Have to agree with Knight on this one.
- Thread starter TNCatfanforever
- Start date
Stupid...the kids not good enough to play in the NBA today are the same kids that wouldn't be good enough 2-3 years from now.
And wow that Andrew Wiggins should have stayed an extra year, that would have helped him out a lot! How about our own Dakari Johnson...he would have gone lottery in 2 years!!....uhh, no.
And wow that Andrew Wiggins should have stayed an extra year, that would have helped him out a lot! How about our own Dakari Johnson...he would have gone lottery in 2 years!!....uhh, no.
OAD is definitely better for the NBA- it gives them a chance to better evaluate. It's also better for college, because we get to actually see guys like Anthony Davis play at least one year instead of none.
I get pining for the old days when we'd have stars for 3-4 years but that's never going to happen again.
The OAD whining is so 2010.
I get pining for the old days when we'd have stars for 3-4 years but that's never going to happen again.
The OAD whining is so 2010.
He still may get there. How quickly people forget about the Jermaine O'Neals and Towns of the world.
What a lot of people fail to talk about when you get into OAD is how normal students often leave school after a year. The national freshman retention rate is about 75%, which is up from where it has historically been.
This means that about three out of ten freshmen at public college/universities leave. It's much higher than that at community colleges; I taught at JCC for a few years and it would be common to start with a class of 20 and end with 7 or 8.
The argument that one-and-dones make a mockery of the system it to misunderstand the system itself. College isn't indentured servitude. A person--athlete or no--should be able to leave and come back as many times as he wants to maximize his earning potential. We fetishize college in this country, which is strange because only about 40% of Americans have a college degree.
This means that about three out of ten freshmen at public college/universities leave. It's much higher than that at community colleges; I taught at JCC for a few years and it would be common to start with a class of 20 and end with 7 or 8.
The argument that one-and-dones make a mockery of the system it to misunderstand the system itself. College isn't indentured servitude. A person--athlete or no--should be able to leave and come back as many times as he wants to maximize his earning potential. We fetishize college in this country, which is strange because only about 40% of Americans have a college degree.
He is going to go top 5 this year 1000%...you all projecting his draft stock off a couple bad games is crazy. Stat wise he's having a great year, especially for someone who didn't play at all last year.
“I have a hard time believing that the NBA itself cannot come out and lay rules: ‘This is the way it’s going to be, and you as the players association – if you want to set up a different league – you go ahead and do it, but we’re not running our league this way.’
It's called collective bargaining, Bob.
It's called collective bargaining, Bob.
he has dictatorship mentality. You do my way or i'm going to cut you off "kill you off."
i really don't agree or disagree with the OAD rule
it is a collective bargaining rule, just like any other union and company have
i will say this though, i would much rather have the top talent play one year then none at all in CBB
it is a collective bargaining rule, just like any other union and company have
i will say this though, i would much rather have the top talent play one year then none at all in CBB
A dumber operation in sports is that Bobby the Bully's opinion is somehow still quotable.
OAD is terrible for college basketball and somewhat bad for the NBA. I'm not saying force kids to stay 3 years in college is the answer but, a minimum of two years would help the kids greatly. The quality of college b-ball has really gone downhill the last 10 years. Fundamentals are really bad on the whole. An extra year would help players work on their game and tone their body, so as to be more ready for the physical nature of the NBA.
Cal has gotten a bad wrap from the media and idiots like Knight because the players he recruits (and usually gets) are the best of the best. As such, they are far more likely to be OAD than just about anyone else's players. You can't say the OAD trend is a Cal creation but, rather the results of Cal being at UK. The Kentucky Effect if you will.
Cal has gotten a bad wrap from the media and idiots like Knight because the players he recruits (and usually gets) are the best of the best. As such, they are far more likely to be OAD than just about anyone else's players. You can't say the OAD trend is a Cal creation but, rather the results of Cal being at UK. The Kentucky Effect if you will.
IMHO OAD is better for both CBB and the NBA then NAD, TAD would be perfect
The owners want TAD, the players union does not
I have never been and still am not a OAD fan. But I agree with those saying that it is better seeing the Davis type play here for a year versus not at all.
It's the rule. It is people like me that need to adjust to it and I have had had the hardest time doing just that. That's on me.
It's the rule. It is people like me that need to adjust to it and I have had had the hardest time doing just that. That's on me.
This is a great post -
Not to mention that it's become an arms race - in most every white collar field, low level workers are increasingly required to have a bachelor's (eg secretaries), mid level workers need to have grad degrees, etc.
The low level jobs haven't gotten that much more complicated - it's just that we've had a generation or two go by where your average suburban kid is 100% expected to get a degree or two, no questions asked - anything else is considered a failure.
That's not to say that it's worthless to have a degree, but it's like the inflation of currency. If everybody has the obligatory degree, then that particular level of degree is worth less than before, and not to mention there are still plenty of great blue collar jobs which require none.
Add in the fact that nearly every UK player has a pro future, and more than likely in the league, and that they are able to come back at any time per Coach Cal and finish their degree, and I just don't get the sanctimonious hand-wringing.
The most significant goal of college is to prepare you for a future career, and studying basketball for 9 months under Cal has proven to be a much more stable proposition than the tens of thousands of students who blow six figures on something silly like a theater degree or finding sexism in 18th century literature and then live in a brooklyn apartment with 3 roommates and a cat until they're 50. Or the tens of thousands of students who come in at 18 and party hardy for 3 semesters, flunk out, and then start an unrelated career elsewhere.
There are way, way, way worse ways to do college than how UK's players do it. Way worse.
And that's coming from a degree guy.
Why are people still talking to this guy? He got let go from ESPN because even they got tired of his terrible analysis as a color commentator and his complete lack of charisma on their college basketball tv shows.
Some of you do know a player learns 10* more in one year of NBA practicing than 4 years of college,, don't you?
Partially true, but one dimensional analysis. You also learn by playing, not sitting. And you can't learn what you physically and emotionally aren't capable of doing.
College basketball needs the elite players that only stay for a year , imagine a game that lacks stars or amazing athletes that do things the average player can't . Watch A.Davis dunk lobs that would have been errant passes or block everyone to the point that they are afraid to go inside and are rushing three pointers that might get blocked too . Or watch any average player do absolutely nothing to amaze you , if players start going out of high school again then I don't know if I can sit through watching the ordinary .
Agreed. I can hear it now....Oh my! Did you just see that fundamentally sound lay up?! Wow..he almost touched the net on that one...!!
It'd be like watching a girls game...'cept with dudes of course. No offense to the girls in any way shape or form.
The interest I have in reading or hearing anything that waste of space and oxygen has to say is harder to detect than dark matter.
One and done (or a two and done) rule is a win-win for both NCAA and NBA. For NCAA, you get to see star players for a year. For NBA, these players develop some recognition and fan base that carries over to the NBA.
How many UK fans watch NBA games just to watch and root for the UK players. I think it is a bunch.
How many UK fans watch NBA games just to watch and root for the UK players. I think it is a bunch.
He is a sociopath who enjoyed some success bullying women and kids. He is not to be taken seriously.
My only problem is if Coach K wasn't doing it now, Knight would have blasted us the whole time that he was on the show. He still sucks.
I'll never forget him doing the NIT final last year, a game that was still in doubt with 30 seconds left, and he's going on and on about himself, seeing as how it was his last game as an announcer. I didn't have a dog in the fight, but if I was a fan of one of those teams I would have been irate.
Knight is so past due is his assessments. And so predictably disappointing. It was never necessary to wait on the chronic results of the one year removed rule (that's the actual way to describe the rule - it IS NOT a "one and done" rule), nor was it even necessary to wait on the implementation of the one year remove rule itself.
These conditions preceded the one year removed rule. They began immediately when the NBA implemented the earnings restrictions against players in their first 3 years in the early 90s. This began the period when players began leaving college very early, and also the period when players avoided college altogether - some succeeded (Kobe, Garnett) while others failed miserably (Kwame Brown says hi).
This began the culture that Bob Knight rants about now, as veteran and better skilled players find themselves in situations where their careers are in jeopardy because lower wage labor is (by the law of the rookie scale) available. Just look at the Philadelphia roster and note how few players are earning money that actually exceeds what is allowed by the rookie scale. Maybe two or three of them. GMs intend to maximize their profits by maximizing the number of players restricted by the rookie scale.
As for the veterans affected, facing job loss? Such irony, as it was the veterans themselves who supported almost a quarter century ago the implementation of the rookie salary cap, because they thought - boo effing hoo - that it was unfair when Glen Robinson signed for 70 million x 10 yrs. straight out of Purdue as the #1 pick.
Now, almost a quarter century later, the #1 pick in the draft still does not make as much money and franchise owners have been laughing their asses all the way to the bank.
The rule requiring that players must be one year removed from high school prior to playing in the NBA was only an adjustment and was, not coincidentally, implemented the very spring when a legal adult, 18 year old superstar, by the name of OJ Mayo could have quit high school after his troubled junior year and legally entered the NBA draft. This rule was implemented for him, to avoid the ugliness of a player quitting high school and becoming a top lottery pick, as would have certainly happened.
These conditions preceded the one year removed rule. They began immediately when the NBA implemented the earnings restrictions against players in their first 3 years in the early 90s. This began the period when players began leaving college very early, and also the period when players avoided college altogether - some succeeded (Kobe, Garnett) while others failed miserably (Kwame Brown says hi).
This began the culture that Bob Knight rants about now, as veteran and better skilled players find themselves in situations where their careers are in jeopardy because lower wage labor is (by the law of the rookie scale) available. Just look at the Philadelphia roster and note how few players are earning money that actually exceeds what is allowed by the rookie scale. Maybe two or three of them. GMs intend to maximize their profits by maximizing the number of players restricted by the rookie scale.
As for the veterans affected, facing job loss? Such irony, as it was the veterans themselves who supported almost a quarter century ago the implementation of the rookie salary cap, because they thought - boo effing hoo - that it was unfair when Glen Robinson signed for 70 million x 10 yrs. straight out of Purdue as the #1 pick.
Now, almost a quarter century later, the #1 pick in the draft still does not make as much money and franchise owners have been laughing their asses all the way to the bank.
The rule requiring that players must be one year removed from high school prior to playing in the NBA was only an adjustment and was, not coincidentally, implemented the very spring when a legal adult, 18 year old superstar, by the name of OJ Mayo could have quit high school after his troubled junior year and legally entered the NBA draft. This rule was implemented for him, to avoid the ugliness of a player quitting high school and becoming a top lottery pick, as would have certainly happened.
Last edited:
Look at the players who left straight out of high school. There are lower amount of busts than the since OAD started. OAD is stupid and shouldn't have ever been a rule in the first place.
Here's the list:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_high_school_draftees
Here's the list:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_high_school_draftees
Only thing he was great at was bullying his players and throwing chairs around and throwing temper tantrums, he never had anything good to say about Calipari either, nope don't like him
