Commission Recommends the End of "One and Done"

[billybud]

It did not mince words, saying that "one-and-done has played a significant role in corrupting and destabilizing college basketball, restricting the freedom of choice of players, and undermining the relationship of college basketball to the mission of higher education."

Tough talk on corruption, one-and-done, but commission misses the mark

 

[raf46]

It did not mince words, saying that "one-and-done has played a significant role in corrupting and destabilizing college basketball, restricting the freedom of choice of players, and undermining the relationship of college basketball to the mission of higher education."

Tough talk on corruption, one-and-done, but commission misses the mark

One and done is not the fault of the NCAA. The NBA put it in to keep 1st year players, fresh from high school, from getting mega deals.

 

[MrP]

One and done is not the fault of the NCAA. The NBA put it in to keep 1st year players, fresh from high school, from getting mega deals.

I always thought the players union fought for the rule to protect veterans, essentially limiting the amount of young talent in the league so veterans’ careers would be extended

 

[BlueDogs]

I hope they require each scholarship be utilized for a minimum of 3 years. If a kid leaves to go pro before 3 years is up, the scholarship spot is deemed utilized but can’t be filled until the 3 year mark.

You’ll see coaches get much more selective about who they take.

 

[UconnFanNVa]

I always thought the players union fought for the rule to protect veterans, essentially limiting the amount of young talent in the league so veterans’ careers would be extended

I always thought the opposite.. Players were for it (especially being that some of the best players in the league where straight out of high school). And that the league was against it. It wanted to protect its teams from drafting players that werent as good as they were hyped to be (busts). They also said they cared about the kids and that kids who entered the draft and didnt get drafted then couldnt attend college on a scholarship.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I always thought the opposite.. Players were for it (especially being that some of the best players in the league where straight out of high school). And that the league was against it. It wanted to protect its teams from drafting players that werent as good as they were hyped to be (busts). They also said they cared about the kids and that kids who entered the draft and didnt get drafted then couldnt attend college on a scholarship.

This is the answer. Many HS kids got big guaranteed contracts and essentially never made their teams. Huge risk for the NBA. It will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[MrP]

This is the answer. Many HS kids got big guaranteed contracts and essentially never made their teams. Huge risk for the NBA. It will be interesting to see what happens.

Actually, it’s both...

“The NBPA is in a difficult quandary because it wants to fight for the right of any player to enter the league who feels prepared, yet keep jobs available for veterans .

“That’s something we have to look at, too, whether by — if we shifted our minimum age from 19 to 18, we’d be bringing the whole league younger, because the jobs have to come from somewhere,” Silver said. “So we’re not by any means rushing through this. I think this is a case where, actually, outside of the cycle of collective bargaining, we can spend more time on it with the Players Association, talking to the individual players, talking to the executive board and really trying to understand the pros and cons of potentially moving the age limit.””

(Source: Boston Globe)

 

[TheChamps990411]

Getting rid of 1nd will benefit the college game especially if they institute a 2 year minimum for players that go to college

 

[CL82]

I wonder if schools could make their offers contingent on a player staying x# of years? If student breaches they pay back the scholarship and perhaps the value of the lost years?

 

[UconnFanNVa]

I like the risk for the NBA teams personally. Its not good for the tankers. You draft 1st or 2nd and draft a kid behind all the hype and they dont pan out that sucks. BUT it kinda lessens the value of drafting in those top 3 slots. Teams need to do their homework. Also the teams that dont tank are rewarded because better talent could now drop to them if teams with higher picks for the sexier choice.

 

[freescooter]

I hope they require each scholarship be utilized for a minimum of 3 years. If a kid leaves to go pro before 3 years is up, the scholarship spot is deemed utilized but can’t be filled until the 3 year mark.

You’ll see coaches get much more selective about who they take.

I have been calling for a version of this for s while. If Calipari had to play with 4 scholly kids some year he might change his approach

 

[freescooter]

The problem with the Commission and the NCAA is that none of them are proposing to take action themselves. They want the NBA to make changes. I’ll be pretty shocked if the NCAA did anything but whine about how the NBA is not saving them from themselves just like always.

 

[SubbaBub]

They needed a committee for this?

 

[huskymedic]

The problem with the Commission and the NCAA is that none of them are proposing to take action themselves. They want the NBA to make changes. I’ll be pretty shocked if the NCAA did anything but whine about how the NBA is not saving them from themselves just like always.

Whether they follow through is always a legit point but in the other thread there is link to where Rice states:

“If a change is not made to one-and-done, Rice said the commission will look into options, such as making freshmen ineligible or locking a scholarship for three or four years if the recipient leaves a program after one year.

"One-and-done has to go one way or another," Rice told the Associated Press.”

 

[intlzncster]

I wonder if schools could make their offers contingent on a player staying x# of years? If student breaches they pay back the scholarship and perhaps the value of the lost years?

How does that help? What exactly would that accomplish?

 

[CL82]

How does that help? What exactly would that accomplish?

Not much really. Offsets the cost of the scholarship. Wouldn't stop kids from going to the NBA but would change the risk/reward of going G-league.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I know this is hopelessly naïve but no one forces colleges to accept one and done players.

It's so insincere to hear all of them say "I'm only doing it because University X is doing it". Coaches were more than free to say to a recruit, "You're too good and you'll be gone in a year. Best of luck in China or Europe and best wishes in next year's draft.

NCAA wants to blame this on the NBA draft requirements but like everything else the NCAA turned the other way while the coaches gorged themselves like pigs in a trough.

 

[Husky25]

One and done is not the fault of the NCAA. The NBA put it in to keep 1st year players, fresh from high school, from getting mega deals.

Eh, maybe. I feel the rookie salary scale takes care of this for the most part.

I think the real reason is that owners wanted to save their franchises from their GMs who, and rightfully so, felt their jobs were on the line if they missed on the next LBJ or Kobe, whether they picked a player or not. By extension. coaching staffs had no appetite to play wetnurse to an immature 8-figure boy, yet miss out on what might be a once in a generation talent, developing over the following 30 months. Likewise scouting departments could not possibly accurately assess so many prospects, not to mention Europeans, as not all leagues offer the same level of competition. Let the NCAA weed them out, if only for a year.

 

[Mokum]

Whether they follow through is always a legit point but in the other thread there is link to where Rice states:

“If a change is not made to one-and-done, Rice said the commission will look into options, such as making freshmen ineligible or locking a scholarship for three or four years if the recipient leaves a program after one year.

"One-and-done has to go one way or another," Rice told the Associated Press.”

Freshmen ineligible. That would be interesting. I am old enough to remember when there was a freshman team and a varsity team. That would definitely screw up Kentucky and Duke, and anybody else who recruits players who in all likelyhood will jump to the NBA after one year.

 

[AdamaNation]

I hope they require each scholarship be utilized for a minimum of 3 years. If a kid leaves to go pro before 3 years is up, the scholarship spot is deemed utilized but can’t be filled until the 3 year mark.

You’ll see coaches get much more selective about who they take.

I was on the side of 2-2 year schollies as contracts. With the second to be released upon early graduation. It is more predictable and cyclical to the 4 year schedule. Allows the nba evaluation as well, recruiting assurances and overall predictability.

 

[freescooter]

Whether they follow through is always a legit point but in the other thread there is link to where Rice states:

“If a change is not made to one-and-done, Rice said the commission will look into options, such as making freshmen ineligible or locking a scholarship for three or four years if the recipient leaves a program after one year.

"One-and-done has to go one way or another," Rice told the Associated Press.”

Interesting comments. Problem is that she has no more power to implement them than you or I do. I guess maybe the fact that the options are out there makes it harder to use the “the NBA made us do it” excuse with a straight face, but since when does the NCAA worry about that.

 

[temery]

Not much really. Offsets the cost of the scholarship. Wouldn't stop kids from going to the NBA but would change the risk/reward of going G-league.

It would force the schools to make better decisions when recruiting.

 

[intlzncster]

Freshmen ineligible. That would be interesting. I am old enough to remember when there was a freshman team and a varsity team. That would definitely screw up Kentucky and Duke, and anybody else who recruits players who in all likelyhood will jump to the NBA after one year.

It would force the schools to make better decisions when recruiting.

I just don't think that would work in the modern game. Sure, you'd take care of one and done's, but there's also a number of 2-and-dones and 3-and-dones; guys jump as soon as they can. Add to that the transfer epidemic. Injuries.

You need to be able to play freshman these days to fill holes. You could see situations where it's tough to field a roster, especially one without glaring holes.

Even look at our team last year. We'd have had 8 eligible scholarship guys. And we didn't recruit any 1 and done's. You basically add a whole bunch of other problems to fix one part of the deal.

You'd actively have to recruit bad players just to make sure you have enough.

I just don't see it.

 

[BlueDogs]

I was on the side of 2-2 year schollies as contracts. With the second to be released upon early graduation. It is more predictable and cyclical to the 4 year schedule. Allows the nba evaluation as well, recruiting assurances and overall predictability.

I think you still get a revolving door at 2 years, but it’s better than what we have.