HawkeyeMHA
Well-Known Member
News to me. I always thought it was a four year deal. Seems shady to give a scholly and then take back
Any mention of Kentucky signing almost every top 10 player in this years recruiting class?
That is exactly why it happens. These kids have been told their entire lives that there is no one better than they are.
News to me. I always thought it was a four year deal. Seems shady to give a scholly and then take back
If you did this you would see A TON of kids just going to play in Europe for a year and then go to the draft. This idea would do a lot more harm to the college game than good.
No they wouldn't. It would just mean that Kentucky wouldn't be able to sign 5 one and dones per year. The one and dones would still play in the NCAA, but they wouldn't all gravitate to the school with the best bag man, er um, the coach who claims he can best prepare them for the NBA.
Not if they graduated early or get a waiver. There's plenty of circumstances you can transfer under and play immediately.
Yeah, because the NCAA just hands those out like candy.
So who would be willing to sign all these one and dones if they are gonna be on the hook for a scholly for 4 years and only get 1 year of production? 12345's solution is full of holes.
Why would anyone want to sign them is the better question.
Let's say Kentucky continued to follow their existing practices of signing one and done'ers.
Assume a starting point with a current roster of 3 players in each class (3 Sr, 3 Jr, 3 So, 3 Fr and 1 RS)
Each year that school would have 3 additional scholarships to offer to new incoming players. As 3 Sr's move on, 3 new scholarships open up.
If 2 Fr declared for the draft or left school for other reasons than allowed, Kentucky would still only have 3 scholarships to offer. 2014 roster (next year) would look like this:
3 Sr
3 Jr
2 So (2 FR left but they gained the RS player back)
3 Fr
That leaves KY with 11 scholarship players
Now assume that 2 more FR from the '14 team left early. The '15 team would look like this:
3 Sr
2 JR
1 SO
3 FR
That is 9 scholarship players. The trend would be a self fulfilling prophecy of a program running itself into the ground. The ADs would step in at some point and end the one and done'ers and the coaches that are facilitating it will eventually be run out of town.
Why would anyone want to sign them is the better question.
Let's say Kentucky continued to follow their existing practices of signing one and done'ers.
Assume a starting point with a current roster of 3 players in each class (3 Sr, 3 Jr, 3 So, 3 Fr and 1 RS)
Each year that school would have 3 additional scholarships to offer to new incoming players. As 3 Sr's move on, 3 new scholarships open up.
If 2 Fr declared for the draft or left school for other reasons than allowed, Kentucky would still only have 3 scholarships to offer. 2014 roster (next year) would look like this:
3 Sr
3 Jr
2 So (2 FR left but they gained the RS player back)
3 Fr
That leaves KY with 11 scholarship players
Now assume that 2 more FR from the '14 team left early. The '15 team would look like this:
3 Sr
2 JR
1 SO
3 FR
That is 9 scholarship players. The trend would be a self fulfilling prophecy of a program running itself into the ground. The ADs would step in at some point and end the one and done'ers and the coaches that are facilitating it will eventually be run out of town.
That's not unusual with coaching changes. Why bring a player in who you don't want? Pitino Jr wasn't the guy who recruited him.
If the players don't like being used for "free labor", they can go get a real job or play overseas.
Sorry,but it is unusual for the school not to honor the signed LOI...in fact,it is not allowed,technically.
Most schools give the recruit the option to be released and check out other schools,but it is very rare for a school to say ''see ya later'' to a kid who signed an LOI in November in good faith. The LOI does not say tubbys name..it says University of Minnesota. ...and now their new representative of their bb program is saying....hit the road,we do not stand behind that U. of Minnesota LOI? I cannot remember this happening in the Big Ten...but now that Pitino and Crean are here...anything goes, I guess.
You are proving my point for me, thanks!
These top HS seniors aint going to Robert Morris or some other small school just to play 1 year in college and bolt for the NBA. They will go to Europe, get paid for a year and then go into the draft. If, as you proclaim, AD's would pretty much forbid their coaches from signing "one and done" type players, it would hurt the college game more than anything else.
You shouldnt have an issue with the college coaches that are working the system to the max, your problem should be with David Stern and the NBA. They could follow the NFL's example and require kids to be 3 years out of high school before they are even eligible to enter the draft.
Look. You are going to disagree with whatever point that I have, I get it. But to sit back and let the NBA fix the NCAA basketball dilemma is shortsighted at best. I am a firm believer that college needs to be in the business of educating those that desire an education and earn a diploma at the end of 4 (or so) years. That is the sole reason that I would want to implement these rules. It has nothing to do with improving the overall product on the court but rather reduce the number of uneducated thugs that wear school colors.
If a kid goes to college because its a stop gap to get to the NBA then the NCAA needs to step in and create barriers for this to happen. Its an overall societal situation rather than a purely athletic issue.
Every athletic program is doing what it takes to win, almost to a fault. They will not patrol themselves. The NBA won't patrol the NCAA because it sees the NCAA as their own personal D-League. Put the student back in college student-athletes.
However we get there I could care less.