NCAA Commission Findings Release
-
I don’t like the losing a scholarship for 3 years if your player goes after one season. Zaire Smith and Gilgeous-Alexander are examples of players who nobody could have guessed would be OAD players to start the season.
Not allowing Freshmen to play seems like it would hurt far too many teams. How could you even fill a roster if you had 5 seniors?
I do think the post season bans and coach penalties should all be much harsher.
I do like the undrafted players returning.
I do like certified agents being able to help the players figure out their decisions.
I do like presidents making sure the coaches are following rules.
I do agree players should not be paid a salary by the NCAA.
-
mayjay said:
Moved my post to this new thread:
@BeddieKU23 In another leap by ESPN, they say the recent indictments included allegations about assistant coaches (true) including KU (not so fast, there, Bub).
Saw that as well. Apparently the victim card isn’t working too well for us
-
@Kcmatt7 Where are you seeing that Freshman would not be allowed to play? I have not seen that anywhere…
-
“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.”
-
@Kcmatt7 Oh well that is pretty much irrelevant. There is going to be a change to the one and done. Most likely for the 2020 class.
-
@Kcmatt7 I agree with you on where if the kid leaves after his freshman season, the school could lose that schlorship for three years? I don’t agree with that at all. Why should THE SCHOOL be penalized for this kid leaving after one year. - - They aren’t the one that is telling the kid to leave- -he is making that decision - I’m sure if the schools had their way they would want the kid to stay longer - that just seems messed up to me.
The kid gets to leave after a year go to the NBA and start making money and the school gets penalized for him leaving - -what’s wrong with that picture. - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY
-
@Kcmatt7 Do you remember when Freshman weren’t eligible long ago?- - - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY
-
@jayballer73 I’m too young to remember that. BUT, I do know it existed.
I just don’t know how you could do it to just men’s basketball and not every other sport across the board.
-
@Woodrow Yea I do hope it is. Glad they are finally voicing that they would like to work with the NBA. Felt like they have been two organizations competing instead of two organizations helping each other.
-
Here is a good article from Seth Davis on today’s report.
-
The top 1% of college basketball needs all these people to solve a non problem. Typical of where our country is headed…Tyranny of the Minority.
If you have “market value” in basketball, then go pro and test your skills in that market. Otherwise take advantage of an ACADEMIC scholarship and STFU.
-
@Kcmatt7 Well if they are trying to do away with the one and done , and if they don’t comply or adapt the rule and talking about making Freshman ineligible? - Even if they do away with the one and done what if a kid that is right there on that one and done line is - -he still wants to attend school and then plays a year and then at the end of the year he still declares - -I mean in that scenario Freshman would be eligible - but kid comes to school even with the so called one and done no longer in play.
This kid comes a year for school and decides he wants to leave - and we still get screwed by losing the spot for 3 years
-
@jayballer73 Zhaire Smith and Shae Gilgious Alexander come to mind this season for sure.
I don’t think Trae Young was looked at as a OAD to start the season.
Really seems like a raw deal for the school. I don’t know that it would work.
And I don’t know that you could really sit freshmen AND have today’s transfer market both exist side by side. It may actually mean that fewer players would transfer.
I will admit, they are intriguing ideas to explore.
-
@Kcmatt7 It would be a raw deal for sure. I mean like you point out there are going to be those type of players -pretty good players - -they have a awesome Freshman year and then they decide to commit for the NBA. - Now tell me why a School should be penalized for that, as for when you recruited them the school not even thinking of them being a one and done - yet the kid goes to the NBA after one year and the school get’s penalized for THREE ? -that just doesn’t make any sense
-
I mean sure they want to do away with the one and done - - -great - - I have no problem with that. A kid wants to go straight to the NBA - - that’s fine they feel like they got what it takes - -good for them. - -Yet to penalize a school for three years if a kid comes to that school and decides to leave after one year - - - COME ON
-
Kind of pointless as it turns out. The biggest idiocy was talking about regional camps, that would be a disaster.
-
The NCAA is corrupt.
I define “corruption” probably broader than most. It’s more than just some guy taking bribe money in a dark alley.
The commission report exposed some of the obvious things to clean up college basketball. Why didn’t the NCAA do some of those things earlier? That is corruption right there (in my book). Corruption is also the failure to execute the right path correctly.
So, by my definition, without any other info it seems obvious the NCAA is corrupt. And did they really have incentive to correct college basketball with lots of changes? Or… is it possible that they have received publicly-unknown mega benefits from various sources… shoecos… sports media… universities… ?
-
The only one I like is letting undrafted kids return. The glaring omission is letting kids make money on their own.
-
@Buster-1926 they don’t get parking passes
-
The best part of the report was the one about letting College Players enter the draft and come back to school if they go undrafted, retaining eligibility. This idea needs some work behind it- like deadlines for returning but I do think this was one of the best recommendations made for the kids.
I was a fan of harsher penalties for coaches and cheaters. This seemed to be aimed at the Rick Pitino’s, Jim Boeheim’s and others of the world as well as the assistant coaches that were caught up in the FBI sweep. Nothing will hit harder to coaches and administrations if the penalties are severe enough to make them think twice. As it was, there was no fear for them to do the right thing. This entire system revolved around good faith. The doors have fallen off that train. They will be unable to hop-skip-and-jump to their next payday somewhere else and keep this corruption going. I hope this is enforced and put in.
Other things in this report were a hot pile of garbage. The OAD rule is not the issue, it seems more of a headline piece to distract from other bigger issues. Kids should absolutely have the right to go to the NBA out of HS. There seems to be movement from the NBA according to league sources. 2020 draft could be the end as is being discussed. If the OAD rule is eliminated see ya later to the Top 20 or so prospects every year in the College Game.
Where in this report was their anything about Shoe Companies. Transparency? Oh that sounds so big. Wow give me a break. This report just slid right on by that big Pandora’s Box. Of course the money tied to the NCAA with Shoe Companies and Universities is just too much to ruffle up.
At least the report called out the NCAA enforcement for being incompetent.
-
@Buster-1926 I’d be interested in that, but then what happens if a player transfers?
Or like Vick, by all appearances he was forced out by Self.
Your job doesn’t make you pay for the temp they have to hire or the overtime someone else has to work when you quit.
Doesn’t necessarily seem fair.
-
Well, since a free and open discussion is such a threat to humanity, that a thread gets locked, we better watch our step. We can’t have lively debate?Too offensive. Too threatening. I wholeheartedly disagree with a number of the comments on the other thread, but in the entire discussion I never saw a “shut up” or “your opinion is worthless” or cursing. Further, I didn’t see any name calling. Just good, hearty debate. We should not be scared or offended by that. It was directly related to CBB topic, and just because points or issues stray, I personally don’t believe a thread should get shut down. But, @Bshark says “nope” so it’s shut down. I guess those that don’t want to participate can not simply click on other threads.
-
@HighEliteMajor I always miss the good ones.
-
Keep political talk on the political board. It’s simple.
-
Or in some cases, the actual racist while dumping out old lies talk…
-
@BShark No, it’s not that simple. Sometimes sports and politics mix. Meaning, issues that relate to a topic overlap. What is so offensive? Sometimes debate and discussion is uncomfortable. This is a topic with a lot of depth and a lot of implications. We should embrace the discussion. If a topic bleeds into the political end, then folks can avoid that thread. While discussions will stray, this was related to the CBB rules and it was being discussed in a much broader context. That shouldn’t be shut down because it’s uncomfortable.
-
For full disclosure: I am white.
If you don’t think there are still general barriers in place I don’t know what to tell you. You’ll never see it otherwise. I’m not for anything like title 9 either. Everything should be based on merit but that may never happen, certainly not as long as old racists are in power. White people completely controlled America for the longest time and it still has an impact today. Only when all the old racist aholes have died off will there be more meaningful change, and we are getting there. In fact things are slowly headed in the right direction for homosexuality and transgenders, FINALLY.
@justanotherfan Brought up a great point about Lebron’s friends. They now have successful businesses on their own merit. They however likely never would have had a real shot without Lebron’s NBA/shoeco money to help get them going.
There is also so much delusion about the NCAA. People say it works, you say test the free market. The market is out there, it’s just shady and underground with the shoe companies. So it’s quite obvious kids have more value than a scholarship, regardless of what anyone thinks about it. Most kids or moreover someone related to them get paid, even though it won’t come out in the report. If you are on scholarship on the KU hoops team you aren’t hurting for money. Giving parents jobs, walk-ons with rich parents, guaranteed jobs after college… There are plenty of legal ways around not paying players directly.
-
@HighEliteMajor we should have moved it over to the political area once we got to that point. Out of respect for the board and those that come here to just talk hoops and get recruiting updates.
I didn’t want the conversation to stop either, but I also didn’t want it to continue where it was at.
Now we have tried to move it to another thread it doesn’t belong instead of just starting a new thread to continue the conversation in the correct spot.
If you want to continue the conversation, feel free to start your own thread in the politics section. But please don’t derail this thread. This one still has some talking points and others won’t want to participate if it is full of political feelings.
-
Serious question: If kids are allowed to retain eligibility should they not get drafted, how is that going to affect recruiting new kids? Coaches already over-recruit to some degree anticipating departures. Seems like allowing a kid to come back will create more “force out” decisions to make room. So, is that really a better scenario? I suppose if logical deadlines are put in place it may not affect much, but I’d hate to see guys like Mitch forced out because a potential NBA-bound player didn’t get drafted and decided to come back putting the roster over the limit.
-
@tis4tim It does seem like a tough problem. But I’m sure the coaches and players are honest with each other as the year goes on, there shouldn’t be much of an issue.
-
If you lock scholarships for players that leave, you have to make scholarships a four year contract. Coaches can’t push players out anymore. You can’t pull scholarships unless a player becomes academically ineligible, though that also introduces oversight issues.
The findings of this commission will be incredibly difficult to implement without some significant changes to the NCAA structure. If the AAU structure goes away, you will see more players flowing to Prep schools because it is incredibly difficult to evaluate players against mediocre competition (that’s why coaches go to AAU tournaments instead of lots of HS games - also easier because you can see six or seven guys in one day rather than just one).
The entire rulebook needs to be re-written to implement these recommendations. Basically this commission recommends a total re-set.
-
I am actually against letting the kids come back if they declare and do not get drafted. If they listen to the wrong people and and make a bad decision then that is on them. Guess what… That’s life. This is just going to cause a cluster F when it comes to orchestrating rosters.
If you declare for the draft and do not get invited to the combine but still stay in then you are making a dumb decision. Not sure why they should be able to come back.
-
@Woodrow I really don’t see how it is a cluster in that case. If the player is 99% to not get drafted and knows it but just leaves their name in because they can, I don’t see the negative.
Especially if their camp and the coach are communicating throughout the process.
People in the “real world” don’t have to quit their job everytime they take an interview. This is essentially the same thing. The applied and interviewed, just didn’t get the job. Doesn’t mean they should be forced to quit their current one.
-
@Kcmatt7 except they are getting information that is telling them if it is a good or bad decision to stay in the draft. Some guys don’t listen or listen to the wrong people and that is on them.
I guarantee you there will be numerous players that are not invited to the combine and have no business staying in the draft, but will keep there name in it.
-
@justanotherfan I would be interested to hear how they think the logistics will work behind hosting their own tournaments.
Basically, they think if they don’t let the coaches go to the AAU tournaments, that will end them.
I just think that is an oversimplification of it. They can just put in a little bit of extra money and broadcast these games to the coaches instead.
The Shoe Companies won’t be fast to give up control of players they have invested money in already.
-
@Woodrow So what?
Again, if all the signs point to them not getting drafted, and the player and coach talked about how if he doesn’t get drafted he will return, what is the issue?
-
Along tangential lines, here is a fairly simple proposal from the fairly simple mind of an avid fan. If a scholarship player transfers or departs for professional play prior to competing two years at a collegiate institution, he is legally bound to reimburse that institution the cost of his tuition, room, board and monthly personal stipends. That said, my dukes are down; lace em up and have at me.
-
@Woodrow How on earth is a 17 or 18 year old kid supposed to know who the right person to listen to is? Alleged “experts” miss on draft picks all the time. Why make a player’s decision to trust someone who “misses” in a prediction so absolutely determinative of a kid’s prospects? It is as if people deserve to be punished for not controlling what people around them are advising them. And obviously punishes the wrong people.
A better idea, in my view: If you declare but return because you are undrafted, you lose eligibilty for that calendar year and have to sit out until January. Coaches would have an incentive to keep a kid who could contribute, or get a potentially draftable recruit, and kids could still be a part of and benefit from their college experience. But while there would still be a consequence from declaring unwisely, enough to cause second thoughts by the player and any school considering him, it eliminates the stark harshness of losing all eligibility.
-
The declaring and returning with eligibility needs some work.
It could be as simple as a deadline that is implemented after the combine ends. Say kids have a 1-2 week interval to decide on staying in the draft or going back to College. Not all kids get accepted to the combine but you see others getting NBA workouts on the side. They could also put a hard date in around the time summer school starts as well to coincide with schools off-season priorities.
That way your not leaving coaches completely out to dry. We are seeing record transfers, HS kids reclassifying late into the summer etc that recruiting and adding players seems like a never ending cycle. Didn’t Whitman come to KU on a Tuesday and leave by a Friday? Kidding of course but we see programs adding players at what used to be dead periods.
Things have changed, I don’t think this particular change would be that difficult.
-
@REHawk The only problem I see is a player leaving for not one of the reasons you mentioned. Academics. Legal issues. Just quits and decides he doesn’t want to play basketball. All kinds of things.
-
justanotherfan said:
If you lock scholarships for players that leave, you have to make scholarships a four year contract. Coaches can’t push players out anymore. You can’t pull scholarships unless a player becomes academically ineligible, though that also introduces oversight issues.
The findings of this commission will be incredibly difficult to implement without some significant changes to the NCAA structure. If the AAU structure goes away, you will see more players flowing to Prep schools because it is incredibly difficult to evaluate players against mediocre competition (that’s why coaches go to AAU tournaments instead of lots of HS games - also easier because you can see six or seven guys in one day rather than just one).
The entire rulebook needs to be re-written to implement these recommendations. Basically this commission recommends a total re-set.
Locking scholarships seems like a bad idea for everyone involved.
I think many of the suggestions from the committee are basically impossible.
-
What if we converted scholarships to loans that get written off if a kid stays, say, 3 years? Kids going pro early get to pay them back through earnings.
And then athletes could have the extra special modern college normal experience of leaving school with crushing debt.
Ok, this needs refinement…
-
@BShark Well coming up with ideas that could actually be implemented would make it look like they were actually trying to change something.
They aren’t going to risk driving money out of CBB. The NCAA makes 81% of their revenue from the March Carney. Ratings have only gone up since the OAD rule was put in place. I just don’t believe that they ACTUALLY want to get rid of players who give them tons of hype year after year.
-
Kcmatt7 said:
@BShark Well coming up with ideas that could actually be implemented would make it look like they were actually trying to change something.
They aren’t going to risk driving money out of CBB. The NCAA makes 81% of their revenue from the March Carney. Ratings have only gone up since the OAD rule was put in place. I just don’t believe that they ACTUALLY want to get rid of players who give them tons of hype year after year.
Agree.
The most absurd idea to me was trying to do regional camps over the summer instead of AAU ball. It’s already hard enough for coaches to see and evaluate everyone they want to. Something like that would lead to MORE transfers imo.
-
@BShark And I honestly wonder where they think they will get the money to do it.
-
@mayjay Kids should only listen to people with the NBAPA, their college coach, and NBA personnel. It is not anyone else’s fault or problem if kids listen to people in their “circle” who tell them they are this and that and make a poor decision.
-
@Woodrow And if the coach is wrong?
-
@mayjay Who do you think coaches talk too? Do you not think coaches want what is best for the player? Self isn’t out here giving players poor information. If coaches do that then they get burned in recruiting. This is not that difficult.
-
@Kcmatt7 After some deliberation on how these issues got so heated here, something I read in recently came to mind that makes our discussion kind of ironic:
One thing about the Commission that was criticized from its inception is that it was not charged with figuring out anything regarding the amateurism rules, or compensation to players. The image/likeness litigation is still being considered by courts, so the NCAA tied the Commission’s hands on these issues.
So, we probably should not get too excited about the potential changes regarding $ we have been discussing because the NCAA won’t be doing anything for years if ever.
-
@Woodrow But if the coach talks to the right people and a team which wants to hedge its bets says the guy is draft-worthy, certain in the 2nd round, and the kid declares, he should pay a penalty of forfeiting his college prospects because he listened to the right people and still got screwed? That makes no sense.
