- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NCAA basketball minimum 2 year rule
Posted on 3/3/15 at 11:29 am to rumproast
Posted on 3/3/15 at 11:29 am to rumproast
quote:
Actually...from a recruiting standpoint...it isn't. If this year's 5* blue chippers are forced to stay for a sophomore season, then next year's 5* blue chippers would recognize that they wouldn't get immediate starting time.
Guys, yall really need to look into what is being discussed and why. They wouldn't get immediate playing time regardless. They would be ineligible as freshmen.
1
Posted on 3/3/15 at 11:35 am to Fratigerguy
quote:That is completely untrue. The age requirement is 19.
That person, one year removed, could be 18 to 21. Again, there is NO AGE REQUIREMENT.
You really need to learn more then post. You cherry picked 7 words in a half sentence to respond to - out of 100+ words presented - and you were still 100% wrong.
Posted on 3/3/15 at 12:29 pm to Fratigerguy
quote:
Again, there is NO AGE REQUIREMENT
Yes there is
quote:
The rules now state that high school players will gain eligibility for draft selection one year after their high school graduation and they must also be at least 19 years old as of the end of the calendar year of the draft
Posted on 3/3/15 at 1:37 pm to Fratigerguy
quote:
Guys, yall really need to look into what is being discussed and why. They wouldn't get immediate playing time regardless. They would be ineligible as freshmen.
And you need to read what I wrote. I'm not talking about immediate starting time in the NBA, I'm talking about starting time in college.
Posted on 3/3/15 at 4:51 pm to ballscaster
quote:
Dumbest shite I've ever heard of. Rather than have super talented players for just one year, this would turn so many good players into Brandon Jennings (overseas route)
quote:
Or Patrick Ewing. Or Alonzo Mourning. Or Grant Hill. Or Christian Laettner. Or Larry Johnson.
Time for your evening meds grandpa. Kids wanna get paid, this isn't 1990.
Posted on 3/3/15 at 5:01 pm to Big Moe
You're right. The NBA can't survive without the Brandon Jenningses of the world.
Posted on 3/3/15 at 5:08 pm to drizztiger
quote:
drizztiger
I don't see how a minimum age requirement would be unconstitutional when holding office has age requirements:
quote:
The Constitution imposes three eligibility requirements on the Presidency—based on the officeholder's age, residency, and citizenship—that must be satisfied at the time of taking office. By virtue of the Twelfth Amendment, the qualifications for Vice President are the same. The Framers established these qualifications in order to increase the chances of electing a person of patriotism, judgment, and civic virtue.
This post was edited on 3/3/15 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 3/3/15 at 5:11 pm to Big Moe
quote:
Time for your evening meds grandpa. Kids wanna get paid, this isn't 1990.
people said the same thing when the 1 year rule was established.
You might have a few players go overseas, but the majority would go to college.
This post was edited on 3/3/15 at 5:12 pm
Posted on 3/3/15 at 5:17 pm to drizztiger
quote:
I think the 1-year rule along with 3 years for NFL (or 2+ age) are unconstitutional.
I know, right? When I graduated high school I wanted to be an astronaut, but those constitution hating MFers at NASA were all like "go to college".
Posted on 3/3/15 at 5:37 pm to evangelfan
Wat
Posted on 3/3/15 at 5:53 pm to drizztiger
quote:
drizztiger
I actually agree with you. All these people that are saying that a private company can choose who or who not to hire are not entirely correct. A company cannot say they will only hire white people. A company cannot say they will only hire christians. Why? Because they are considered a protected class. The issue here is that age does not become a protected class until one reaches age 40.
Technically as it stands now the NBA can have an age requirement and it be legal because it's age requirement is a minimum age requirement, not an age at which a person is to be fired. At the same time, the very same rationale that made it illegal to fire someone for getting to old applied to this case would say that it should be illegal to not hire someone because they are ONLY to young.
Requirements for college or other experience arguments are simply dumb arse arguments in this because they are experience based criteria. This basically sets a standard that person must meat to be hired because it directly correlates to the ability to perform the job. This is distinguished from any arbitrary trait (such as age) that has no impact on the performance of the job.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 8:51 am to ballscaster
quote:
You're right. The NBA can't survive without the Brandon Jenningses of the world.
I thought we were talking NCAA
I would have no problem without Brandon Jennings in the NBA
, just saying the mentality is different. As someone who grew up on the AAU circuit, these kids play for Nike/ Adidas sponsored teams since they are 12. They see the money involved. If I had a dollar for every time I heard a college athlete bitch about not getting paid while I was at LSU, I'd be on a cruise to the Bahamas right now
This post was edited on 3/4/15 at 8:57 am
Posted on 3/4/15 at 9:02 am to Tiger1242
quote:
Yes but they can go overseas for 2 years and get paid us play better competition
It comes with tremendous risk. An injury puts them on the street with NO education, job, etc
Weighing that against play ball, free education, security isn't even close.
Overseas doesn't pay crap for a high school kid.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 10:08 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
So Kentucky having all that talent for more than 1 year is not good for them?
You think UK gets the talent they do without regard to playing time? Their system is dependent on early departures.
Use your brain dude.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 10:19 am to drizztiger
quote:
think the 1-year rule along with 3 years for NFL (or 2+ age) are unconstitutional. But when you have billions dollar revenue entities (NBA, NFL) hand shaking with other billion dollar revenue entities (NCAA), they get to make up the rules for themselves.
You are completely ignoring the fact that the employees of the professional associations you refer to are unionized. The actual players bargain for their best interest, which would include limiting the amount of cheap, inexperienced labor entering the workforce.
Your argument may simply be that unions are unconstitutional, or at the very least less necessary than they were 100 years ago, which is hard ti argue, but nevertheless, these rules are put into place by professional associations for job security of the employees.
It is also pretty evident that a good deal of these early departees are not ready to contribute when they are hired. Maximizing on court professional product therefore includes imeprovimg the amateur product.
Further, what organization in the US doesnt employ baseline hiring practices? Im sure there are tons of students "ready" to join the workforce before they complete college, however that doesn't stop organizations from only hiring those with minimum qualifications (a degree)
Posted on 3/4/15 at 10:40 am to drizztiger
quote:
quote:
That person, one year removed, could be 18 to 21. Again, there is NO AGE REQUIREMENT.
That is completely untrue. The age requirement is 19.
You really need to learn more then post. You cherry picked 7 words in a half sentence to respond to - out of 100+ words presented - and you were still 100% wrong.
So, because I didn't proofread, and typed an 18 instead of 19, that makes what I typed wrong? Sure. Tell me about that 19 year old high school graduate that is eligible for the draft this year. You wonder why I didn't type 22? I'm well aware of the minimum age. But your premise is that it is age discrimination due to the 1 year removed rule. That's been your argument.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 10:47 am to drizztiger
quote:
I'm not ignorning that. It's completely irrelevant. No one said the NBA or any other entity should hire unqualified applicants. What I'm saying is that age (for an adult) isn't a qualification. Just like being male, white, protestant, heterosexual aren't qualifications on a resume.
So how else can they document and enforce minimum "qualifications"? Require them to have a degree in an irrelevant field? You are oversimplifying the intent of the rule. The NBA would prefer kids coming into the league with at least one year of coaching by a professional (not some nobody AAU coach) . It would dilute the product if such individuals were allowed in the league, so they came up with a rule to mitigate that from happening. It has less to do with ignoring rights, handshake agreements so the NCAA gets a piece of the pie,etc than it does protecting the integrity of their game. The NBA is not a developmental organization, it is reserved for the best of the best in the world. This rule helps to maintain that position, and not be a league filled with potentially the best of the best.
And I am only responding because you stated your opinion, was correct. How on earth can you make a claim like that? You made your own assumptions as to the spirit of the rule, therefore ignoring other possible stances, which is not how you win an argument. You didnt school anyone.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 11:03 am to drizztiger
quote:
That is completely untrue. The age requirement is 19.
Time to ruin my argument:
Does the rule of being 19 at the end of the calender year of the draft simply not just ensure that the draftee is at least 18 at the time of the draft? Since the date of the draft is not static, if the rule were 18, it would have to be as of a certain date each year to not discriminate year over year. In other words, the 19 rule ensures that the player is 18 at the time of the draft, when they are able to sign a non-voidable (due to age) contract. If the rule were 18 at the time of the draft, kids could miss the deadline by a day one year, but would have made it the year before and after, which would be inconsistent and unfair. Therefore, being 19 at the end of the draft year ensures the individual is at the age of majority at the time a contract is signed.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 1:08 pm to jrodLSUke
quote:What's that have to do with anything? Age and qualifications are mutually exclusive. A child prodigy could have a masters in engineering at age 16.
I know, right? When I graduated high school I wanted to be an astronaut, but those constitution hating MFers at NASA were all like "go to college".
Also, NASA doesn't have an age requirement. So that was a well thought out post, lmao.
The NBA has an arbitrary age requirement of 19.
How do I know it's arbitrary? For a few reasons:
1. It didn't exist 10 years ago.
2. The NBA wanted it set at 20.
3. The NBA PA didn't want a minimum age requirement at all.
4. the two sides compromised on the arbitrary age of 19.
Posted on 3/4/15 at 1:14 pm to Fratigerguy
quote:You're the worst type of poster and a reflection of the incresingly dumbing down of America. Instead of owning up and admitting you were wrong, you double down with a complete mess of an argument.
Fratigerguy
quote:
So, because I didn't proofread, and typed an 18 instead of 19, that makes what I typed wrong?
quote:Is the double down to your:
I'm well aware of the minimum age.
quote:You, sir, are a fool.
Again, there is NO AGE REQUIREMENT.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News