Soxbadger

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 02:18 PM) Eh, any star athlete can sign with a big-name agent before they get their first contract. The agent understands when that payday is coming. Can they afford another attorney to review the agents work, to make sure the agent isnt ripping them off. There is a price to be paid when you hire someone on a contingent fee. You are stuck in their boat, regardless of how good they are. (edit) The whole agent/attorney thing is actually a completely different issue problem. A lot of these guys dont realize that there is a difference.

Steve, I dont think you understand how bargaining power works. If I am a rich person, I can hire any agent, lawyer I want, I have the money. If I am a poor person, I may be able to hire any agent, lawyer I want, it depends on if I have the right case/talent etc. People with money are almost always likely to be better represented than people without money. Just because they have an "agent" doesnt mean they have a good one. Ricky Williams hired Masta P. Im pretty sure if Ricky had some money already and could hire outside counsel, they would have told him that was a very very stupid idea. And I have explained why the NBA doesnt want to deal with people coming in who are already rich and entitled. Its always easier to control someone who has very little. If they dont have the money to lord over their heads, theyd have even more trouble keeping these guys in line.

Even worse its for a game against PSU hahaha

That is a good step. The problem is obviously the guy who gets injured, but can still play badly. So its possible that a guy who gets signed as a UDFA and then cut on week 1 cant claim under the policy. But if they start doing things like that, then there are less concerns for the players. Thats really the goal here (at least for me) to give these guys a better chance at life.

An interesting idea for NBA could be to have it be merit based. Some sort of if you graduated HS, got X on the ACT or passed some test, you could opt out of the 1 year requirement. That would actually create an incentive to do good in HS and take it seriously

And the other part that is being lost, is that its more about having a legitimate justification. At least in the NFL they are saying its for the safety of the players, most of those guys are staying in college 3+ years. That is a legitimate time commitment. That being said, I do think there should be at minimum some sort of insurance for college athletes in case of injury. That isnt just exclusive basketball or football.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:58 PM) Considering the law is almost 50 years old, and no one has been able to take down the NBA or NFL with it, they have a reason to be able to set an age limit that stands up in a court of law. Things change. At one point in the history of the US many of the players in the NBA would not have even had the right to vote. Just because something is old, just because its been around, does not mean its right. Until Curt Flood baseball didnt have free agents. Its tough, because no one wants to be the guy who fights their employer, there are a lot of consequences.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:36 PM) I really don't think they care because a college is not going to be able to sustain a $70 million roster like the NBA can. No but people with money generally are able to get better counsel who can negotiate better for them. I dont think its a big concern, I just think all things being considered the NBA would prefer that they are being sent poor kids who have very little ability to negotiate on their own.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:34 PM) No I know, just throwing out the law. So when I slap my hot secretary's ass in my 5 attorney (10 person) firm I can't get in trouble Dude you should really consult an attorney about that because Im pretty sure sexual harassment is different than discrimination.

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:30 PM) "Fantasy world" is the right term to use. The payout for making the Final Four is like 250k. Obviously there's TV money, gate receipts and merchandise sales, but I seriously doubt it's enough to sustain that kind of model, especially if you also have to continuously spend on upgrading your facilities and fill out the rest of the roster. The boosters are probably your best bet, but how many schools have enough people to willingly flush north of $10 million per season down the toilet? I also picked the low end of your number, $50 million is just absurd. There's far more money in football based on bowl payouts and much bigger stadiums, but there are also far more roster spots and it's less obvious who the studs are when they're still in high school (for just two examples, Andrew Luck and Johnny Manziel were both 3-star recruits). Zoom, I was using hyperbole. I dont know how much money these teams have access to. But the NBA doesnt want players being paid in NCAA, for a variety of reasons.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:29 PM) While true that I adore the NBA and want the product to be "good", I really respect the right of the NBA to do what it wants with its private league. As do I, until what they want to do starts to become aged based discrimination which I do not believe should be allowed in the US. Not in the NBA, not in your job, not anywhere.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:28 PM) IIRC if you're an employer with less than 15 employees you can. You are correct, but that would not apply to any NBA or NFL team, which is why I didnt mention the exemption as it was irrelevant for this discussion.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:28 PM) So that law is basically saying that a woman can play in the NBA, and a man can play in the WNBA? I believe the NBA would have to hire a woman if she was good enough, but she would have to prove that their not hiring her was gender motivated. I am not 100% sure about the WNBA hiring men. The law is way more flexible about men being screwed over.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:25 PM) Potential issues there e.g. boosters signing kids to "endorsement deals" for way more than reasonable amounts, but why shouldn't D-Rose have been able to sign with Adidas in college? Because then we have the direct link of X school is Adidas school, D Rose went to Adidas school. Now we have the behind the scenes "X is going to be a Nike client, X went to Oregon a Nike school."

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:23 PM) You are the king of unrealistic examples. You can disagree with my argument, but as I said, its merely because you selfishly want the NBA product to be good. And quite frankly dont care about discrimination or any other laws that the US has created to protect individuals from this type of treatment. That is fine, but like I said, under your theory it would be okay to ban white people as long as the NBA was better off. I disagree.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:21 PM) But that's just it and that's how the NBA thinks. It's their private league and they can do with it what they want. You made a point about age discrimination - they are private. There are clubs out there that still don't allow African Americans. The US government age discriminates for the presidency. You can do what you want. The NBA, of course, does not discriminate against black people anymore because they do care about marketing reasons. Sex discrimination is illegal, but the NBA doesn't allow women to play. They have their own set of rules and don't answer to you, to the NCAA, or to Nerlens Noel. Steve, Even private employers cant discriminate based on race/religion/sex. http://www.eeoc.gov/employers/coverage_private.cfm http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:21 PM) How the hell are schools going to be able to pay guys $10 million a year? A lot of them run in the red as it is... In this fantasy world where NCAA is allowing payment, I presume you can find that type of money. How much is a player like Rose worth to a school for 1 year? It would be interesting if its open season.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:16 PM) The NBA wouldn't care one bit if the NCAA decided to pay players - they just want to ensure their best possible on-court product for marketing, ratings, and attendance. No the NBA would care. Because they would then have to play NBA players more. If a college kid is making $10mil a season, then a NBA player has to make $10mil +. If LSU is going to pay Shaq $50mil to stay 1 more year, how much does the Magic have to offer to get him to leave? So it could very well impact the NBA salary ranges, which the NBA is trying to deflate.

Yes your very clever "I want the NBA to be good so I dont care what happens to people as long as I get a good NBA product" is such a mighty argument that I am not sure how I can respond. Come on now, you just are taking the most selfish perspective possible, even though we both know that if you were 18 and projected to be the #1 pick, youd be furious that you couldnt get drafted and would have to wait a year.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:12 PM) yeah I guess I don't really have an issue with the NBA's rule to protect themselves for their own dumb GM's, I have a problem with the NCAA. The problem is both of them working in concert. Both the NCAA and NBA want the best players in the NCAA getting as little money as possible.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:09 PM) Oh I agree, that's why college football is awful. Basketball is still an outlier though. Every decade you have a handful of mid-level teams that come out of no where and despite the money/facility difference, can still recruit well and be succesful and build up the program. Butler and VCU are recent examples, Gonzaga going back ten years or so. But I think it'd get even worse, and again, we're forgetting that college sports would basically become football and basketball and perhaps a fringe sport like baseball IF the program is good enough for it. Otherwise the school wouldn't have any money to fund those sports. Oh, and then schools get sued for violating Title IX when they get rid of all of their womens programs. So yeah, giant snowball. Jenks, Its already this way. Wisconsin has no baseball program because it has a Hockey program. I think the best way to prevent this is to allow kids to go to the NBA at 18. Then you can have really strict NCAA rules about payments etc, because you can argue that the kid chose to. The problem is the NCAA doesnt even really want to enforce their rules. They just want to have some semblance of control.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:08 PM) It makes it completely pointless to post what you did when making your argument. On the contrary, it shows (just like with Noel who will easily still go top 5 next year), that if a player who has tremendous upside gets hurt in college, a team will still draft him based on that upside even if he gets injured. No it makes absolute sense if you actually understand the argument. You are looking at things from "prepare for the best, dont worry about the worst." I am looking at things from "prepare for the worst, hope for the best." Just because Lee Evans worked out, doesnt mean that another player will. That is the point. The point is that even when a player voluntarily makes the decision to stay, it could still be a dumb decision. But at least in Lee Evans scenario, he had the option to make his dumb decision. That is the point, that these kids/players deserve the option to make mistakes. That they shouldnt be forced into a position.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:04 PM) So your example that you decided to post when we are discussing kids being screwed or not by the system and losing potential millions because he was forced to stay in school was a player who chose to stay in school, got drafted 12th overall, and banked $12 million. Did I say he was being screwed? Did I say it was an example of being screwed? No. I was using him as an example of an injury working out, to show that even in that situation I dont think he made the right decision. It was very specific and I had to use an example of a player who chose to stay and got injured.

Jenks, (Edit) This was in response to the money statement. The NCAA is already that way. Different schools have different facilities for athletes to live in, study in, etc. So if a school takes its endowment and builds single family homes for athletes to stay in, that is okay. So its already money based. (second response) Im not saying that supply restraints are a big reason. I am just saying that in general, I hate them, so this is just another example of where I do not like them. I more was saying that if people are fine with it in the NBA, they should be fine with supply restrictions everywhere.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 14, 2013 -> 12:01 PM) Was that his choice? Or was this because he didnt have 3 years under his belt? It was his choice. He wanted to stay. I just was saying that (imo) that was a really unnecessary risk. And while as a Wisconsin fan, I loved him playing, as a human I was considerably worried that he may be risking millions of dollars over college athletics.