Changes to the College/NBA Rules Are Coming: The Death of the OAD
-
HighEliteMajor said:
@BeddieKU23 Being selfish, yes, I’d like 3 years or 2. But I think it’s unreasonable for the NBA to put in a restriction like that unless someone was actually drafted and didn’t come – meaning that a team has the player’s rights for a specific period of time.
More in line with the Baseball or Hockey model?
The recent comments from Adam Silver pointed to the fact they would rather see players develop in College or the G-League then being the OAD or oversea’s model or in the case of Mitchell Robinson sitting out the year and training.
It seems they might remove the restriction of College for those that wish to jump immediately but it does seem they would like for kids that do end up going to College to stay at least a few years
-
@BeddieKU23 One might hope that something like this might get the anti-NCAAA, anti-CBB folks to tone it down, but they won’t. Folks like the hypocritical, illogical and conveniently shifty Bilas won’t stop until they destroy CBB. And that is where many want this to go, to destroy CBB.
-
-
The tough thing about athletic careers is that they are fairly short, and that your best earning years are before you reach the age of 30. Every year you spend playing for free before 30 is a year you are missing out on earnings. I have posted this before, but wanted to post again just for fun.
In 1995 Kevin Garnett and Rasheed Wallace were selected with back to back picks (Wallace #4, Garnett #5). Wallace was coming off an All American season at UNC. Garnett was straight from HS.
During their first three years, Wallace made a little bit more (about half a million) by virtue of being the higher pick. Both ended up signing big deals at the end of their third season, and by virtue of being the better player, Garnett made more money.
But a funny thing happened towards the end of their careers.
In 2008-09, Rasheed Wallace finished his age 34 season (and the end of his contract). He made less than $14M the rest of his career, and never signed another multi year deal.
Garnett, being two years younger, signed a multi-year deal that paid him over $50M, then in 2012 signed another multi-year deal that paid him another $30M plus before winding down his career with a couple of years on smaller contracts (another $16M).
Kevin Garnett made over $185M more in his career than Rasheed Wallace, and while a lot of that was because Garnett was the better player, about $80M of that is because Garnett was just younger and able to sign a couple more contracts than Wallace was, and was able to play longer.
That’s the top side of things.
The other side of things is a situation like Jonathan Bender. Most people remember him only as a bust, but he actually washed out of the league due to a degenerative medical condition in his knee. Had he gone to college, he likely doesn’t make a single dime in the NBA. Instead, he made about $30M, fell out of the league, and then invented a medical device to help with physical therapy.
If Jonathan Bender goes to college, he likely never plays in the NBA, and, without that money, maybe he never even has the opportunity to invest in his own business.
That’s why I don’t mind the OAD rule, but would prefer no requirement for college. The physical nature of the game means that the body may give out fairly quickly. I bet Brandon Roy wishes he hadn’t spent four years at Washington (all star in three of his first four seasons before injuries basically wiped out his career).
-
I also remember one of Roy’s commits deciding the sat was too hard and just going pro. A top 10 HS player; he was drafted, but washed out of the league quickly.
It’ll make recruiting more tricky. You e got to id the top college guys, not just the top talent. So Ayton to AZ at the last minute is likely Ayton goes straight pro and the second coming commits to the Jayhawks then goes into the draft (instead of Bosnia) anyway.
-
HighEliteMajor said:
It is ridiculous that an adult is limited from making a living in any profession solely because of collective bargaining, where the participants conspire selfishly to exclude that individual.
An 18 year old can vote and fight for our country, but can’t decide on going straight into his chosen profession. Not only requiring any time attending college is wrong, it is done not with the athlete in mind.
Eliminate the required college time and save the NCAA a lot of work.
-
I don’t see where a degree helps an NBA player succeed in the league, but post HS educational requirements are not all that uncommon in many/most professions. Hopefully something can be worked out that doesn’t screw over the NCAA as I couldn’t possibly care less about the NBA other than it’s affect upon the NCAA.
-
As the rule exists attending college for one year does not do much for the student athlete, only the NBA benefits by having a high end farm system that costs nothing.
Colleges don’t really benefit that much since there are only a handful of OADs and they spend huge sums of money recruiting, keeping them in luxurious accommodations, providing the best trainers, tutors, facilities and exposure and some don’t even play a game and after one year they are gone. Any athlete that leaves school before 3 years should be required to reimburse the school.
Student athletes either become millionaires at the age of 19 and retire by the time they are 30 and don’t expect to work again, unlike the rest of the people that work until their 60s and some never can really afford to retire and work until they die…for very little money.
The ones that get screwed are the student athletes that are led all along to believe they are good enough to make it in professional sports but they really are not. They don’t make it to the pros and have no degree to fall back.
I personally favor the baseball rule where talented players can go straight to the NBA but if they start college, they have to wait 3 year which is enough time to get them most of the way towards a degree that they can finish if sports don’t work.
-
If you read that whole long article, it sounds like the NBA will set up an alternative to college- not just the top few players. It sounds like they’re going to try to kill off the college game.
-
KUSTEVE said:
If you read that whole long article, it sounds like the NBA will set up an alternative to college- not just the top few players. It sounds like they’re going to try to kill off the college game.
That is their goal.
-
I mentioned a few months ago that this was the direction things were headed. Some said that the NBA would have no interest in it. I told people it was coming (I heard from some pretty well connected people in pro basketball, as well as from news reports trickling out).
This is coming, and its not just going to be for OADs. This is a change to the system as a whole. AAU. NCAA. Even the prep school landscape that is in HS right now. The NBA is talking about changing all of it.
While people have been focused in on other things, the NBA has become one of the most stable and most profitable leagues in the world. The NFL has issues with head trauma and a huge drop in youth participation. The MLB is still struggling with pace of play and how to market its game. The NBA adapted. The NBA has a better online presence than any other sport. You can queue up highlights from an NBA game on Youtube the same night of the game. The NBA was on top of that before other leagues. As a result, most younger kids are familiar with NBA stars in a way the NFL, MLB, NHL, and NCAA just can’t match.
The other thing people haven’t noticed is how much money the NBA is rolling in. The NFL is popular here in the US, and to some degree in Europe, but has very little presence in China or South America. Baseball is popular in the US, Latin America and specific parts of Asia (Japan, South Korea), but very little elsewhere. Basketball is popular everywhere. It’s just behind soccer in terms of world popularity, and has the advantage of being popular in the U.S., Latin America, Europe, Asia (NBA is HUGE in China), and Africa.
The NBA is global, and that means more money for teams. Because of that, the NBA has the money to spend on player salaries and change the development structure, and they are going to do it. What that means for D1 basketball is still up in the air, but the NCAA is in a race where their opponent is already sprinting, and they just realized they were supposed to run.
-
I am obviously a huge CBB fan. I can’t stand the NBA. But I am a free market guy.
If the NBA presents an alternative, then good for them. If kids can come out of high school and make a living, great. And if they bypass college, fine with me.
What I don’t like are folks trying to change the college game because they want players paid a part of the profits. That’s not the college game.
That of course could evolve with competition. But I would view that as a more natural, free market change. The NCAA reacting to the market vs. reacting to whiners.
And it all comes back to this – the players have choice. Play under the NCAA rules, or do something else. That is what I want preserved. It’s pure, it’s based on the market, and it highlights the many positives that CBB presents. The narrative that kids are “forced” into the CBB is laughable and dishonest.
-
What about the NCAA doing away with amateurism rules. Allow the schools to pay whichever athletes they want “fair market value.” How is that figured? That’s up to the university. These kids are risking their physical health both short and long term to earn billions of dollars for people who wear suits. As a profitable basketball program, KU could likely offer top recruits more money than say Iowa State, or they could use some of that money to go after a quarterback or a rower or a tennis player. Scholarships would be part of the offers. For some kids like Mitch, that might be enough. For others, some additional compensation might make the difference between their hometown school and a blue blood. In reality that is still the case, so why not make it legal as to get the shady people out!
Will problems arise? Yes. Fix them then. Will some schools game the system and cheat? Yes. Punish the school not the kid. Is it fair? No. Nothing really is.
-
There will always be KU basketball to watch. Even if it ends up being 5 white guys running around playing 5 other white guys, we will still hear the Rock Chalk Chant damn near every Saturday from November through April.
The real question is how does the NBA think that they can afford this? And, if they can, what would they gain by doing so? I think they should let guys go right out of HS. Absolutely. But other than that, why shell out a crap ton of money just to train players slightly differently than they are getting trained now? Just makes no sense to me.
First, Colleges already have infrastructure all over the country. World-Class infrastructure. They have a fan-base that puts players on national stages and attracts more casual fans to the NBA than a developmental league would. How is the NBA going to get players that are literally located in every state in the country into some sort of developmental process? It just seems so messy to me.
I understand that baseball does it. But it works for baseball because nobody watches College Baseball. I couldn’t name a single College Baseball player right now. So, the MLB gains nothing from the College Game. They also get to pay the majority of their players in their developmental system next to no money. Making it much more affordable. Especially because the MLB has almost no competition internationally for players. Salary-wise, it isn’t even close.
I am also concerned with what the rules would be. Do players sign with teams in HS? Is there a draft? How would all of this work, for a pre-18 year old? There would just be far, far too much to do that I can’t see how this makes sense.
As long as the best players in the World continue to play in the U.S. I see no reason the NBA would want to embark on an endeavor that seems to me, quite fruitless.
-
Silver does say the NBA has no plans for an academy in the US. Mexico City will be the closest one.
-
@benshawks08 You do realize that they are paying them fair market value right now, right?
Unfortunately your suggestion would destroy CBB. You’re suggesting changing NCAA rules to makes CBB professionals.
-
Cant wait for the sob stories in 20 years. People think an NBA minor league will mean big money for “these poor kids being treated like slaves”. It wont and more guys will make bad decisions and make 20k a year for 3 years and have nothing and no skills after that. You will hear about a ton of guys who were “cant miss” taking student loans in their 30s. Go look at the stories of how little the minor league baseball guys are paid.
-
The simplest solution is to let kids enter the draft or be drafted and come back to school if they don’t sign.
-
@mayjay doesn’t necessarily solve the paying recruits problem though. I like NCAA’s solution to let players fetch endorsements.
-
@Kcmatt7 Sure. They can do other things to solve a variety of problems, too.
My suggestion was just for how the NCAA can stave off some of the developmental talent raiding: make college basketball inclusive of kids who want to explore professional options rather than kicking them out for taking a chance on the draft.
-
HighEliteMajor said:
It is ridiculous that an adult is limited from making a living in any profession solely because of collective bargaining, where the participants conspire selfishly to exclude that individual.
You realize when the “sign with an agent”, the agent generally puts out a line of credit for travel, training, etc. Who pays this bill when the kid goes back to school? Also if they take credit(money) what happens to their amateur status?
-
benshawks08 said:
What about the NCAA doing away with amateurism rules. Allow the schools to pay whichever athletes they want “fair market value.” How is that figured? That’s up to the university. These kids are risking their physical health both short and long term to earn billions of dollars for people who wear suits. As a profitable basketball program, KU could likely offer top recruits more money than say Iowa State, or they could use some of that money to go after a quarterback or a rower or a tennis player. Scholarships would be part of the offers. For some kids like Mitch, that might be enough. For others, some additional compensation might make the difference between their hometown school and a blue blood. In reality that is still the case, so why not make it legal as to get the shady people out!
Will problems arise? Yes. Fix them then. Will some schools game the system and cheat? Yes. Punish the school not the kid. Is it fair? No. Nothing really is.
Schools with more money, wealthier alums have an edge?
-
The whole concept of having academies is silly.
Let’s see, the NBA ha 30 teams and each carries app. 15 players which makes it 450 active players in the League. Now let’s assume an average career of 10 years which means about 45 players or so are replaced every year. The draft selects 60 players of which 10-15 are foreigners with some experience and out of the 60 maybe 40-50 stick and the rest don’t make it and matches the number of players that retire or are phased out. This means that the NBA would be creating a system of Academies to produce app. 30 players per year?
It makes no sense financially when the G League already exists and what it pays is very low. There is no way these academies would generate any income and could not compete with the excitement of college basketball and its huge fan base.
A much better approach is to allow players to go directly to the League front m HS and the ones that don’t need to wait 3 years improving their game enough to have a chance to either make it in the League or have a career not in sports.
-
@HighEliteMajor True they are getting paid fair market value now but it’s mostly under the table through occasional illegal wire transfers to the kids mom or uncle or whatever. Why does that destroy college basketball anymore than what’s happening now? If the university pays the coach that gets kids better, players will still want to go play for that coach. Maybe even more so if that coach can offer more than a fake year or two of “education” that is mostly classes picked because they are easiest to pass. What if colleges created programs specifically designed to further an athlete’s career in sports either through playing, coaching or any other related job? What if the focus was on providing value for the athlete instead of pretending they are just like any other student but being expected to follow rules no other student has to?
-
@Gunman That isn’t true now?
-
@JayHawkFanToo Average career in the NBA will surprise you: only half of what you are assuming!
The goal of acdemies would be solely to undermine lengthy careers (and thus reduce the most expensive salaries) by developing players early enough to start contributing when they actually go into the “majors.” I.e., change the ratio to more 1st, 2nd, and 3rd year players, who will be much cheaper coming out of an academy system than the current draft with guaranteed 1st round contracts. Kids going in really early will lose major leverage.
This can only hurt the established players. The union will not likely agree unless the system allows for free movement out of those academies.
-
I know what you are saying about career length but numbers can tell many different stories.
There are many players that join the League sign one contract for 2 over 3 years and after that they are gone, Other like Jabbar and Nowitzki can have careers that span 20+ years. Fringe players don stay very long and skew the number down quite a bit; starer quality players stay a lot longer.
Minimum of 41 games played in a career = 6.18 seasons.
- Less than 12 minutes per game for a career = 2.01 seasons.
- More than 12 minutes per game for a career but less than 20 = 5.01 seasons.
- More than 20 minutes per game for a career but less than 25 = 7.59 seasons.
- More than 25 minutes per game for a career but less than 30 = 9.21 seasons.
- More than 30 minutes per game for a career = 10.88 seasons. NBA All-Star at least once = 11.36 seasons.
Obviously the objective of these academies would be to develop quality players, or so a reasonable person would think. Why would the academies bother developing players that will stay in the League 1-3 years when you can pick those anywhere with zero investment? If you take the numbers above for starter quality players needing comparable replacement, then a ten year career is not that unrealistic.
Now, if all they want to do is produce tons of players to replace entire rosters ever 3 years then the academies would make sense…but who would want to see a teams with lots of players with under 3 years experience? Isn’t this what college basketball currently is?
-
@JayHawkFanToo If they have been “developing” them for 1 to 3 years at low salaries, and simply cut the ones without potential, they don’t waste the rookie-3 year salaries on guys who aren’t going to make it. Almost like starting everyone as a second or third year player but on reduced first year salaries because they are already essentially “captives” of a lower salary rate system.
And good players who might otherwise go to college and enter the big-buck oppty of the draft might feel they have to go the “alphabet minor league” route rather than losing their chance to get pro training or risk injury.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Cole surely is screwing up that <12 minute avg:
10.5 mins, 9th season! Nice stats you found, btw.
-
Simplest solution is for the NCAA to adopt NBA playing rules, give coaches more practice time, and let schools count participating in a sport as a 3 or 6 hour credit class. That way it doesn’t mess with student loans or insurance. Students who are actually playing a sport as a way to pay for school can still do that. Players who are just making a pit stop don’t even need to really go to class and can focus more on basketball. I mean the whole point of college is to prep you for your career. No reason that people who will be future professional basketball players shouldn’t be getting the best possible preparation they can for that career path.
-
Arthur can probably top that.
-
KU has had some quality young NBA guys that have come back and finished their degrees.
-
I thought trade school was to prepare you for work; College is supposed to create well rounded individuals who are work ready. Thus the English class requirements for Engineers.
Unfortunatly many major student athletes are allowed to skimp on the academics; something that they can use beyond age 30.
I agree with @kcmatt7 there needs to be a UNC like courses for athletes that don’t care about their future outside of sports. Freshman level only. Maybe a class in money management (and how to pick your friends) so society isn’t paying for these guys later.
-
The biggest problem with the academies (other than it messes with MY college basketball!!!) is the kids that washout have nowhere to go. No degree. No work contacts. Just basketball.
-
Every athlete can use an education! Part of it is just being disciplined, it’s free, you have the best tutors. It’s a free handout to better yourself.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 And they can use it to enrich the rest of their entire life.
-
dylans said:
The biggest problem with the academies (other than it messes with MY college basketball!!!) is the kids that washout have nowhere to go. No degree. No work contacts. Just basketball.
Maybe they should add college funding (to a public in-state school or something) when the career is over to make it a good alternative. Add more for each year in the academy, with prep classes for them, too. The union could even fund part of it.
-
The European model of development is what the NBA is looking at. In European soccer academies, the players do their academics during the day, but then train with the same staff and in the same system as the professional team. The players literally go to school (something like a prep school) during the day, then train at night.
Real Madrid and Bayern Munich have two of the oldest and most well established soccer youth academies in the world. They use the same strategies, tactics and facilities as the pro teams they are associated with. That is the idea that the NBA is considering.
The NBA has started this development with the G-League. Currently, the G League has 26 teams, with the 4 teams without a G League affiliate planning to start one in the next few years. That’s the first step. Once they have that established, the next step will be to build a development center around that. Houston used their G League affiliate to test out their aggressive three point shooting strategy. Other teams are using the G League to develop front office and coaching talent.
That’s only going to expand. The Euro model already shows how to do it, with a facility dedicated to education, and a separate facility for sports. The Euro model also adds an element to the education side of things. In the US right now, athletes are discouraged from challenging academics because HS and college coaches don’t want guys struggling in classes. At academies, that’s not an issue because they have all of the facilities right there for the kid. If a kid is struggling academically, maybe they take a few weeks off from games (no HS coach worried about what that will do to his playoff chances because the focus is on development) while they work on their studies. You don’t have to build your class schedule around athletics because that’s already done for you. That means if you have an interest in science and want to also play at the academy, you can do both.
The Euro model already lays out the architecture. Its just a question of when it goes into place.
-
@dylans MLB solves that problem by putting a stipulation in the contracts of most players that they will pay for college if they don’t make it to the pros.
-
Good thing there are child labor laws in the US. Otherwise it sounds like we will have to pay to watch our kids play biddy ball soon. Nba prep league and all…
