|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2020 10:56:52 GMT -5
I am asking this seriously...does anyone watch the G League? I cant say I have personally. Maybe that changes down the road but if there is a high profile college bball game on versus a high profile G league game I am defintely watching the college game... This is a great question. As in most team sports, most fans are fans of a TEAM not individual players. In other words, if you are a New York Yankees fan, you're not going to defect to another team when a player leaves or is traded (or at least, 99% won't). G League teams simply do not have much of a fan-base, so the interest in watching them is limited. Not to reopen this topic, but this is why I think a LOT of the "pay the players" crowd ignore the fact that most of the value generated by college basketball arises from the colleges and their fans and alumni, not from the players. Of course, the players are key cogs in the game since they are the players, but most of the value and fandom comes from the university connections, not the players on the team. That is why college basketball (and college football) is way more popular and gets more viewers than things like minor league baseball. Ultimately, I do not see this affecting college basketball all that much in the short term. Sure, guys like Calipari may have fewer top 10 guys to recruit to college since they may go to the G League, but instead Calipari will drop down to the next ten, and take those guys. It's not like Calipari's draw (and Kentucky's) is only limited to top 10 guys. I am sure there are tons of top 20-50 guys who would love a chance to play under Calipari, Coach K, etc. (as others have said, Coach K only turned to the one-and-done model recently, anyway). I think it will also demonstrate that most of the players' value is captured by the superstar type talent that gets these G league contracts. Once those guys are swept off the NCAA landscape, the grossly underpaid college players will be even fewer than they are now.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,381
|
Post by calhoya on Apr 17, 2020 11:18:20 GMT -5
How (if)the NCAA responds to this latest challenge is going to be very important to the future of the college game. The reality is that the NCAA has clung to an archaic notion of the student athlete in how it treated these kids who are only in school to be trained for the professional leagues. While people can and have debated whether it is appropriate for schools to "pay" athletes for use of their likeness, what cannot be disputed is that college basketball has become a major part of most big conference school's financial fabric. How much would the loss of a elite and prestigious basketball program that generates millions hurt Kentucky, Duke, Syracuse or Kansas? Change is coming--with or without the participation of the NCAA. The idea that schools would be mortally wounded by not getting more revenues in basketball seems a stretch. Basketball at Duke is $21 million in spend in a $2.3 billion university budget. FWIW, Duke was a very much football school until the mid-1960's (Duke won six of the first 10 ACC titles from 1953 to 1962) when the school put restrictions on admission. The school didn't go out of business when football receded from the front pages, and neither would it with basketball. Did not suggest that the loss of basketball revenues would "mortally wound" a school, particularly a Duke with a massive budget and endowment. However, to discount the impact on schools of the loss of these revenues is a mistake. If the money in College football and basketball was not lucrative, we would not have seen the mad scramble in realignment that occurred in the last 15 years. The conference jumpers, including the formation of the new Big East were not the result of a search for prestige. Syracuse will never achieve in basketball what it had in the BE. They were chasing dollars and television contracts. No one is paying these schools millions to televise their academic prowess.
|
|
bostonfan
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,531
|
Post by bostonfan on Apr 17, 2020 11:19:20 GMT -5
I am asking this seriously...does anyone watch the G League? I cant say I have personally. Maybe that changes down the road but if there is a high profile college bball game on versus a high profile G league game I am defintely watching the college game... I don't think all too many "fans" watch these games, but the concept here for these players is that NBA scouting staffs watch these games all the time. Those staffs will get a chance to watch these young players compete against athletic and skilled grown men. That should make evaluating them easier compared to when these guys play in college when they are maybe playing against one, or two, possible NBA players in a game. Some of these high level high school players are really just focused on the fastest way to playing in the NBA and if they can make some decent money while getting evaluated then it is appealing to those players.
|
|
justsaying
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 709
|
Post by justsaying on Apr 17, 2020 11:35:28 GMT -5
500K, G-League out bids the LSUs, Arizonas, Dukes, Carolinas, Oregons for this one. There will be others how may will be interesting. Jalen Green going GLeague - next top player taking the bigger payday. LSUs, Arizonas, Dukes, Carolinas, Oregons ... etc will be looking to up their incentives soon.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,233
Member is Online
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 17, 2020 11:46:06 GMT -5
500K, G-League out bids the LSUs, Arizonas, Dukes, Carolinas, Oregons for this one. There will be others how may will be interesting. Jalen Green going GLeague - next top player taking the bigger payday. LSUs, Arizonas, Dukes, Carolinas, Oregons ... etc will be looking to up their incentives soon. Ok, but what are your thoughts on this new path for players?
|
|
justsaying
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 709
|
Post by justsaying on Apr 17, 2020 13:18:40 GMT -5
Jalen Green going GLeague - next top player taking the bigger payday. LSUs, Arizonas, Dukes, Carolinas, Oregons ... etc will be looking to up their incentives soon. Ok, but what are your thoughts on this new path for players? Overall dilution of talent if the trend continues and if even more of the top of the talent pool heads that way. College basketball will remain competitive because the talent pool draws closer together as far as overall talent. One ill effect is that if the GLeague becomes stronger at drawing those at the top of the pool, the schools that currently offer the additional under the table inducements will tap their sources to try and compete with GLeauge offers or there will be additional inducements that will be offered to the premium (what left of the 5*s and top 4*) type recruits which could create recruitment levels numbers that schools like GU has the potential to pull in. This is by no means saying that GU can't recruit those higher level recruits but just saying the pool shrinks. Either you enter the fray with your eyes wide open or you continue to put in the extra work beyond what others are doing. Regardless of what many trolls may think here, it is of the opinion in this reply that this staff puts in that work and is not given props for hurdles attempting to combat, unless these trolls think that GU already offer many of these same inducements and is not pulling them. Otherwise naivety with strong opinions is a convenient mix to spread trolling notions. By the way Isaiah Todd declared.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2020 13:27:02 GMT -5
The longer-term problem for college basketball (and all sports) is that there is a pretty good chance that the lucrative TV contracts that have spurred the growth of sports across the board are unlikely to continue to grow at the rate they have been growing for years. ESPN has been in significant trouble for quite some time, and I assume that the pandemic will only accelerate cord-cutting and such problems. Fox Sports probably faces many of the same headwinds, though they started much later and have fewer contracts with the major sports.
The key for the Big East will be to renew its Fox Sports deal before any sports fees bubble bursts. Much of that will likely depend on what the sports outlook looks like after this pandemic.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,233
Member is Online
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 17, 2020 13:59:42 GMT -5
Ok, but what are your thoughts on this new path for players? Overall dilution of talent if the trend continues and if even more of the top of the talent pool heads that way. College basketball will remain competitive because the talent pool draws closer together as far as overall talent. One ill effect is that if the GLeague becomes stronger at drawing those at the top of the pool, the schools that currently offer the additional under the table inducements will tap their sources to try and compete with GLeauge offers or there will be additional inducements that will be offered to the premium (what left of the 5*s and top 4*) type recruits which could create recruitment levels numbers that schools like GU has the potential to pull in. This is by no means saying that GU can't recruit those higher level recruits but just saying the pool shrinks. Either you enter the fray with your eyes wide open or you continue to put in the extra work beyond what others are doing. Regardless of what many trolls may think here, it is of the opinion in this reply that this staff puts in that work and is not given props for hurdles attempting to combat, unless these trolls think that GU already offer many of these same inducements and is not pulling them. Otherwise naivety with strong opinions is a convenient mix to spread trolling notions. By the way Isaiah Todd declared. The “sources” you’re referring to are mainly the sneaker companies and agents, so why would they give a kid money under the table to go to college when it could all be above board in the G-League? I think you’re going overboard on the “inducements” theory...
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Apr 17, 2020 14:05:28 GMT -5
I am asking this seriously...does anyone watch the G League? I cant say I have personally. Maybe that changes down the road but if there is a high profile college bball game on versus a high profile G league game I am defintely watching the college game... This is a great question. As in most team sports, most fans are fans of a TEAM not individual players. In other words, if you are a New York Yankees fan, you're not going to defect to another team when a player leaves or is traded (or at least, 99% won't). G League teams simply do not have much of a fan-base, so the interest in watching them is limited. Not to reopen this topic, but this is why I think a LOT of the "pay the players" crowd ignore the fact that most of the value generated by college basketball arises from the colleges and their fans and alumni, not from the players. Of course, the players are key cogs in the game since they are the players, but most of the value and fandom comes from the university connections, not the players on the team. That is why college basketball (and college football) is way more popular and gets more viewers than things like minor league baseball. Ultimately, I do not see this affecting college basketball all that much in the short term. Sure, guys like Calipari may have fewer top 10 guys to recruit to college since they may go to the G League, but instead Calipari will drop down to the next ten, and take those guys. It's not like Calipari's draw (and Kentucky's) is only limited to top 10 guys. I am sure there are tons of top 20-50 guys who would love a chance to play under Calipari, Coach K, etc. (as others have said, Coach K only turned to the one-and-done model recently, anyway). I think it will also demonstrate that most of the players' value is captured by the superstar type talent that gets these G league contracts. Once those guys are swept off the NCAA landscape, the grossly underpaid college players will be even fewer than they are now. This is what I have been saying for a while. The brand is the school and the enormous alumni base attached to the school. People act like that is invisible but that is a huge reason why March Madness and college basketball is so popular even though it's an inferior league with inferior players to the NBA or even alot of overseas leagues. Frankly most G league teams could probably consistently beat the big 6 conference college teams. When Kobe, KG, etc went straight to the pros I really don't think that had much of an effect on college basketball. I think this G League program is great because it gives those who want to be paid a legitimate avenue to do that while keeping the college game non pay. If you want the money go to the G league, want an education and benefit from the college brands go to the NCAA. In fact I can see all 3 leagues (NBA, G league, NCAA) can prosper. If you can set up the G league to be played during the summer and fall. Then you will have a basketball audience that will follow that league if the quality is high. There's no reasons basketball can't be year round and the G League can fill that gap.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Apr 17, 2020 14:07:27 GMT -5
The longer-term problem for college basketball (and all sports) is that there is a pretty good chance that the lucrative TV contracts that have spurred the growth of sports across the board are unlikely to continue to grow at the rate they have been growing for years. ESPN has been in significant trouble for quite some time, and I assume that the pandemic will only accelerate cord-cutting and such problems. Fox Sports probably faces many of the same headwinds, though they started much later and have fewer contracts with the major sports. The key for the Big East will be to renew its Fox Sports deal before any sports fees bubble bursts. Much of that will likely depend on what the sports outlook looks like after this pandemic. Yeah, Disney/ESPN/ABC is in huge trouble. If they can't open the parks by the end of the summer they are saying that the whole company will go bankrupt. That's really not the end of the world because someone like Apple or Netflix or Google will buy them or pieces of them (like ESPN/ABC).
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,233
Member is Online
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 17, 2020 14:36:04 GMT -5
Justin Young does a very good job here...
Programs that develop and cultivate talent should thrive in a transition period as we will likely see more G-League (or other professional levels) defectors. College basketball doesn’t need "now power”. The college game needs staying power. “Now power” didn’t yield squat in 2019-2020, a down year for college hoops.
Anthony Edwards was on a team that went 16-16 and finished 13th in the SEC. James Wiseman dipped his toe into the college game at Memphis. Isaiah Stewart and Jaden McDaniels were part of a Washington team that went 15-17, finished 12th in the Pac-12 and only won five games in 2020. Cole Anthony was on North Carolina’s 14-19 season (he was 10-12 when he played) and was 13th in the ACC.
Vernon Carey, a constant player in the top five his entire prep career, was the only player inside our final HoopSeen top 7 who actually had team value at the college level as a rookie. Our former No. 2 overall player in the high school ranks was outstanding for the Blue Devils, posting 17.8 points, 8.8 rebounds and 1.6 blocks a game for the team that went 25-6.
Finding players that can stick has proven to be the better recruiting tactic than the one-and-done. We’ve only see two lottery picks win national championships over the last five years. Two - Villanova’s Mikal Bridges won two times and was drafted No. 10 overall in the 2018 draft. De’Andre Hunter won a title at Virginia and was taken No. 4 overall in the No. 4 draft.
Neither of those players were five-star, top-10 gotta-land-em type of players for the bluebloods. They were good at the prep level but developed in programs where it took time to get better.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,233
Member is Online
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 17, 2020 15:22:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Apr 17, 2020 15:29:11 GMT -5
As this is probably only going to be an option for the top 10-20 players in a given class for the time being, the impacts are likely to be the following:
Kids who previously had to try to keep an under-the-table payment quiet now don't have to do so and can potentially earn even more money utilizing this path. A top 20 kid like Isaiah Todd is reportedly getting $250K. Throw in not having to go to class. Some will say this is short-sighted, but assuming they do continue to progress under this pathway program and get drafted, this looks like a pretty appealing alternative. What little chance we had for a kid like Cisse is likely now out the door.
So now that the shady programs can't "bid" on the top HS recruits, what will they do? They'll likely just bid on the next level of recruits. The NCAA has already proven time and time again that they will look the other way, so there's no reason why these programs will begin to operate differently. I don't think the overall level of play across CBB drops dramatically, but things aren't going to change much for these programs. With the same number of schools chasing a shrinking pool of talent, high 4-star talent is going to become increasingly hard to come by. For a program like us that hasn't landed one of these kids in years, it's going to get that much harder. But will we even notice the difference?
Independent of all of this: with an increasing number of transfers due to the relaxing of rules, the competitive programs are going to find it easier to reload year after year. Winning begets winning. Not winning causes you to get ignored.
So how much is this all really impacting us? A lot less than it should. And that's not a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Apr 17, 2020 20:00:04 GMT -5
As this is probably only going to be an option for the top 10-20 players in a given class for the time being, the impacts are likely to be the following: Kids who previously had to try to keep an under-the-table payment quiet now don't have to do so and can potentially earn even more money utilizing this path. A top 20 kid like Isaiah Todd is reportedly getting $250K. Throw in not having to go to class. Some will say this is short-sighted, but assuming they do continue to progress under this pathway program and get drafted, this looks like a pretty appealing alternative. What little chance we had for a kid like Cisse is likely now out the door. So now that the shady programs can't "bid" on the top HS recruits, what will they do? They'll likely just bid on the next level of recruits. The NCAA has already proven time and time again that they will look the other way, so there's no reason why these programs will begin to operate differently. I don't think the overall level of play across CBB drops dramatically, but things aren't going to change much for these programs. With the same number of schools chasing a shrinking pool of talent, high 4-star talent is going to become increasingly hard to come by. For a program like us that hasn't landed one of these kids in years, it's going to get that much harder. But will we even notice the difference? Independent of all of this: with an increasing number of transfers due to the relaxing of rules, the competitive programs are going to find it easier to reload year after year. Winning begets winning. Not winning causes you to get ignored. So how much is this all really impacting us? A lot less than it should. And that's not a good thing. Disagree, the difference between a 5 star McDonald's lottery pick and a 4 star is huge. 4 stars have some kind of weakness/question about them whether it be NBA measurables of size and athleticism, skill set, character, grades, attitude, etc. The difference between a 4 star and a 3 star is much less and so it puts everyone on a more equal footing especially when you have a 5 year guy like Terrell Allen vs a one and done 4 star. Even with Coach Cal's army of 5 stars he couldn't make the Final Four every year. It's only going to get harder once his closest is only filled with 4 star freshmen.
|
|
justsaying
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 709
|
Post by justsaying on Apr 18, 2020 14:57:43 GMT -5
Overall dilution of talent if the trend continues and if even more of the top of the talent pool heads that way. College basketball will remain competitive because the talent pool draws closer together as far as overall talent. One ill effect is that if the GLeague becomes stronger at drawing those at the top of the pool, the schools that currently offer the additional under the table inducements will tap their sources to try and compete with GLeauge offers or there will be additional inducements that will be offered to the premium (what left of the 5*s and top 4*) type recruits which could create recruitment levels numbers that schools like GU has the potential to pull in. This is by no means saying that GU can't recruit those higher level recruits but just saying the pool shrinks. Either you enter the fray with your eyes wide open or you continue to put in the extra work beyond what others are doing. Regardless of what many trolls may think here, it is of the opinion in this reply that this staff puts in that work and is not given props for hurdles attempting to combat, unless these trolls think that GU already offer many of these same inducements and is not pulling them. Otherwise naivety with strong opinions is a convenient mix to spread trolling notions. By the way Isaiah Todd declared. The “sources” you’re referring to are mainly the sneaker companies and agents, so why would they give a kid money under the table to go to college when it could all be above board in the G-League? I think you’re going overboard on the “inducements” theory... These Sources: Shoe Companies, agents a course. These sources Boosters, Local businesses, various affiliates, past players (their businesses and school pride factor) that are not boosters these are some you have not considered and are very much real. Shoe companies have strong ties to various programs and coaches. They need these profiles to continue so as to appeal to the masses of the young ones buying, styling their products. For shoe companies and many others, even at this time, there is more profit to be had to keep recruits flowing to college programs for there are probably more of the younger and as well as older customer paying more attention to CBB that GLeague (at this time). Sales, sales, more sales is their purpose. Agents getting theirs one way or the other. Agents get their cut when it comes to the GLeague, but the agents in CBB there is still the additional $ to get various boosters, local entities, and then then also $ from the League if they can stay attached (more $ more $ more $). To underestimate these other influences again maybe be a lack of knowledge of "CBB" not just what we see on the various networks when rooting and drinking a beer. These billions that comes from advertisements, so even with the GLeague, these payments to the various college teams still got to get funded somehow this just don't magically go away. If you live in close vicinity of these blue blood programs, in the fabric of the landscape, you then get a sense of some of various inducements beyond shoe companies. A lot of entities still feel they have a lot at stake out side of the GLeague operating and in spite of the GLeague.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,233
Member is Online
|
Post by EtomicB on Apr 18, 2020 16:17:59 GMT -5
The “sources” you’re referring to are mainly the sneaker companies and agents, so why would they give a kid money under the table to go to college when it could all be above board in the G-League? I think you’re going overboard on the “inducements” theory... These Sources: Shoe Companies, agents a course. These sources Boosters, Local businesses, various affiliates, past players (their businesses and school pride factor) that are not boosters these are some you have not considered and are very much real. Shoe companies have strong ties to various programs and coaches. They need these profiles to continue so as to appeal to the masses of the young ones buying, styling their products. For shoe companies and many others, even at this time, there is more profit to be had to keep recruits flowing to college programs for there are probably more of the younger and as well as older customer paying more attention to CBB that GLeague (at this time). Sales, sales, more sales is their purpose. Agents getting theirs one way or the other. Agents get their cut when it comes to the GLeague, but the agents in CBB there is still the additional $ to get various boosters, local entities, and then then also $ from the League if they can stay attached (more $ more $ more $). To underestimate these other influences again maybe be a lack of knowledge of "CBB" not just what we see on the various networks when rooting and drinking a beer. These billions that comes from advertisements, so even with the GLeague, these payments to the various college teams still got to get funded somehow this just don't magically go away. If you live in close vicinity of these blue blood programs, in the fabric of the landscape, you then get a sense of some of various inducements beyond shoe companies. A lot of entities still feel they have a lot at stake out side of the GLeague operating and in spite of the GLeague. None of these sources can outright pay a player the way the G-League can so to me it seems futile for them to try to compete against them for players... Also, why would a kid consider shady money(think of what happened to Brian Bowen's family) as opposed to the out in the open money that Green & Todd just received? Kansas wanted RJ Hampton badly but none of their "sources" could compete with the NBL in Australia and a Chinese sneaker company, what would make you think any "sources" a school has could compete with the NBA\G-League for the top players? Shoe companies already have contracts with almost all college programs and definitely with all power programs so their products are being well advertised in every game that's played in college. The fight for them is over who the star player will sign with after college. Maybe I am naive about the power of boosters, agents & runners but I still think you're going overboard with these inducements theories...
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Apr 18, 2020 23:28:42 GMT -5
As this is probably only going to be an option for the top 10-20 players in a given class for the time being, the impacts are likely to be the following: Kids who previously had to try to keep an under-the-table payment quiet now don't have to do so and can potentially earn even more money utilizing this path. A top 20 kid like Isaiah Todd is reportedly getting $250K. Throw in not having to go to class. Some will say this is short-sighted, but assuming they do continue to progress under this pathway program and get drafted, this looks like a pretty appealing alternative. What little chance we had for a kid like Cisse is likely now out the door. So now that the shady programs can't "bid" on the top HS recruits, what will they do? They'll likely just bid on the next level of recruits. The NCAA has already proven time and time again that they will look the other way, so there's no reason why these programs will begin to operate differently. I don't think the overall level of play across CBB drops dramatically, but things aren't going to change much for these programs. With the same number of schools chasing a shrinking pool of talent, high 4-star talent is going to become increasingly hard to come by. For a program like us that hasn't landed one of these kids in years, it's going to get that much harder. But will we even notice the difference? Independent of all of this: with an increasing number of transfers due to the relaxing of rules, the competitive programs are going to find it easier to reload year after year. Winning begets winning. Not winning causes you to get ignored. So how much is this all really impacting us? A lot less than it should. And that's not a good thing. Disagree, the difference between a 5 star McDonald's lottery pick and a 4 star is huge. 4 stars have some kind of weakness/question about them whether it be NBA measurables of size and athleticism, skill set, character, grades, attitude, etc. The difference between a 4 star and a 3 star is much less and so it puts everyone on a more equal footing especially when you have a 5 year guy like Terrell Allen vs a one and done 4 star. Even with Coach Cal's army of 5 stars he couldn't make the Final Four every year. It's only going to get harder once his closest is only filled with 4 star freshmen. Agree with you that there is a huge gap between 5 stars and 4, but there is no way this development makes it easier for us to land 4 stars of our own. Really puts the onus on our staff doing a better job developing kids once they get on campus. Haven't seen enough across the board yet to think we can close the gap while recruiting at the level we have been.
|
|
justsaying
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 709
|
Post by justsaying on Apr 19, 2020 15:59:23 GMT -5
These Sources: Shoe Companies, agents a course. These sources Boosters, Local businesses, various affiliates, past players (their businesses and school pride factor) that are not boosters these are some you have not considered and are very much real. Shoe companies have strong ties to various programs and coaches. They need these profiles to continue so as to appeal to the masses of the young ones buying, styling their products. For shoe companies and many others, even at this time, there is more profit to be had to keep recruits flowing to college programs for there are probably more of the younger and as well as older customer paying more attention to CBB that GLeague (at this time). Sales, sales, more sales is their purpose. Agents getting theirs one way or the other. Agents get their cut when it comes to the GLeague, but the agents in CBB there is still the additional $ to get various boosters, local entities, and then then also $ from the League if they can stay attached (more $ more $ more $). To underestimate these other influences again maybe be a lack of knowledge of "CBB" not just what we see on the various networks when rooting and drinking a beer. These billions that comes from advertisements, so even with the GLeague, these payments to the various college teams still got to get funded somehow this just don't magically go away. If you live in close vicinity of these blue blood programs, in the fabric of the landscape, you then get a sense of some of various inducements beyond shoe companies. A lot of entities still feel they have a lot at stake out side of the GLeague operating and in spite of the GLeague. None of these sources can outright pay a player the way the G-League can so to me it seems futile for them to try to compete against them for players... Also, why would a kid consider shady money(think of what happened to Brian Bowen's family) as opposed to the out in the open money that Green & Todd just received? Kansas wanted RJ Hampton badly but none of their "sources" could compete with the NBL in Australia and a Chinese sneaker company, what would make you think any "sources" a school has could compete with the NBA\G-League for the top players? Shoe companies already have contracts with almost all college programs and definitely with all power programs so their products are being well advertised in every game that's played in college. The fight for them is over who the star player will sign with after college. Maybe I am naive about the power of boosters, agents & runners but I still think you're going overboard with these inducements theories... If you believe that so be it, have no problem with that plus that Todd and Green was to my point. Not all recruits each year are going to be at the top of the heap as far as the GLeague is concerned. As the GLeague appeal expand how much to you think let's say that 12th and 13th guy.. etc that maybe try to enter is going to get (at this time)? Throw a figure out there. Also if you believe the Bowen situation was the only situation that was going on that year, or the only one that got messy at that time.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,143
|
Post by SSHoya on Apr 19, 2020 17:36:32 GMT -5
Before his senior season came to a halt, Jalen Green was an elite high school basketball player, one of the top two or three in the country, with the talent to play at any college. Instead, he is charting a new path by preparing for the NBA in an unprecedented manner: He will be paid to play basketball. He will get to remain in the United States while he does so. And he won’t have to bother with the scam of going to college classes in pursuit of a degree that he would have no intention of finishing. College basketball will be better for it. www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/04/19/what-happens-college-basketball-if-best-players-go-pro-it-might-get-better/
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 19, 2020 19:02:38 GMT -5
Before his senior season came to a halt, Jalen Green was an elite high school basketball player, one of the top two or three in the country, with the talent to play at any college. Instead, he is charting a new path by preparing for the NBA in an unprecedented manner: He will be paid to play basketball. He will get to remain in the United States while he does so. And he won’t have to bother with the scam of going to college classes in pursuit of a degree that he would have no intention of finishing. College basketball will be better for it. www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/04/19/what-happens-college-basketball-if-best-players-go-pro-it-might-get-better/And there you have the final word; the Washington Post has spoken.
|
|