The new draft eligibility rule, which essentially makes one year of college basketball a prerequisite for playing in the NBA, seems to further erase the student from student-athlete. With players only planning on staying for one year before cashing in the NBA, the education of these players becomes increasingly non-existent. However, problems like low graduation rates, dirty recruiting and early entry into the NBA draft all existed before the new rule, and while the new rule may increase these issues, it will not be too significant of a change.
Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski commented on the effect of the increasing trend of early entry into the NBA on ESPN's Sunday Conversation, saying, "It doesn't mean the product [of college basketball] isn't as good as before, it's just different. There's still the tradition." With this new rule, the "different" product of college hoops has all the potential to get better and better because of the influx of talent that may have skipped straight to the League.
The freshmen this year that would have been in the NBA without the inception of the one year rule have taken the country by storm and raised the general level of play. Ohio State picked up center Greg Oden, who surely would have been the top selection in last year's draft. Oden has almost single-handedly revived the program (and I mean single-handedly-he's been playing without his dominant right hand), and his talent is undeniable, averaging 15 points, almost 10 rebounds, and three and a half blocks per game. He has led the Buckeyes to a Big Ten regular season title and a move closer to a number one seed.
Longhorn faithful must also thank David Stern for keeping superstar Kevin Durant out of the league. The National Player of the Year frontrunner has given us a glimpse of what Kevin Garnett (with more range) might have looked like in the college game, with his versatility on offense and length on defense. Durant's 25-point first half against Kansas a week ago, capped by a pull-up 27-foot trifecta to silent Phog Allen Arena, was one of the most entertaining halves of basketball this year. Durant has carried his team to a likely number three seed in the tournament, and is creating rumblings about a Carmelo-like run to the National Title.
Another perk of the rule is the possibility for increased parity within leagues and across the nation. The coaches that will gravitate towards the big-name recruits that now have to spend some time at the college level will have to trade experience for raw talent, allowing for perennial bottom-feeders in the BCS conferences and mid-majors to build a core of players ready to bust brackets come March three or four years down the line. While this type of parity has existed with increasing numbers of players leaving early, it will only become more prevalent as the years go by. Imagine how many more stories like Virginia, who this year went from basement-dweller to ACC Co-Champs, will exist in the coming years.
Is this rule another example of Commissioner Stern taking his power too far? Maybe. But it makes college basketball no more of a "minor league" than it was, and watching Oden and Durant, as well as UNC's Tywon Lawson and Brandan Wright has certainly made me an advocate of the rule. While this class may be a special exception, the thought of seeing the future LeBrons, Kobes and Dwight Howards get to play a year makes college basketball fans everywhere drool at the thought.
Stein says:
I cannot deny that the one-year rule will make college basketball more exciting, particularly this year, thanks to players like Greg Oden and Kevin Durant, who would have been top picks if they could have entered the NBA after high school. Also, the new rule should level the playing field, as teams will be affected when their star player leaves after one year, and other teams will thrive when they have a recruiting class that stays for four years. However, the new rule is just going to further encourage and magnify everything that is wrong and corrupt with college basketball.
By enforcing this rule, the NBA is basically making the NCAA a minor league system. This is not what college is supposed to be about. College sports is supposed to be for student athletes, not athletes. If teams draft a player and feel that he needs a year of experience, send him down to the NBDL. However, no team would ever do this and it is evident that the NBA is just using college to help develop players.
NBA teams don't want to have to develop players in the way that Major League Baseball (MLB) does with its minor league system. MLB teams have teams that they own, and the high school players decide whether to attend college or begin developing in the minor leagues. The difference here is that when baseball players are drafted out of high school, they are almost never major league-ready. However, guys like seven-foot Greg Oden is NBA-ready and could make an impact on any NBA team. Thus, if any team had a player like Oden, they would use him now and not waste him in a minor league system. After a year of college, Oden will definitely be a more improved and developed player. So it seems that the NBA is just using college basketball to develop the players so the NBA doesn't have to. They don't want to have a minor league system and develop a player for a year or two because they know they could not pass on the opportunity to use the player during his first year out of high school.
People who do not want to go to college are by no means going to try, and after the first semester they can literally stop going to class. It is well-known that big-time Div. I athletes already get away with too much when it comes to academics, and now collegiate athletes will feel that they are above the system.
Additionally, there has always been controversy surrounding the recruiting process and practices in college athletics. It seems like every year an investigation occurs in which a player is found guilty of receiving money, gifts or benefits and a team loses its championship that it won several years ago. This is what happened across the street at UMass, where Marcus Camby received cash gifts from sports agents and the team subsequently had to forfeit its NCAA Final Four run in 1996. Incidents like this will be seen at an even larger scale now that players who never would have considered college basketball are going to have to pick a team. Imagine if LeBron James played college basketball. Colleges would have done anything to have him on their team for a year, and agents and "friends of the program" would be all over him, offering gifts and money.
The one year rule may increase the level of play in both the NCAA and the NBA, but it does not help improve what is wrong with college basketball, and it sends the wrong message to players and the system as a whole.