sebstar wrote:

martin wrote:

sebstar wrote:

martin wrote:

sebstar wrote:

martin wrote:

sebstar wrote:We've had this debate for awhile around here. The age limit is anti-american, not insofar as the league is enacting rules for its own self-interest, but its the idea that kids are funneled into a college system where they help to generate billions and aren't allowed to participate in the profits.

Its a cold hustle, thats for sure.

I say it's anti-american for us to tell a business enterprise how to run their own company, ie age limit, no age limit.

Did you read what I wrote, bruh? They are working in concert with a collegiate system that is practically illegal.

practically illegal? working in concert with? You are describing everyday work process for about every company out there. One thing has nothing to do with the other. If you want to hold college institutions accountable or the NCAA accountable, go for it.

The difference between the NBA and the everyday work process is that athletes are directly responsible for a billion-dollar industry. Thats the difference. The athletes are the main spokes in the collegiate financial wheel. The NBA placing an age limit, with no other legitimate alternatives, is practically forcing athletes into a role of indentured servitude.

There is obviously enough gray area for the NBA to get away with it and since athletes have been so demonized as greedy and soulless they have sentiment on their side.

So, the NBA drafts on average 3 extra college kids a year if there is no age limit. How does that change what the NCAA is doing? Nada. So, one has nothing to do with the other.

sebstar, you do a big disservice to all of those tobacco workers of the 17th-18th century by describing student athletes who get tuition, room, board, free choice, etc as "into roll of indentured servitude". Thanks for that.

This isnt all that complicated. Its wrong to make such an obscene amount of money off the backs of students, period.

If you were an athlete for a major program and you saw the merchandise being sold and your face splattered all over television, and people told you that you living in a 10 X 10 room and eating spagetti every night was "fair" compensation --- you would sing a different tune.

I agree with Sebstar on this. I do not think that athletes should be receiving a salary. They already get that in the form of a free education. But it is criminal that schools can sell a Ray Allen jersey and make millions while he doesn't get a red cent. Honestly how do schools justify this. I 100% agree that athletes deserve a cut of this.

martin wrote:There is clear benefit to the NBA to hold off on drafting kids. That has been shown.

No, it hasn't. Quite the opposite. That’s part of the problem.

In fact, from a monetary standpoint, the only argument you could kind of make, it isn't so clear cut. Look at Brandon Jennings. He's playing a huge role in the Bucks marketing this year. You can't tell me that wouldn't have been the same had he come in to the league a year earlier, after getting next to zero national exposure playing in Europe.

In general, yes, an NBA team doesn’t want to have to pay out a contract for a $3 million player who may or may not contribute to wins right away. But how exploitative is that, considering they will make tens of millions on said player down the line.

sebstar wrote:If you were an athlete for a major program and you saw the merchandise being sold and your face splattered all over television, and people told you that you living in a 10 X 10 room and eating spagetti every night was "fair" compensation --- you would sing a different tune.

I would agree with you on the merchandising angle. But that has nothing to do with age limits for the NBA.

How would you pay the athletes? This question has been either glossed over or ignored. What would you consider fair for athletes to receive in payment? But for the record I think the NCAA should ban schools for profiting off of individual athletes. Sell the jerseys, hats, cups whatever but they shouldn't be allowed to use any form of a athlete's likeness.

Your take that millions are made off the backs of these kids sounds very evil.

30 teams with two drafts, thats sixty kids.

There are 331 division one teams in the US. If on average they carry 15 4,965 kids.

Each team is allowed 13 FULL scholarships. Thats 4,303 full scholarships.

I think every year perhaps there are just 30 propospects that are bonafide pro caliber. Of that maybe 6 are high schoolage, and we know about half don't pan out. They would perhaps fall out in the minors or in college anyway. Maybe Eddy or Kwame would either have failed earlier or matured in a less intense environment. Or maybe just fall to a lower draft position allowing a kid maturing to reach is proper position.

Your also fogetting that other players could grow in value and be a better invesment to a team.

Andrew wrote:

bitty41 wrote:oohah,

How would you pay the athletes? This question has been either glossed over or ignored. What would you consider fair for athletes to receive in payment? But for the record I think the NCAA should ban schools for profiting off of individual athletes. Sell the jerseys, hats, cups whatever but they shouldn't be allowed to use any form of a athlete's likeness.

And athletes that under perform and a program loses $? They should pay have to take out loans to pay the university.

Define "underperform". Or perhaps the program is out of it's league. One might say that the recruiting program is what underperformed. Very similar to a GM in the NBA. Also, sometimes pro players come from losing programs.

Let's not be too flippant...I have a solution that while is radical would probably be fair to everybody, everybody makes money, and a college/club team star who may not make the NBA will at least get paid during "his time". And if decides that he wants to be a student and he wants to obtain an education, he can use the money he earned to buy that education.

By the way, everyone, you do realize that paying players is rampant? Either in straight cash or other methods? We are discussing something that is already happening! And not just for the guys heading to the NBA.

I was plying my trade before college. I put myself through school with the money I earned from it. I stood shoulder to shoulder with people who had degrees, and I had to either perform or be fired. Just the same way a player who goes straight to the pros out of high-school would.

oohah

bitty41 wrote:oohah,

How would you pay the athletes? This question has been either glossed over or ignored. What would you consider fair for athletes to receive in payment? But for the record I think the NCAA should ban schools for profiting off of individual athletes. Sell the jerseys, hats, cups whatever but they shouldn't be allowed to use any form of a athlete's likeness.

Agreed

oohah wrote:Bippity, 2 Syracuse guys:

Etan Thomas = paid through education = invalauble.

David Johnson = Never should have been there = played for free to gain exposure in the hipes he would have a solid NBA career = All those perks of trainers etc. did jack for him anyway.

oohh

That's the thing, when you go to college there are no guarantees of success. giving you free stuff is not a guarantee that things will work out for you. If you can't take advantage of the free trainers and coaches to become an NBA player then take advantage of the free education they hand you and try to make something of yourself. If you choose not to, that's fine, but you wasted an opportunity.

If you hand me 1 million dollars today, that one million dollars has value. If I decide it's not important and bury it in a hole in the backyard and never use it doesn't mean that you didn't give me something of great value. It just means that I didn't understand the value of what you gave to me or had a different view of what value is.