College isn't for everyone. New option for 1 & dones.

[kybassfan]

The impact isn't really small if you only recruit outliers who are on the far end of the bell curve. If all those players 3-4 SDs away from the mean are gone, then UK, Duke, Kansas, Arizona are suddenly set back much more than the other guys. They go from 99.9th percentile kids to 95th percentile kids, which is a much bigger fall than the next four schools who will then be scooted back from 95th to 92nd or whatever.

Yes. Exactly. Very good! Hence my comment about parity.

It is reasonable to think that the top schools would feel this while the whole of college basketball remains essentially unaffected. I tend to believe that the top draw programs would still tend to draw the top players in the new population so the effect would be greatly muted. I think your percentiles are somewhat overstated as the sample size is so small. Now had we clipped off a slightly bigger percentage, you might be right on the money. That is a very well considered response.

I thought the kid that was so invested in the discussion would pick up on this and run with it. It would have made the banter a lot more fun. Alas, didn't happen.

 

[Jkwo]

Yes. Exactly. Very good! Hence my comment about parity.

It is reasonable to think that the top schools would feel this while the whole of college basketball remains essentially unaffected. I tend to believe that the top draw programs would still tend to draw the top players in the new population so the effect would be greatly muted. I think your percentiles are somewhat overstated as the sample size is so small. Now had we clipped off a slightly bigger percentage, you might be right on the money. That is a very well considered response.

I thought the kid that was so invested in the discussion would pick up on this and run with it. It would have made the banter a lot more fun. Alas, didn't happen.

Well, I'm talking about the percentile for the high school graduating class. I believe I read somewhere there are a bit fewer than 4 million kids per graduating high school class in the country. So take from that whatever chunk you think probably played varsity basketball, and you have your population in question. Taking those numbers into account, I think I was almost certainly understating things.

 

[kybassfan]

Oh, your population is much to big. Let's run a couple of numbers more in your favor. To make simple, let's figure 1200 players enter college basketball each year. 25 is roughly 2.1% of that number which about everything 2 sigs and above. Thing is that area under the curve gets larger rapidly as you know to the right and you are feed 25 less talented kids in on the far right, so the less attractive teams are taking places in that 96 - 97 percentile range.

Actually closer to the numbers you mentioned than I was expecting but I still think your percentages were a bit large. This is due to the fact that compared to a real population, we've grabbed the left most group of the normally distributed population. I think it's likely a more linear distribution than normal or at least very highly skewed to the left.

All this said, as I mentioned in the prior post, I concur that the impact on the recruiting class of the very top teams, 1 - 1.5% of the total teams is more significant than for college basketball as a whole. I also think the actual impact is somewhat blunted by intangibles such as fan loyalty, team success being somewhat more than the sum of its individual players and that second 25 being more likely to be multi year players.

I still think the business model for this proposal is smoke and likely a hoax. I also think that college basketball will eventually face this scenario but in a more chaotic fashion than what we have discussed. The driver for this will be the NBA policy for rooks and how it might change. Ironically it is the nba that sets the policy for the NCAA.

 

[Jkwo]

Oh, your population is much to big. Let's run a couple of numbers more in your favor. To make simple, let's figure 1200 players enter college basketball each year. 25 is roughly 2.1% of that number which about everything 2 sigs and above. Thing is that area under the curve gets larger rapidly as you know to the right and you are feed 25 less talented kids in on the far right, so the less attractive teams are taking places in that 96 - 97 percentile range.

Actually closer to the numbers you mentioned than I was expecting but I still think your percentages were a bit large. This is due to the fact that compared to a real population, we've grabbed the left most group of the normally distributed population. I think it's likely a more linear distribution than normal or at least very highly skewed to the left.

All this said, as I mentioned in the prior post, I concur that the impact on the recruiting class of the very top teams, 1 - 1.5% of the total teams is more significant than for college basketball as a whole. I also think the actual impact is somewhat blunted by intangibles such as fan loyalty, team success being somewhat more than the sum of its individual players and that second 25 being more likely to be multi year players.

I still think the business model for this proposal is smoke and likely a hoax. I also think that college basketball will eventually face this scenario but in a more chaotic fashion than what we have discussed. The driver for this will be the NBA policy for rooks and how it might change. Ironically it is the nba that sets the policy for the NCAA.

Again, man, you're talking about a different group than I'm talking about.

When I said kids in xth percentile, I was talking about varsity players in their high school class. There are way, way,way more than 1200 varsity graduating HS ballers (say, all varsity starters for example) every year, and assuming that they'd nearly all play in college if given the option, then to narrow the population to 4 digits in that way is to make an entirely arbitrary distinction - you're not basing it on the players available for recruiting, you're basing on the players who happened to receive scholarships, which is different than what I was originally referring to and, as you said, won't produce quite as neat a distribution as would a bigger population.

But again, I didn't make that cutoff. If you're talking about *all* the players eligible to recruit for college ball that year (as I was), then you're gonna have to go a couple of sig figs past 99. to get to the Skal Labissieres of the world.

And as you said, the distribution gets really, really, far from normal when you get fully into outlier territory - so you have situations where, you know, the skill gap between #1 and #30 best varsity HS player in the country is probably greater than between #3000 and #3500. Which is why I don't think us getting the new set of best kids will fully mitigate the talent shift that would occur.

(Obviously 3000 vs 3500 doesn't impact us on the D1 level, but I just meant it for colorful illustration - I know it's more like we'd get 20s instead of single digit recruits, and the Illinois of the world would end up with 100 instead of 80, and I don't think the latter is as meaningful as the former).

But I agree with you that the venture will fail, so I don't think it matters much either way.

 

[kybassfan]

Again, man, you're talking about a different group than I'm talking about.

When I said kids in xth percentile, I was talking about varsity players in their high school class. There are way, way,way more than 1200 varsity graduating HS ballers (say, all varsity starters for example) every year, and assuming that they'd nearly all play in college if given the option, then to narrow the population to 4 digits in that way is to make an entirely arbitrary distinction - you're not basing it on the players available for recruiting, you're basing on the players who happened to receive scholarships, which is different than what I was originally referring to and, as you said, won't produce quite as neat a distribution as would a bigger population.

But again, I didn't make that cutoff. If you're talking about *all* the players eligible to recruit for college ball that year (as I was), then you're gonna have to go a couple of sig figs past 99. to get to the Skal Labissieres of the world.

And as you said, the distribution gets really, really, far from normal when you get fully into outlier territory - so you have situations where, you know, the skill gap between #1 and #30 best varsity HS player in the country is probably greater than between #3000 and #3500. Which is why I don't think us getting the new set of best kids will fully mitigate the talent shift that would occur.

But I agree with you that the venture will fail, so I don't think it matters much either way.

LOL. I think we are in what is called "violent agreement". Good discussion.

Just to put a keen point on one of your assertions, there are often quite large differences in performance at the extremes of any group. Individual sports gives us many examples. Edwin Moses being a very good example. A hugely dominant competitor. Then there is Bob Beamon with his mind boggling long jump in the '68 Olympics. That was the record that would "never" be broken. Then there was the long jump competition in Japan where Carl Lewis broke that record some 23 years later. AND LOST! Mike Powell handed Carl Lewis his first loss in 10 years in the same competition where Carl Lewis beat the unbeatable record. In my opinion that was the greatest single competition in human history that didn't involve cutting out someone's heart. To really drive home the point, Beamon's jump was 2 feet longer than the existing world record. Taken in the context of statistical distribution and considering how profoundly these individuals stand out against the very best of their own species, the individuals and their performances are simply breath taking.

 

[JDHoss]

If they can work out the financial end of it, this would be a great thing for the guys who have no real interest in attending college. If I were a top player, confident in my abilities, and no real loyalties or interest in attending college, I'd jump all over it. It's wrong to try and keep these players from making a living off of their skills.

Making the finances work might not be as hard as you'd think either. My understanding is that it's a "group" of investors. You get a few people interested enough to drop a couple or 5 million (chump change to some and considering there are 45,000+ people in the US with net worth over 50 million) each, get an apparel company sponsor (the uniforms and other gear would likely be outrageous and big sellers among kids), get some shoe company involvement, a few corporate sponsors, and a small TV contract (I could see it being picked up by someone like NBC Universal or Foxsports1, etc) , it's suddenly not such a money losing proposition, and maybe at worst, a tax write off.

Regardless, I don't think it hurts college basketball at all. The top programs will still get the top players after this team signs a few guys. People will still show up to watch UK/KU/UNC/Dook, etc. and there will still be all the same games on TV. The NCAA tournament will still be the lifeblood of college basketball in general. Aside from the top programs like I mentioned, just like they do now, much of the country will still treat college basketball as a 4 week sport that starts in March, regardless of whether or not this venture takes off.

I would add that if it does take off, I'd like to see a self imposed cut off date for signing/pursuing players for this team. Otherwise, imagine Skal and Briscoe jumping ship in a couple of months.

 

[ukdesi]

I don't think college basketball would suffer because of this. Hardcore fans won't go away. Medium level fans of college basketball barely recognize most of the superstars in college anyway. I think there is a small percentage of fans who watch CBB for the potential NBA superstars. You might lose that.

 

[KyCatFan]

What about issues with recruiting? If they don't announce early on their intentions to do that and string coaches along, it will have an impact on recruiting. Just like it has with all these players going to lesser schools this year. If we invest a lot of time in them while other teams lock up the next best players, then we are stuck with an empty cupboard. The NCAA will have to force the players to make their intentions known a lot earlier then the Spring signing period if they are planning on skipping college altogether.

 

[UKgreatinmyveins]

It will also kill the ncaa. Ncaa gets a ton of cash from march madness. They will have a watered downed product to sell soon if that semi pro league works out. This and the afam scandal at unc cheat will be the final nails in the ncaa's coffin. GBB

It is already watered down enough as it is.

 

[Bigblueforever]

It will also kill the ncaa. Ncaa gets a ton of cash from march madness. They will have a watered downed product to sell soon if that semi pro league works out. This and the afam scandal at unc cheat will be the final nails in the ncaa's coffin. GBB

\How true this will end college basketball but good riddance to the NCAA.

 

[JDHoss]

What about issues with recruiting? If they don't announce early on their intentions to do that and string coaches along, it will have an impact on recruiting. Just like it has with all these players going to lesser schools this year. If we invest a lot of time in them while other teams lock up the next best players, then we are stuck with an empty cupboard. The NCAA will have to force the players to make their intentions known a lot earlier then the Spring signing period if they are planning on skipping college altogether.

I don't think that it would be any different than before when kids could declare for the draft. I remember sitting about 10 feet from IU coach Mike Davis at Appalachian St in March at the national prep school championships watching the Oak Hill team that had Rondo and Josh Smith. Smith was committed to IU at the time, but watching him play, I thought there was no way he would ever play at IU. IMO you'd just have to recruit with that in mind and try to get a feel for who is serious about coming to college. As I said earlier, I'd like to see this team (Las Vegas Dealers) self impose a recruiting deadline for themselves, and not pursue players after a certain date. There's not really anything the NCAA could do about it one way or the other. If they (LV Dealers) wanted to be unscrupulous, it could wreak havoc on a recruiting class, but hopefully, they would have their "recruiting class" wrapped up by the end of February, if not sooner.

 

[Xception]

This particular model may not work but there will eventually be one that will . It will hurt college basketball if or when it does . College has already been watered down by not having the stars stay multiple years as it once was , not having them at all would be even worse . Unless you are the type that doesn't care for special players that perform at a level above the common player or have unusual athleticism that sets them apart .

Take all the hot chicks out of playboy and have the average house wife instead because it'll be the same stuff . The game would go on but for those who know better it will miss an element or glimpses of greatness , much fewer plays that wow you or leave you saying "how did he do that" . Instead you will be left with players of similar ability , nothing truly remarkable. Diehards will stay for that and pretend nothing has changed but many will tune out and over time have a detrimental effect on the game .

When that time comes I may not care because the product we watch now is highly manipulated . From rulings in enforcement , eligibility , tournament seeding , edicts to target selected schools while intentionally ignoring blatant violations from schools they wish to prop up as a model and the NCAA's greedy nature in hoarding all the profit leaves no sympathy for their destruction .

 

[Teachable Moe]

Who's the audience here? There's already a development league.

 

[BLUEBLOOD73]

I think it hurts college basketball pretty bad until it fails, and I believe it will. The rub for us as UK fans is it will hurt college basketball during the Cal era. He is only here for so long and the next guy cold be even better but I wouldn't wager much on that. The idea this is no bigger a threat than European ball is just uniformed naivety. This will sting, and sting bad until it fails.

 

[Teachable Moe]

I anticipate this thing will never get off the ground.

I anticipate some kids getting burned in the process.

 

[BBBLazing]

How many of you would actually pay to watch one of these games, knowing that the kids will never play at UK. The only reason the McDonald's game or any prep game for that matter, gets attention from an audience other than the kids' parents is because the fans of the schools that are recruiting them watch. No one will watch this team play. If you will, and pay to do it, lets hear you.

 

[FickusDuckus]

I could see the kids getting played instead of paid. No one in America gives a crap about oversees basketball. Shoe companies aren't going to sink as many millions into unknown kids playing a game no one watches. College kids will have the advantage as they get free advertising for a year building their brand. Going to school and making a name for yourself would give you far better leverage with shoe companies than in a euro league, enough that it would probably be a bad ideal not to go to school if you're a highly touted player.

Youre right but people overseas LOVE American basketball. They are going on a huge European tour, they will make money. They will bill these kids as the future of the NBA and the folks across the pond will go nuts. IF they take it to Asia theyll make even more money. That said the effect on NCAA hoops will be minimal. You will have schools lose kids to this team and leave them in a pinch here and there much like Slick Rick experienced repeatedly after returning to college hoops. Outside of that it wont hurt college at all. Itll keep the kids who have no business in college out and thats about it.

 

[J. Shellacque]

I don't know what will come of this, none of us do. But after thinking about it, three letters come to mind.........XFL. I applaud those thinking outside, but this seems like an unbelievably bad idea. How will they market the team? Will they be the AAU Globetrotters......and find Washington Generals teams all over the globe? They can't attach USA to their name. As a previous poster said.........this will never see air.

 

[calamitybone]

This would be tantamount to watching a season of all-star games. There would be no attachment to the team(s). We follow UK because we love and support the program, regardless of the players on the court. This is a gimmick that is tremendously short-sighted IMO.

 

[WeepNoMore]

This makes a lot of sense to me and would be beneficial on several levels:

First and foremost, it would allow those athletes that have a financial need and/or are not prepared to study at the college level and/or have no interest in college to pursue their career goals. Simply put: college is not for everyone. A lot of solid citizens skip college to pursue their careers.

Second, it would allow college basketball to move back in the direction of student/athlete from the current move toward athlete/employee/student.

Third, although a lot of fans will say that this approach would waterdown the college game, I believe it would, in fact, make the college game more exciting and therefore more enjoyable.

Fourth, it would reduce the need for some schools, e.g., UNCheat, to commit academic fraud to keep their star players eligible.

Fifth, if successful, it could lead to a similar alternative for football athletes with the same benefits as listed above accruing to college football.

 

[KA4Prez]

Look back at the last decade of CBB. If this thing got off the ground, and say they got just 10 of the top 25 recruits every year. It would drastically hurt the college game. I want to see the BEST players. Even if they only stay 1 year. This notion of Freshman ineligibility, guys playing overseas, a league like this, etc...to preserve some notion of "academics" in college sports? Be real. College football and college basketball are worth 11-figure contracts....there's nothing "amateur" about it.

 

[CrustyCat]

yes

 

[kybassfan]

Look back at the last decade of CBB. If this thing got off the ground, and say they got just 10 of the top 25 recruits every year. It would drastically hurt the college game. I want to see the BEST players. Even if they only stay 1 year. This notion of Freshman ineligibility, guys playing overseas, a league like this, etc...to preserve some notion of "academics" in college sports? Be real. College football and college basketball are worth 11-figure contracts....there's nothing "amateur" about it.

What's this got to do with amateurism? Even if you could pay in college, you expect colleges to match the 700K this guy was talking about?

The business model sucks so this won't get off the ground. However, you gotta get used to the idea that losing the top 10, 25 or even more out of college basketball is a matter of when, not if. The current rules will not stand forever. College basketball will not be destroyed when they do change.

The worst possible outcome is a few guys get all weepy eyed cause they didn't get the guy that might'a been ranked number one in Joe's Garage and Recruiting Service. Who cares?

Oh, by the way. Who in college has an 11 figure contract? 10,000,000,000? That's billion, with a B. Ten of them. Just sayin.

And the college athletes are still essentially amateurs by comparison with their professional analogs. The college, NCAA and ESPN are getting rich off them but the athletes are certainly not. That's a whole other argument.

 

[Tyblue22]

FIRST OFF: This 'Model' WILL absolutely work. The Euro and Asian Leagues are working fine. This is nothing more than a Euro team, Located in Vegas. You can expect to see their jersey littered with sponsor logos. You can guarantee that Nike, Addida's, Reebok, and Peak shoes will line up to structure shoes deals with these guys. The team will filter the first year of that contract to the player as the actual salary.

Do yourself a favor, go to youtube, search for Euro basketball game, or china basketball game. Unless its a playoff game, there might me 3000 people in the stands. These teams do not make money from ticket sales. Open your minds a little bit. lol

The comparisons to the XFL are off base. Keep in mind he is not saying that he is creating a League...Hes creating ONE team. That team will play teams already established in a league in Europe.

Think of it like this. YOU are ADDIDAS. You know that Jaylen Brown is going to be a one and done player in college. So in about 10 months when his college season ends, sign him to a long shoe contract. OR, if he plays for this team, you can go ahead and sign him now, ADDIDAS simply filters $700,000 of that contract through the team as a 1 year salary. Do you think it hurts ADDIDAS to pay Jaylen Brown 1 year early?? NO !!! In fact, in many cases, its already happening guys (in college). The shoe companies filter through agent contract, and then to families of the players. See Shabazz Muhammed, whos sister was an average tennis player suddenly signed by addidas during the spring of Shabaaz senior year.

Get used to it. This is the future. AND There is only ONE solution. Dissolve the NCAA and start paying college athletes. YOU personally may never watch the Las Vegas Dealers play a game in your life. But guess what, they will still play, and each year 4 to 5 Mcdonalds All Americans will sign and get their $700,000. This thing is global. Its bigger than you and "ticket sales in an arena". Its Global. Its going to work, and its already started.

 

[Tyblue22]

And guess what...Its going to work fine.

This 'Model' WILL absolutely work. The Euro and Asian Leagues are working fine. This is nothing more than a Euro team, Located in Vegas. You can expect to see their jersey littered with sponsor logos. You can guarantee that Nike, Addida's, Jordan Brand, Reebok, and Peak shoes will line up to structure shoes deals with these guys. The team will filter the first year of that contract to the player as the actual salary.

Do yourself a favor, go to youtube, search for Euro basketball game, or china basketball game. Unless its a playoff game, there might me 3000 people in the stands. These teams do not make money from ticket sales. Open your minds a little bit. lol

The comparisons to the XFL are off base. Keep in mind he is not saying that he is creating a League...Hes creating ONE team. That team will play teams already established in a league in Europe.

Think of it like this. YOU are ADDIDAS. You know that Jaylen Brown is going to be a one and done player in college. So in about 10 months when his college season ends, sign him to a long shoe contract. OR, if he plays for this team, you can go ahead and sign him now, ADDIDAS simply filters $700,000 of that contract through the team as a 1 year salary. Do you think it hurts ADDIDAS to pay Jaylen Brown 1 year early?? NO !!! In fact, in many cases, its already happening guys (in college). The shoe companies filter through agent contract, and then to families of the players. See Shabazz Muhammed, whos sister was an average tennis player suddenly signed by addidas during the spring of Shabaaz senior year.

Get used to it. This is the future. AND There is only ONE solution. Dissolve the NCAA and start paying college athletes. YOU personally may never watch the Las Vegas Dealers play a game in your life. But guess what, they will still play, and each year 4 to 5 Mcdonalds All Americans will sign and get their $700,000. This thing is global. Its bigger than you and "ticket sales in an arena". Its Global. Its going to work, and its already started.

 

[JwUKFan11]

Adidas

 

[kybassfan]

Its already started?

Who out of high school went to Europe or Asia next year.

I just hear you preaching for what you want or think you believe. I don't hear you substantiating a likely outcome.

 

[KA4Prez]

I meant that college athletics is worth 11 figures...the television contracts.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

I think this could work out really well if done right. In fact, I'd turn it into a glorified AAU team - get sponsored and paid by shoe companies to play for teams (they do this in HS already)...Team Nike South, Team Adidas West, Team Under Armour East, etc. Go around to play other teams, either domestic or internationally. Think about it, you could make a schedule based entirely of: international clubs, non-NBA affiliated clubs (plenty of summer leagues in local cities with ex-college and NBA players in them, look at North Carolina one that Wall played in), NBA D-League teams, exhibition teams, etc.

Could be a game-changer if they get enough talent to go...it could be a traveling MCDAA team, and I would for sure watch it.

 

[Blue Angel]

I sure am glad they are keeping away from any appearance of inappropriate contact with gamblers by working for the LAS VEGAS DEALERS!!!

 

[Chuckinden]

This makes a lot of sense to me and would be beneficial on several levels:

First and foremost, it would allow those athletes that have a financial need and/or are not prepared to study at the college level and/or have no interest in college to pursue their career goals. Simply put: college is not for everyone. A lot of solid citizens skip college to pursue their careers.

Second, it would allow college basketball to move back in the direction of student/athlete from the current move toward athlete/employee/student.

Third, although a lot of fans will say that this approach would waterdown the college game, I believe it would, in fact, make the college game more exciting and therefore more enjoyable.

Fourth, it would reduce the need for some schools, e.g., UNCheat, to commit academic fraud to keep their star players eligible.

Fifth, if successful, it could lead to a similar alternative for football athletes with the same benefits as listed above accruing to college football.

I posted basically the same thing earlier in the thread. I agree that I think it would make CBB better in the long run.

 

[Smashcat]

And guess what...Its going to work fine.

This 'Model' WILL absolutely work. The Euro and Asian Leagues are working fine. This is nothing more than a Euro team, Located in Vegas. You can expect to see their jersey littered with sponsor logos. You can guarantee that Nike, Addida's, Jordan Brand, Reebok, and Peak shoes will line up to structure shoes deals with these guys. The team will filter the first year of that contract to the player as the actual salary.

Do yourself a favor, go to youtube, search for Euro basketball game, or china basketball game. Unless its a playoff game, there might me 3000 people in the stands. These teams do not make money from ticket sales. Open your minds a little bit. lol

The comparisons to the XFL are off base. Keep in mind he is not saying that he is creating a League...Hes creating ONE team. That team will play teams already established in a league in Europe.

Think of it like this. YOU are ADDIDAS. You know that Jaylen Brown is going to be a one and done player in college. So in about 10 months when his college season ends, sign him to a long shoe contract. OR, if he plays for this team, you can go ahead and sign him now, ADDIDAS simply filters $700,000 of that contract through the team as a 1 year salary. Do you think it hurts ADDIDAS to pay Jaylen Brown 1 year early?? NO !!! In fact, in many cases, its already happening guys (in college). The shoe companies filter through agent contract, and then to families of the players. See Shabazz Muhammed, whos sister was an average tennis player suddenly signed by addidas during the spring of Shabaaz senior year.

Get used to it. This is the future. AND There is only ONE solution. Dissolve the NCAA and start paying college athletes. YOU personally may never watch the Las Vegas Dealers play a game in your life. But guess what, they will still play, and each year 4 to 5 Mcdonalds All Americans will sign and get their $700,000. This thing is global. Its bigger than you and "ticket sales in an arena". Its Global. Its going to work, and its already started.

I imagine Zimmerman will be signing a contract any day.

 

[coolcat9lives]

This thing will be a sham. They guy running this stated he can get 5 guys from this class?! Other than Thon Maker I don't really see anyone from this class pursuing this. He may get a few guys here and there but no way he gets 5-10 MCDAA's a year, that's absurd. How do these kids know they will be developed? What kind of coaching staff is going to be in place? Will the competition level mirror or exceed college basketball? These things are important to a recruit's long term sustainability once they jump to the league. I don't think 700K is enough to gamble losing out on all of that.

 

[KA4Prez]

Well, maybe some of the head-scratching players in the 2015 class can shock us all again....

Honestly, I would watch. I watch the HS all star games...I watch some AAU videos.

 

[Smashcat]

This thing will be a sham. They guy running this stated he can get 5 guys from this class?! Other than Thon Maker I don't really see anyone from this class pursuing this. He may get a few guys here and there but no way he gets 5-10 MCDAA's a year, that's absurd. How do these kids know they will be developed? What kind of coaching staff is going to be in place? Will the competition level mirror or exceed college basketball? These things are important to a recruit's long term sustainability once they jump to the league. I don't think 700K is enough to gamble losing out on all of that.

I agree. The only good that may come of this is the people trying to reinstate college freshman ineligibility get crushed.

 

[AGEE11]

I personally hope this takes off and does great. It will force the NCAA to pay the actual people who make them billions... the players!

This thing may even be the final straw that breaks the NCAA apart, if we're lucky

 

[barryn2000]

Ironically...who feeds the shoe makers the money?

I'll never get the whole shoe addiction. Must be an age thing.

 

[AGEE11]

As someone stated earlier, they will not need ticket revenues or TV deals for this. The shoe companies will pay big.

Think about it, if you were Nike, would you not front this? I'd pay a kid a million his first year, with the option to sign him after. Kind of like the "team option" on the end of rookie contracts. That keeps the next superstars coming to you instead of Adidas or another competitor.

If Nike fronts this team, you will have Adidas and Under Armour doing it next.

This has the potential to get big. And it will force the NCAA to adapt or fold.

You could potential start and XBA league or whatever and have a 4-8 team playoffs. If those 4 teams were better than college, you might get a TV deal. Maybe work with ESPN and some games on off nights in college.

This will also force colleges to pay the people that actually make them money, the players.

 

[catben]

3 questions:

1. Will a TV network pay big money for the rights to televise the games?
2. Will people pay to watch the games?
3. Will the big time players risk tons of exposure to play?

If the the answer to any of these question is no, then it will fail miserably.

 

[KA4Prez]

3 questions:

1. Will a TV network pay big money for the rights to televise the games?
2. Will people pay to watch the games?
3. Will the big time players risk tons of exposure to play?

If the the answer to any of these question is no, then it will fail miserably.

Someone will have to take the leap first.