Where does College BB go from here

[YlJacket]

The outside enforcement group is an interesting idea along with the harsher penalties but the rest is about what I expected. The core is get the NBA to do away with one and done players and the issues associated with them - get them out of college sports - and force transparancy on the AAU circuit. Makes sense but will not be a short implementation process.

 

[kg01]

Not trying to argue, I just want to understand. How would freshmen not being eligible not hold up to scrutiny? How would locking a scholarship to a player for three or four years not hold up to scrutiny? The first would make the NCAA very unattractive to potential first round picks who are in high school.(Why go to college if you won't be able to play for the only year you are there?) The second would make Coach K's or Coach Cal's teams of 3-5 one-and-dones impractical. If you lost five scholarships for three years would you chance taking five super players for one shot at a title?

First, yes ou are trying to argue. Just own it.

There's no way they're going to bring back freshmen ineligibility. The whole, 'We can die for our country but not play basketball?' movement would incinerate college campuses.

Tying scholarships to guys, in that manner, makes no sense. @burlgt mentioned the return of the 5/8 rule which is a dumb rule but would be a more practical method for limiting rosters full o' 1-and-dones.

 

[orientalnc]

I don't agree with that. They only items that require others to make changes are: NBA end one-and-done, Apparel companies be more transparent, NBA work the NCAA to develop a youth league. They can't force the apparel companies to do anything, so what do you suggest the NCAA do to prevent them from providing money to AAU or to players? If the NCAA started a youth league without the NBA I'm not sure that it would be able to compete with AAU at all, so they would need the NBA for clout.

The other things are major changes that the NCAA does have control over: Not allowing NCAA coaches to attend AAU events or interact with AAU coaches. Developing separate and independent investigative authorities that don't have ties to any particular school or conference or even the NCAA. Giving NCAA coaches more access to high school players(to reduce dependence on AAU coaches). Strengthening penalties for violations. Allowing high school and college players to get advice from agents without losing eligibility.

Even with the one-and-done rule, they have NCAA alternatives if the NBA does not change such as locking up scholarships when players leave, or making freshmen ineligible. The NCAA cannot legally stop one-and-done players period. They can however prevent a one-and-done from playing the one year. Or they could make the college team suffer greatly if someone does leave after one year.

The NCAA does have potential clout over the AAU circuit. They could make any contact between coaches and players at non-certified events a recruiting violation. They could also declare that participation in non-certified events would make players ineligible for NCAA play.

 

[orientalnc]

First, yes ou are trying to argue. Just own it.

There's no way they're going to bring back freshmen ineligibility. The whole, 'We can die for our country but not play basketball?' movement would incinerate college campuses.

Tying scholarships to guys, in that manner, makes no sense. @burlgt mentioned the return of the 5/8 rule which is a dumb rule but would be a more practical method for limiting rosters full o' 1-and-dones.

I was very skeptical that anything meaningful would be suggested. I was wrong. These are all good changes and are things the NCAA can do by themselves.

 

[RonJohn]

First, yes ou are trying to argue. Just own it.

There's no way they're going to bring back freshmen ineligibility. The whole, 'We can die for our country but not play basketball?' movement would incinerate college campuses.

Tying scholarships to guys, in that manner, makes no sense. @burlgt mentioned the return of the 5/8 rule which is a dumb rule but would be a more practical method for limiting rosters full o' 1-and-dones.

Really, I was only asking because I didn't(and still don't) understand why you think those ideas would not hold up to scrutiny. The document also doesn't say they would implement any of those ideas, they just list them as some possibly actions that the NCAA might take if the NBA does not eliminate the one-and-done rule. It says:

In that circumstance, the Commission will reconvene and consider the other tools at its disposal.

They then list a small number of options that "could" be considered. I don't think it is an exhaustive list of all of the possibilities.

 

[kg01]

I was very skeptical that anything meaningful would be suggested. I was wrong. These are all good changes and are things the NCAA can do by themselves.

Really, I was only asking because I didn't(and still don't) understand why you think those ideas would not hold up to scrutiny. The document also doesn't say they would implement any of those ideas, they just list them as some possibly actions that the NCAA might take if the NBA does not eliminate the one-and-done rule. It says:

They then list a small number of options that "could" be considered. I don't think it is an exhaustive list of all of the possibilities.

Guys, I hope y'all are right. I just don't think you are.

ETA: I think this is a back-slapping session. In a few months, ... crickets.

 

[RonJohn]

Guys, I hope y'all are right. I just don't think you are.

ETA: I think this is a back-slapping session. In a few months, ... crickets.

You are correct about that concern. These are general recommendations and not rules changes. We will have to see if the NCAA actually implements actual rules and whether those rules actually accomplish what the committee has laid out as the objectives.

 

[orientalnc]

You are correct about that concern. These are general recommendations and not rules changes. We will have to see if the NCAA actually implements actual rules and whether those rules actually accomplish what the committee has laid out as the objectives.

I agree. I like the recommendations. But, we'll see what happens going forward.

 

[Peacone36]

Here is my quick pessimistic take.

College Basketball recruiting is La Cosa Nostra.

You might knock the crap out of it from time to time but like we say in construction, there are no problems, only opportunities to shine.

Cheaters will adapt to new rules.

Coaches can’t interact with AAU people? Ok. You’re just going to start seeing a bunch of coaches brother in laws or school alumni at AAU events.

Allow compensation but with a cap? Ok.....that’s why duffel bags and hotels exist.

It’s a charade that is being played out because of media attention. When the next shiny object goes rolling down the road this will fade away and become business as usual again.

 

[RonJohn]

Allow compensation but with a cap? Ok.....that’s why duffel bags and hotels exist.

Where did you see that? I saw a lot of discussion in the document about pros and cons of paying athletes, but no recommendations related to it.

 

[kg01]

You are correct about that concern. These are general recommendations and not rules changes. We will have to see if the NCAA actually implements actual rules and whether those rules actually accomplish what the committee has laid out as the objectives.

You had me here.

That's the thing for me though. Why even go through all this if none of it is binding? I know why. To make it look like they're doing something in response to the FBI stuff when, in actuality, they aren't.

Sorry to be so cynical.

 

[kg01]

Here is my quick pessimistic take.

It’s a charade that is being played out because of media attention. When the next shiny object goes rolling down the road this will fade away and become business as usual again.

.... this is beautiful ... and terrifyingly likely.

 

[orientalnc]

I believe the NCAA sees the problems are real and wants to do something that allows them to retain control over the sport. It's their primary source of revenue. This FBI mess is all over the NCAA more than the programs directly implicated.

 

[Peacone36]

Where did you see that? I saw a lot of discussion in the document about pros and cons of paying athletes, but no recommendations related to it.

Nothing from the document. Just commentary on the massive amount of opinions being tossed around the twitter-verse.

Here’s the thing, just my opinion. The NCAA is set up to fail. Member organizations policing themselves to discourage behavior that could ultimately make those same institutions obscene amounts of money. In that sense it’s similar to the “war on drugs”. We might get caught and catch some probation and vacate a banner, but we can also possibly make $20MM

 

[RonJohn]

You had me here.

That's the thing for me though. Why even go through all this if none of it is binding? I know why. To make it look like they're doing something in response to the FBI stuff when, in actuality, they aren't.

Sorry to be so cynical.

Well I think that this is how things usually happen, at least in effective organizations.(Not saying that the NCAA is an effective organization) First you develop a charter for what you want to do. Then you develop a plan to accomplish the goal of the charter. Then you conduct the work to implement the plan. Project management 101. I look at this document as the charter even though it wouldn't meet the definition of the PMI.

Now they need someone to push the execution and oversight. I do see it getting messy at this point. When they start trying to make rules or modify rules, there will be contingencies of people who have vested interests in pushing in a direction or stonewalling ideas. The NCAA president has said he wants rules implemented by August. We will just have to see how they move forward with it.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

All you early risers beat me to the punch. I thought I was going to be able to post something new, but noooo. You guys are way ahead of me. LOL

 

[RonJohn]

Why should they get that when regular students don't? If they exhaust their eligibility they are no longer a student athlete. Just a student.

I depends on what the goals of the NCAA are. If their goals are as they state (to support and regulate athletic competition among college students, and more recently stated goals of increasing graduation rates) then it makes perfect sense. If the goal of the NCAA is to provide athletic entertainment to fans, then it doesn't make sense. However, if the goal is providing entertainment then none of the arguments against paying players and players going to the highest bidder make sense either.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[orientalnc]

This is 14 years old, but still timely:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=567745

 

[RonJohn]

Nothing from the document. Just commentary on the massive amount of opinions being tossed around the twitter-verse.

Here’s the thing, just my opinion. The NCAA is set up to fail. Member organizations policing themselves to discourage behavior that could ultimately make those same institutions obscene amounts of money. In that sense it’s similar to the “war on drugs”. We might get caught and catch some probation and vacate a banner, but we can also possibly make $20MM

That is one reason that the idea of the independent investigative authority makes a lot of sense to me. I don't know if they would actually take it this far, but set up a system where the NCAA makes the rules and penalties, but the independent authority conducts investigations and makes determinations of violations and penalties. It it were that way, the NCAA would be like the legislative branch and the other authority or authorities would be like the executive(at least for investigations) and judicial. If the NCAA doesn't like the way the rules are being enforced, then they would have to change the rules instead of the current system of fuzzy interpretation and enforcement.

 

[kg01]

That is one reason that the idea of the independent investigative authority makes a lot of sense to me. I don't know if they would actually take it this far, but set up a system where the NCAA makes the rules and penalties, but the independent authority conducts investigations and makes determinations of violations and penalties. It it were that way, the NCAA would be like the legislative branch and the other authority or authorities would be like the executive(at least for investigations) and judicial. If the NCAA doesn't like the way the rules are being enforced, then they would have to change the rules instead of the current system of fuzzy interpretation and enforcement.

It sounds great, in theory. In reality, the NCAA controls everything. That includes 'the money'. There's no way they'll allow any other body to come in and control 'the money'. Even if they create that 'independent' body, it'll be run by someone beholden to the NCAA to the extent that will render it as useless as the NCAA is/has been.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Emmert at the podium naming the "independent body" president. Then turn around with a fake, Snidely Whiplash mustache on.