Bippity10 wrote: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.

This says nothing about the one year wonders who go in to college knowing that they will be worth millions when they get out. Don’t confuse the argument against the age limit (which was put in place as an obvious benefit to the NCAA) with an argument against the NCAA itself.

martin wrote:

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.

Sure it does. Let’s say on average a healthy player has 15 years of earning potential. It’s not unlimited. The NBA is taking away one year of that (and will possibly propose taking away two) while giving no benefit to that player, providing only dubious benefit to itself, while the NCAA makes a boatload of cash as a result.

Why don’t more people see this as a problem?

RemBee76 wrote:

martin wrote:

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.

Sure it does. Let’s say on average a healthy player has 15 years of earning potential. It’s not unlimited. The NBA is taking away one year of that (and will possibly propose taking away two) while giving no benefit to that player, providing only dubious benefit to itself, while the NCAA makes a boatload of cash as a result.

Why don’t more people see this as a problem?

Because for every person the league is "preventing" from earning their millions, its also preserving a spot on an NBA team for a veteran to continue earning their millions. Who is your constituency? Oh yeah.. existing players. So who should get the benefit of collective bargaining? Oh yeah... existing players. Who is going to have to concede something for the NBA to do away with the age limit? Oh yeah.. existing players.

RemBee76 wrote:

Bippity10 wrote: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.

This says nothing about the one year wonders who go in to college knowing that they will be worth millions when they get out. Don’t confuse the argument against the age limit (which was put in place as an obvious benefit to the NCAA) with an argument against the NCAA itself.

So again this is another choice that they make.

1.) The NBA has the right to decide what their age limits are. Agree or disagree?
2.) The player has the right to attend college and leave for millions or he can go to Europe to play. Yes or no?
3.) The college system is set. Your payment for playing is not an overt check, they instead bypass the check and hand it to the university to save you thousands. If this is not the system that you enjoy, then number 2 is an optiion.

I personally think athletes get paid right now. Not sure how anyone disputes that. The only thing I don't agree with is that Universities should not be able to sell merchandise with the players likeness/numbers and then make a profit off of it. That is shameful. As for the rest of the money, I know it's the in thing to do, to say that "some fat cats are getting rich" off of the backs of these college students. Yes, there are some people at the University profiting. But the majority of the money goes to paying for the other sports programs and paying for thousands of scholarships for students(many of them minority, female and poor) who otherwise would not be able to go to college. Another portion goes to university improvements that help to provide a better education for all the students that go there(before Calhoun Uconn was not known. The people that heard of it, only knew it because it was listed as one of the Top 10 party schools in playboy. After Calhoun it has magically become one of the top state universities in the country). who do we take money from? Would it be good for universities/america to start cutting track programs and field hockey programs and baseball programs so that a few basketball and football players can receive a little more money on top of the 100's of thousands they already receive.

martin wrote:because even if the NBA does remove the age limit, the NCAA still makes a boatload of cash and the problem still exists, so the problem is not a symptom of the age limit itself.

No, the problem I'm describing would not exist, because the NCAA would not be making that boatload of cash by exploiting a year of an athlete's finite earning potential. Like I said, 99.9% off the athletes in the NCAA don't have the option of making money in the pros.

The guys we are talking about do. For the tenth time, don't conflate this argument with an argument against the NCAA itself.

Bippity10 wrote:They don't allow the names but they instead put the numbers. This is a great way around paying the kid, but let's be real. When Ray Allen was at Uconn there were very few #84 or #50 jerseys for sale, but plenty of #34's. The school profited off him overtly and they protected themselves by not putting his name on the Jersey. Personally I feel the students should get a cut of this money.

I agree in theory, but I'm sure this too has its issues. Syracuse #44 for example would be tough to handle with all of the great cuse players wearing it. Imagine having two players wanting to wear that number to battle for a piece of the pie.

martin wrote:defending the 3 dudes a year who wouldn't get drafted.

The three dudes who would get drafted you mean, yes. Who else would I be defending, these are the guys who are affected by the age limit.

martin wrote:Is it illegal to have age limit? NO. So there is no problem.

Right, right. I mean, really, why even start this thread? Or write a piece in the NYT op-ed, for that matter. As we all know, there has never been anything that was unfair that wasn't illegal.

Andrew wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:They don't allow the names but they instead put the numbers. This is a great way around paying the kid, but let's be real. When Ray Allen was at Uconn there were very few #84 or #50 jerseys for sale, but plenty of #34's. The school profited off him overtly and they protected themselves by not putting his name on the Jersey. Personally I feel the students should get a cut of this money.

I agree in theory, but I'm sure this too has its issues. Syracuse #44 for example would be tough to handle with all of the great cuse players wearing it. Imagine having two players wanting to wear that number to battle for a piece of the pie.

It's not an easy thing to solve. We could then of course just take the numbers off the Jersey's. Or we could have the players receive compensation while they are in school. I admit that I don't really have a clear cut solution to this issue, but I do however think it's wrong.