Cuban and Stern on One & Done

#2
#2
KY favors one-and-done over letting guys turn pro right out of high school. Making players stay three years like in football would benefit KY even more. They'd have a second string that could win the SEC. Seriously, if they make everyone stay for three years, our chances of competing for an SEC title drop to zero until Calipari leaves.
 
#3
#3
ukvols said:
KY favors one-and-done over letting guys turn pro right out of high school. Making players stay three years like in football would benefit KY even more. They'd have a second string that could win the SEC. Seriously, if they tmake everyone stay for three years, our chances of competing for an SEC title drop to zero until Calipari leaves.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Due to scholarship limits thier would be more top shelf guys to go around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4
#4
Yup. Extending the one and done will certainly make it more even. I would guess there would be a TON of transfers. Would be pretty awesome to see a HS Sr go to KY and win a championship....Decide, "Well....let's go to Kansas or Duke now" sit out and then win another one your JR year before you declare.
 
#7
#7
I think if the nba started enforcing a three year separation from high school, we would see a lot more players go play in Europe and get paid.
 
#8
#8
Aavoxx said:
I disagree. Due to scholarship limits thier would be more top shelf guys to go around.
Click to expand...

They have 13 scholarships. That's enough for more than two strings. Top-shelf football players don't seem to mind waiting their turn at Alabama right now. I'd expect the same for KY basketball. UT would be better off, whether it's one year or three years, if the best players also had the option of leaving right out of high school.

Since UT is usually not "in" on nearly as many of the top basketball recruits as KY, UT would benefit greatly if, instead of recruits having to declare for the draft, they were able to wait and see where they were drafted and then decide, like with baseball. If it worked that way, Calipari would annually lose some incoming players in the middle of the summer and would have to adjust.
 
#9
#9
ukvols said:
They have 13 scholarships. That's enough for more than two strings. Top-shelf football players don't seem to mind waiting their turn at Alabama right now. I'd expect the same for KY basketball. UT would be better off, whether it's one year or three years, if the best players also had the option of leaving right out of high school.

Since UT is usually not "in" on nearly as many of the top basketball recruits as KY, UT would benefit greatly if, instead of recruits having to declare for the draft, they were able to wait and see where they were drafted and then decide, like with baseball. If it worked that way, Calipari would annually lose some incoming players in the middle of the summer and would have to actually coach kids up instead of depending on raw talent straight out of highschool and would probably never sniff another 30 win season again
Click to expand...

FYP :hi:
 
#10
#10
NBA has a functional D-League, there's no reason they can't adopt the MLB rule.

Either turn pro out of HS, but if you opt for college, it's a three year commitment.
 
#11
#11
Aavoxx said:
I disagree. Due to scholarship limits thier would be more top shelf guys to go around.
Click to expand...

Not to join the chorus too much, but if that doesn't happen in football, it wouldn't happen in basketball. At USC in the Pete Carroll era, they had HBs and QBs buried three and four spots deep that would have started at literally every other school in the country. With Cal's "recruiting advantages" and a mandatory three year period in college, they and a few other schools would be the only programs with a realistic shot of winning the title any given year.

Right now, the only advantage that small schools have over the UNC's, KU's and UK's of the world is that they make up for talent with unit cohesion and an abundance of senior leadership.

Take that one advantage away, and I'd put down money that men's basketball starts to resemble women's basketball in that we'd wind up with the same handful of schools that are the only truly competitive ones.
 
#12
#12
I tend to agree with most of yall. A 2 or 3 year limit would mean more parity, as less scholarships would be open for schools who typically sign one-and-dones.
 
#13
#13
ukvols said:
They have 13 scholarships. That's enough for more than two strings. Top-shelf football players don't seem to mind waiting their turn at Alabama right now. I'd expect the same for KY basketball. UT would be better off, whether it's one year or three years, if the best players also had the option of leaving right out of high school.

Since UT is usually not "in" on nearly as many of the top basketball recruits as KY, UT would benefit greatly if, instead of recruits having to declare for the draft, they were able to wait and see where they were drafted and then decide, like with baseball. If it worked that way, Calipari would annually lose some incoming players in the middle of the summer and would have to adjust.
Click to expand...

milohimself said:
Not to join the chorus too much, but if that doesn't happen in football, it wouldn't happen in basketball. At USC in the Pete Carroll era, they had HBs and QBs buried three and four spots deep that would have started at literally every other school in the country. With Cal's "recruiting advantages" and a mandatory three year period in college, they and a few other schools would be the only programs with a realistic shot of winning the title any given year.

Right now, the only advantage that small schools have over the UNC's, KU's and UK's of the world is that they make up for talent with unit cohesion and an abundance of senior leadership.

Take that one advantage away, and I'd put down money that men's basketball starts to resemble women's basketball in that we'd wind up with the same handful of schools that are the only truly competitive ones.
Click to expand...

13 is far different than 85 when you're signing six or more guys a year.
 
#14
#14
Don't see how you are going to be able to restrict an adult from pursuing whatever career or work he wants to. and if there is someone with enough potential( Dwight Howard, Kobe Bryant) there will be some owner who will go along with it.
 
#15
#15
Ashevillevol said:
Don't see how you are going to be able to restrict an adult from pursuing whatever career or work he wants to. and if there is someone with enough potential( Dwight Howard, Kobe Bryant) there will be some owner who will go along with it.
Click to expand...

The deal with it is this: David Stern ultimately works for the owners, and requiring players stay in college for one, two or three years significantly reduces risk in signing rookies for the team owners. Potential players get to hone their skills at a higher level, and teams get essentially extra free scouting.
 
#16
#16
I say just let these kids take the Kobe Bryant route. The only sad part about that is not everyone is as good as Kobe, McGrady, or Lebron James and a lot of these highly ranked highschool kids would get the Sebastian Tellfair or Kwami Brown treatment against these Pros and they've compltely wasted their talent after that.
 
#17
#17
For every Kobe Bryant or Kevin Garnett, there are ten Sebastian Telfairs or Kwame Browns. That very reason is why this rule is never going away. The inner city kids might get shafted for a year or two, starting a degree they're realistically never going to finish, have to wait on a multi-million dollar payday, and most significantly of all risk injury, but a huge amount of risk is eliminated for the owners and they get name recognition driven up because of the exposure potential draftees get in college.
 
#20
#20
Aavoxx said:
13 is far different than 85 when you're signing six or more guys a year.
Click to expand...

KY doesn't have 13 Top 25 signees on their roster right now, and they never will, as long as guys can turn pro after their freshman year. But, if it's changed to three years, I think a lot of the guys will choose to sit the bench and wait their turn at today's KY before they'll choose to start as a freshman at most other schools. They'll end up loaded from 1-13 on their team instead of 1-6.

Like Milo said, it would be like Women's Basketball. All four 1s and all four 2s would reach the Elite Eight, and then all of the 1s would totally smash all of the 2s.
 
Last edited:
#22
#22
ukvols said:
KY doesn't have 13 Top 25 signees on their roster right now, and they never will, as long as guys can turn pro after their freshman year. But, if it's changed to three years, I think a lot of the guys will choose to sit the bench and wait their turn at today's KY before they'll choose to start as a freshman at most other schools. They'll end up loaded from 1-13 on their team instead of 1-6.

Like Milo said, it would be like Women's Basketball. All four 1s and all four 2s would reach the Elite Eight, and then all of the 1s would totally smash all of the 2s.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. They won't be able to sign as many guys per year because those freshman are going to be back if they have to wait three years. They won't have as many schollys to hand out.
 
#23
#23
Aavoxx said:
You're missing the point. They won't be able to sign as many guys per year because those freshman are going to be back if they have to wait three years. They won't have as many schollys to hand out.
Click to expand...
Saban gets it done. So would basketball coaches.
 
#24
#24
Aavoxx said:
You're missing the point. They won't be able to sign as many guys per year because those freshman are going to be back if they have to wait three years. They won't have as many schollys to hand out.
Click to expand...

There are only around a dozen and a half next level guys any given year coming out of hs. Most of them already sign with the same handful of schools. Kentucky and the like still use scholarships on some average players; if the rule gets changed, those spots would just get taken by up and coming blue chip guys instead.
 
#25
#25
milohimself said:
There are only around a dozen and a half next level guys any given year coming out of hs. Most of them already sign with the same handful of schools. Kentucky and the like still use scholarships on some average players; if the rule gets changed, those spots would just get taken by up and coming blue chip guys instead.
Click to expand...

Exactly, so maybe CCM knocks it out of the park, and we get 1-2 blue chippers. The competition will have a dozen of them.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top