first with Virginia Tech, Miami (FL) and others back in the day for football.  Then added a bunch of schools, including Marquette to shore things up in the mid 2000's. 

Not really fair to compare the Big East taking Miami and Va Tech for football as both were independents before joining the conference.

[WarriorInNYC]

As to the first part, with this potential rule, the NCAA is singling out a specific sport, not the professional leaugue and/or the unions as was explained by other posters here. Guess what:  of last year's Top 25 high school hoops recruits, who most will say are the most likely to be one and dones, 100% are African Americans who will now be excluded and singles out from making millions for a year.

I would back this down quite a bit, as the article Chico's posted noted that an average of 10 freshman per year enter the draft.

[Pakuni]

Agreed.   Just wait until those hockey posses get involved, they'll change things.

Hockey players are traditionals, right?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Not that hard really...other than Autry sued the NCAA and won.

http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1996/Judge-Sides-With-Autry-In-Rushing-Star-Vs-NCAA/id-938ccdba2a9a106a810163738637c40d

I'm aware that he won the lawsuit, I was pointing out the answer as to why the NCAA didn't allow it....too big of a hole in which mischief can happen.  Let's also not forget that all student athletes can work, but guidelines were in place because of the rampant cheating in the past.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Hockey players are traditionals, right?

They tend to be more grounded in the basics than basketball players, if that is what you are asking.  You can't just "out athlete" someone on the ice, you need the fundamentals as a skater and as a player.  A better way to put it, some guys in college hoops didn't even start playing basketball until high school and they still make major impacts because their athleticism translates to the game and they can dominate certain aspects of the game.  For hockey, it's usually years and years of development.

[barfolomew]

If the power five were dumb enough to adopt this rule, they'd drop it within four years.
It would folly for the other conferences (like the BE, AAC, A10, etc) to choose to restrict themselves this way.

First, it would be a clear recruiting advantage for the non-power 5. If you were a 3- or 4-star 17-year-old from Green Bay, and could play at MU immediately instead of waiting a year to play at Wisky, where are you going?

Second, even if the NCAA let the power 5 increase their schollie limit (which I doubt), a team would be at a big disadvantage if they happened to have an unbalanced recruiting class one year.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If the power five were dumb enough to adopt this rule, they'd drop it within four years.
It would folly for the other conferences (like the BE, AAC, A10, etc) to choose to restrict themselves this way.

First, it would be a clear recruiting advantage for the non-power 5. If you were a 3- or 4-star 17-year-old from Green Bay, and could play at MU immediately instead of waiting a year to play at Wisky, where are you going?

Second, even if the NCAA let the power 5 increase their schollie limit (which I doubt), a team would be at a big disadvantage if they happened to have an unbalanced recruiting class one year.

I think a bunch of you are missing what they are proposing.  They are saying a NCAA legislative rule, which would apply to all of the schools in the various divisions, not just the P5.  It happens to be the P5 commissioners pushing this, but they would want this to be voted on by the entire membership and applied to the entire membership.