This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

We could debate the U Mass and Mem. situations for hours. The bottom line is that the system requires 1 year of college before turning pro. These kids have to play somewhere. Isn't the goal of a coach to get the best possible players so his team has the best chance of winning?

no, the goal of a coach is to have student-athletes who succeed in both the classroom and the basketball court

'Mike and Mike' on ESPN.radio had an interesting perspective this morning.

They said it's more difficult in college basketball for the best coaches to win the NT. The regular season is irrelevant. Michigan St. looked pretty bad at the end of the regular season but still made the NT. Once in the NT, just one bad day, or a bad matchup, in the NT and you're out. Izzo has won two NT...one had a final four of #1 Michigan St; a #5 and two #8's. His other title was essentially a home game in Detroit.

In college football, however, every week is a playoff game. One loss and you're likely eliminated from the BCS title game.

Quote: Originally Posted By vandydave on 4/02/2010no, the goal of a coach is to have student-athletes who succeed in both the classroom and the basketball court

Then that is another flaw in the system by the NCAA. If they allow an athlete to stay only 1 year he has no incentive to succeed in the classroom. At least with a 2 year minimum he can actively be working toward an associates degree.

Plus I would take your interpretation a step further. The coach's goal should be the university's goal - to prepare people to be successful in life.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By alblack56 on 4/02/2010
In college football, however, every week is a playoff game. One loss and you're likely eliminated from the BCS title game.

You're correct with the "likely" part. You also could win every one of those weekly "playoff" games and still be out on the chance to win a championship game.

Or you could lose a conference game (as Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech did in 2008) and lose a tie-breaker which allowed one team the right to advance to the title game and the other two were sent home with the consolation prizes.

The rest of the world does it right-- their universities are not minor leagues for pro basketball and football like they are in the U.S. You go to school if you want to, not because you have to in order to try out for the NBA.

In Europe, you can turn professional as a teenager and go to an academy and be groomed up the ranks (like minor league baseball here, being drafted out of HS). There's no farce about being a university student like there is in the U.S. and no farce about coaches pretending about academics.

Even making the "students" go 2 years is farcical. Graduation rates are abysmally low at ALL levels of NCAA. I know plenty of D2 players with no professional hopes whose coaches keep them eligible for 4 years but don't care if they graduate. They shuffle them between majors for a few years and they don't earn any degree.

The coach and university care about winning because it promotes the university and brings in donations and students. That's why the universities would never let the system go, and want to expand cash cows like the NCAA tournament. Almost nobody cares who graduates and who doesn't. The players and their parents certainly don't care-- the longer John Wall is in school the higher the opportunity cost of foregone millions.

Calipari is just doing what the system is designed to do-- groom players for the NBA.

Quote: Originally Posted By johnfoppe on 4/02/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By vandydave on 4/02/2010
no, the goal of a coach is to have student-athletes who succeed in both the classroom and the basketball court

Then that is another flaw in the system by the NCAA. If they allow an athlete to stay only 1 year he has no incentive to succeed in the classroom. At least with a 2 year minimum he can actively be working toward an associates degree.

Plus I would take your interpretation a step further. The coach's goal should be the university's goal - to prepare people to be successful in life.

you just described coach K

My HD Division 2 team players all average above a 3.0 for their careers in school. They are true student-athletes

Quote: Originally posted by cthomas22255 on 4/02/2010
Even making the "students" go 2 years is farcical. Graduation rates are abysmally low at ALL levels of NCAA. I know plenty of D2 players with no professional hopes whose coaches keep them eligible for 4 years but don't care if they graduate. They shuffle them between majors for a few years and they don't earn any degree.

The Division II mens basketballl graduation rate is 58%. If you want to consider that abysmal, that's fine, but just realize that the general student population graduation rate at Division II is even more abysmal at 55%.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2009/division+ii/dii+graduation+rates+continue+impressive+pace_11_18_09_ncaa_news

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

I didn't think there was a 1 year rule, I thought the rule was the player just has to be at least 19 years old. John Wall was eligible for the draft last year b/c he was 19. He opted to come to Kentucky anyway.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

And I didn't even mention the quality of degrees earned. I'd like to know what degrees the 58% of D2 basketball players are graduating with in 4 years. My guess from my own observations at D2 schools is that a lot of them are Sports Management and similar degrees set up solely for student athletes walk out with a piece of paper.