Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="CocoHusky, post: 2333006, member: 5823"] I have corresponded with Mark over the years and found his advice about recruiting to be very sensible and invaluable. With this particular article Mark appears to be addressing college athletics in general and not Women's basketball specifically. The differences in women's and men's collegiate athletics are so vast that one solution (as Mark is proposing) does not fit all. The specific differences are revenue generating sports (women have none), the value of professional contracts (women lag significantly behind) , & rules for entry into professional leagues (women are disadvantaged). Men can enter the NBA 1 year after graduating HS, women cannot enter the WNBA until in most cases 4 years after HS. The NCAA proposed a greater level of "autonomy" for P5 football teams. When that autonomy gets fully implemented good luck getting funding for many women's NCAA teams. A high school baseball player can be drafted by a MLB team and still make the choice to attend college. Despite all these disadvantages women are graduating at a higher rate and transferring at a lower rate than men. A one size solution (everyone sits out a year) unfairly compounds the existing disadvantages for women at a time when women are meeting the primary objective of attending college and actually graduating. Mark also presents another false strawman in the article-that scholarship should be more like employment contracts, with incentives like a players shooting percentage built in. Geno had a similar opinion a few years back regarding paying the players saying I'm paraphrasing: [I]"Does that mean we get to take scholarship away when they start playing bad?[/I] The reason this is false is because a scholarship (per the NCAA) cannot be based on incentives. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach