posted
I'm suprised I haven't seen a thread on this yet.
What do you think of his situation?
Do you think the NFL will be able to defend its unwritten draft guidelines in court?
Do you think they should succeed?
A conservative part of me wants to prevent scores of teenagers from entering the NFL right after high school.
But I'm having a hard time constructing a logical argument for that position. Why should the NFL be able to use the NCAA as a free farm system? Just because I like the Hurricanes?
posted
These guys aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, and they have a limited number of years that their bodies will last. I don't see why the NCAA should profit from them.
Of course, I imagine it will be much like the NBA with the majority of the kids opting to go to college before entering the draft. But for those who wouldn't make in college, I think they should be able to go.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah. I think that if this kid wins his suit and the NFL is allowed to sign kids out of highschool, it will end up being like the NBA and the majority of the kids will still go to college anyway.
I could have sworn that was what I said.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, yes it is. But it's not what I said. I was under the impression that the majority of kids drafted into the NBA do not go to college first. (Though I could be wrong about that.)
And incidentally, the issue is not whether or not to allow the NFL (as a whole) to sign these kids. The NFL doesn't want him to be eligible, because they don't want the can of worms that opens--such as the possible eventual disintegration of their free farm system. The NFL rules currently state that people have to be at least three years removed from high school to be eligible. Clarett is suing the NFL to be allowed to to enter the draft next year.
EDIT to add:
quote:Yeah, I think that's wrong. I look up the stats.
posted
I don't really have a problem with the NCAA rule in regards to football. In most cases, I think football players coming out of highschool are not physically or mentally ready for the NFL and they probably won't be for a couple years. And even after four or five years of college, they may not be quite ready despite their talent. How many draft picks, even first rounders, actually make an immediate impact?
But I think there could be some exceptions. Is Clarett one? I don't know (and I don't really care, I'll be happy when he stops making news).
Posts: 959 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
29 high school players and college underclassmen were eligible for the NBA draft last year. Of course, there were what, over 200 Division I teams alone, with 11 players per team. Thats, what, 2,200 players? 1.3% And that includes the kids who did two or three years of college, too.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, you're not saying what percent was actually drafted, but I'll concede the point. If only 29 were eligible, that would seem to indicate that most do get at least 2 or 3 years of college first.
I wonder why the college product is so markedly inferior then, when compared to college football?
posted
I wasn't aware of this case. I agree that most of these kids are not either physically nor in any other way mature enough to play professional football. However, once they reach legal age, if they want to try I think they should be able to.
Second - No, I don't think the NFL nor the NBA should have the free farm system they do now (aka the two and four-year colleges). It is absurd the way these kids get taken advantage of. There is this big deal made about how a lot of them get their education free of charge through sports scholarships. But what kind of an education do they really get? Not much of one, from what I've seen. What they get is their coaches going around and coercing or begging professors to give them passing grades so that they'll remain eligible academically. I've seen this happen with my own eyes on the community college level. They get systems that look the other way when they get their work done for them. The latest scandal at Fresno State had to do with some basketball players a couple of years ago getting someone to write their papers for them.
What actually happens, in other words, is that in a lot of cases (not all, I concede, but a lot) kids who are very good at throwing a football or dribbling a basketball (these seem to be the sports where the most abuses occur for some reason) recruited to colleges for which they are in some cases not academically prepared. I knew one basketball player at a local community college who was having to be tutored in reading on the "See Dick, See Jane, See Spot Run" level. Nice guy, but he was not ready for college, academically speaking.
And then you get coaches who recruit athletes who are talented but not real clear on what constitutes criminal behavior. The coaches cite "giving the kids a second chance" as the reason they do this. (Our own prime Fresno example of this was Jerry Tarkanian, the coach who has brought down NCAA investigations on every athletic department he's ever worked for. The paper-writing scandal was on his watch.) Then they don't bother to give the kids any supervision or guidance and they go out and do real stupid stuff and get in trouble again and again. Or maybe that's only Fresno State athletes - goodness knows enough of them have gone this route.
The colleges makes a lot of money off these kids from ticket sales(a couple of weeks ago when Oregon State came into Fresno to play the Bulldogs, tickets were $45 dollars each in a stadium that seats 41,031), television rights to big games (that particular game was on ESPN), and who knows what else. But the kids are so bound up by NCAA rules that they can't even take a free meal, much less talk to a sports agent. And then only a small percentage of these kids are good enough to make it in the pros, they haven't gotten a top education because they really aren't encouraged to study - despite what the official line of the athletic department might be - and they end up out of school, out of sports, and out of luck.
Sure, there are athletes who are good students as well. But my experience in being a tutor and tutoring my share of athletes, as well as being in classes with athletes, is that the good student/athlete is the exception and not the rule. So, in the end, a good proportion of college athletes in marquee sports get sucked in, chewed up, and spit out by the system.
Sorry to be so cynical about it, but it's hard not to be cynical about college sports and live anywhere near Fresno.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Only a handful of college football teams make money -- and most of those don't make the Bowl Games -- while the rest soak up money from the educational funding
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
aspectre, do you have a link for that funding claim? I'm not denying it but I want more info. What I have heard is that the athletic "super schools" my own alma mater (University of Oklahoma) being one, make huge amounts of profit. This is why inferior non-conference teams are willing to come in to get beaten by a home team that needs a warm up, because the opposing team still gets a percentage of the gate receipts and TV revenue. The amount of money the smaller school gets from one or two of those games can fund a less glamorous program for an entire year.
With my own team I find it vastly amusing that a known team like UCLA (even if in a rebuliding year) is willing to be a "beater" team for us. This however shows how much UCLA is making by playing us.
Also unfortunately a lot of times alum are more willing to give donations to the athletic teams than they are to academic causes. But if they weren't donating to athletics, they probably wouldn't be donating at all.
I believe that the majority of kids who jump into professional sports straight from High School will be left unemployable when they no longer can play. The fame to gutter scenario has been played out in the past way to often.
On the other hand, the college degree that these players recieve now, while looking good on a resume, does not mean they are getting the education they need to survive outside sports. Besides, there are some who argue that over emphasis on sports in a college deteriorates the education level a school can offer the rest of the students. If we remove the Colligiant farm system, will we be helping or hurting the rest of the students?
My answer--I'll just step out of this debate.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
