bobby bo wrote:
I'm reading your posts. I just don't understand why you're so concerned about the development of an athlete or the ways owners spend their money. If a team owner wants to spend his money on a risky, undeveloped prospect, they should be able to do so.
I dunno, because I'm a fan? I want to see the best product possible? I don't want to see every team with multiple roster spots committed to guys who aren't ready or able to contribute.
So send them to your NBDL affiliate. Make the DL more like the Minor Leagues.
What counts as physically mature in soccer is completely different from basketball. And no, Lebron couldn't have played in the NBA at 16.
You're right, I just wanted to bring up the European Academy System. Also, yes, he could have.
The benefits of the rule are pretty obvious and pretty substantial. Everybody wins except the Josh Selbys of the world. If no one questioned Rose's character or integrity for his time in college we probably aren't even having this discussion.
No they aren't. You seriously believe having a few rookies a year who couldn't contribute seriously affected the overall quality of the NBA? Barely if at all. The only difference is now there are 19 year old bums on your roster instead of 18 year old bums. So what if Josh Selby is a bum in a Bullets uniform instead of a bum in a Grizzlies uniform? Teams should scout better. If scouting is that hard, owners should bargain to reduce rookie contracts (which they've done successfully) to decrease risk and cap commitment. They should increase the use of the NBDL to develop players.
That is pretty extreme. What is the difference between "athletic scholarships" and "academic scholarships to people who want to play sports"?
The only scholarships a university could give out are academic scholarships. If you get one based on your academic performance, and you also happen to be good enough to play on their football team, then good for you.
What this argument comes down to is that some people like pseudo amateur sports and some people would rather watch professionals who get paid to perform. If you're one of the people who like something that allows people like Joe Paterno or Mike Krezweskaiesixksi to amass absurd amounts of power over their employers and communities or someone who likes a sport that can have two teams go 8 minutes without hitting a shot in it's championship game or someone who enjoys seeing slick huckster cheaters like John Calipari hang velcro banners or Nick Saban win championship after championship, then you're never going to be on my side of the argument and I understand that. I really do because despite all of the ridiculous things I just posted, there are a lot of really great things about college sports that I just don't care about but people who do have a lot of fun doing so.