we as bloggers all have opinions as to how sports can be altered to better meet our needs as fans. while we all have differing ideas as to how this can be accomplished, but we generally require lots of scoring (why soccer hasn't taken off), lots of action (why baseball games are tedious to watch in their entirety), and a solid understanding of rules and strategies (why hockey fails to crack the top three in america).
but beyond those aspects of on-the-field rules changes (perhaps the subject of a later posting), there are many "behind the scenes" changes i feel are needed in the current sports environment. these are manipulations of rules regarding issues in sports that do not directly affect the on-field performance, but are still ifluential in how we watch and perceive sports. here are five such changes i believe are necessary:
1) Enact a salary cap in baseball
why its needed: while parity in baseball has been more substantial during the last decade, with teams like the marlins and diamondbacks winning the world series and wild card and smaller market teams succeeding deep into the playoffs, the larger markets and more powerful teams still drastically attract the talent pool. bottom-dwelling teams like the devil rays, royals, rockies, marlins, and pirates act as an extended farm system for the yankees, red sox, cubs, mets, angels, and dodgers. to put this in perspective, last year the yankees' payroll was just under $200 million, compared with the marlins' $14 million. you read that correctly; you could square the marlins' payroll and it would still be less than that of the yanks. each year, it is a case of the smaller market teams bringing up their young talent (acquired through their good draft positions and trades with the larger market teams) and having them individually succeed while the team fails. following this "tryout," one of the more prominent teams offers up more money than the weaker team could ever hope to match, and that player moves out of an area where he is beloved and offers a ray of hope to a fledgling franchise. don't be surprised if carl crawford, alex gordon, hanley ramirez, carlos quentin, and other young studs end up in new york or boston.
how it can happen: just like the nba and nfl, cap the salaries that can be offered to a full roster of players. instead of wild spending sprees each offseason that encourage teams to bid up mediocre players and lavish good ones, have the contract negotiations mean something. have general managers and scouts do their job by identifing bargain and bust players, and operate within the salary cap. there is no need to drastically cut salaries overnight - the cap could start at $180 million and shrink by $10 million a year for 3-5 years. that way, teams like the yankees would need to curtail spending, while owners of the pirates, marlins, and royals could increase theirs with the knowledge that they can't always be outbid.
why it won't happen: the player's union and larger market teams would never agree to this, since it is these groups who have originally inflated player salaries and now reap the benefits. also, smaller market teams gain funds through revenue-sharing and the luxury tax. these teams make more money (as a percentage of total income) than larger market teams since their payroll is so small and their take from revenue sharing is so high. while fans of these teams have long complained about the ownership inactivity, the owners themselves see these teams as business ventures set up to bring in revenue, and under the current system that is precisely what they do.
2) Establish a tournament in college football
why its needed: championships, seedings, careers, legacies, memories, and livelihoods of college student athletes, coaches, and fans are decided by computers and out-of-touch sportswriters. the former of these ranking systems is too objective and the latter too subjective. with so much riding on each game, including the lifelong dreams and livelihoods of so many underprivledged young adults, any discrepancies in rankings and seedings should be played out on a field where the individuals the outcome effects are the only ones who have an affect on the outcome.
how it can happen: immediately following the end of the regular season, begin playing a 16-team tournament with the top 2 teams earning first round byes. there is well over a month (and sometimes close to two) between the end of the season and the bcs bowl games, which is ample time to play through the rounds of the tournament. other non-bcs games are irrelevant the way it is, and can be played during the week between these tournament games. can you imagine watching bcs tournament games friday night and saturday throughout the day, then nfl on sunday for a month and a half straight? the whole tournament would be over by the time the nfl playoffs roll around, and wouldn't take away any viewership or interest from the pro league. the higher-ranked teams would get homefield for each matchup, with the "final four," third place, and championship games being played on neutral sites, which would constitute the 4 existing bcs games we have now, rotating each year for the championship. this way, teams like boise state, who finish the year undefeated, would have a chance (albeit slim) to knock off ohio state and florida, negating any guesswork about who is college football champion.
why it won't happen: there is too much money to be made by schools, administrators, ncaa officials, and bcs system supporters to have them change the current methodology. year after year there exists a split national title, or several schools who stake some claim to the trophy, clouding the awarding of the championship in controversy. likewise, year after year bcs supporters point out the flawlessness of their system (its computer-based and objective, it rewards playing tougher opponents, etc.) while attacking several aspects of an idea such as this (the season would be too long, recruiting would be cut short, there is a risk of injury, the other bowls would be negated, etc.). basically, those with the power have too much invested interest in maintaining the status quo.
3) Allow basketball players to skip college and enter the NBA draft
why its needed: i am a staunch proponent of an 18-year-old age indicating one becoming a consenting adult in all ways, shapes, and forms. if one can be sent to fight and die for a cause determined by one's nationality, then one can also make his or her own decisions within the confines of the law. in the case of basketball, i believe david stern was misguided in his attempt to "save young men from themselves" by instituting the rule requiring players to attend at least one year of college or turn 19 before entering the nba draft. not only does it prohibit young men with a talent from earning money and providing for their family as an adult, it has also damaged the college game as well. while many will point to durant, oden, conley, wright, and others enhancing the college game, there also exist many negatives to this rule. first, these student-athletes are failing classes knowingly because they will be gone the following year, jeopardizing the academic integrity of the school. second, the turnover on teams will be too great, hindering the recruitment process and making it hard for fans to establish affinity for a player. finally, each year many players will be in the national spotlight for many months, taking away from the team concept and being a distraction as they look toward the future.
how it can happen: simply put, david stern must revoke the ruling and allow 18 year old adults to enter the nba draft. if he is concerned about these young men getting misinformed about their future and promised riches and influence they can't acheive, then enact a rule that allows high school players who sign with an agent and go undrafted to re-enter college for another year or have a supplemental draft for the nbadl. if funding and marketing efforts are increased for the dl, then these players can still support families, as well as build a name for themselves. if done correctly, the dl can act as a farm system for the nba, and more prominent and recognizable faces will enter this league for grooming before their time in the nba.
why it won't happen: america has already fallen in love with durant and oden, and many believe that they would not have seen these stars in action before the nba draft if not for this rule. a higher percentage of draft picks will be more recognizable, as there will be more from american colleges, less foreign players, and no high school players. we like to know our stars, and this rule allows us the opporunity to get to know them before they are professionals. the only problem is that this rule violates their rights as americans.
4) Universalize or eliminate the DH
why its needed: in no other professional sports league are two divisions or conferences seperated by an on-field rule such as this. imagine if only the afc counted safeties, or only the nba's western conference allowed dribbling with either hand, or only the nhl's atlantic division enforced power plays. this drastically changes the way the game is played, and as teams go through a season, their mindset, strategy, etc. are completely different than other teams in the same league vying for the same title. its somewhat comforting to know that when the heat play the bulls, they will be playing by the same rules and using the same positions as the clippers do when they play the spurs. in mlb, this isn't the case. when the indians and red sox duel, ortiz and hafner slug it out and then ride the pine while their team fields. however, when the cardinals and cubs play a series, chris carpenter and carlos zambrano have to face each other in alternating roles usually two or three times a game. furthermore, stats and awards are heavily affected by this rule. national league pitchers have an easier role, since they do not face a dh. in addition, mvp awards and hall of fame honors are kept from dhs due to their role (there has not been a full-time dh mvp or hall of fame inductee in the history of the game). i am not a proponent of either side of this coin - both have positive and negative aspects. however, the fact that two leagues have a rule so divisive between them is absurd.
how it can happen: perhaps a trial period can be enacted to test the alternate rule in each league prior to a leaguewide vote. interleague play does not offer a long enough period of time to adequately test this new rule. this way, american league managers can throw pitchers out to bat and use pinch hitters and runners more selectively, while national league teams can move an underacheiving fielder but overacheiving hitter to the dh slot, upgrading two aspects of the team (i.e. dodgers' use of piazza). of course, players like ortiz and hafner would need to learn a position, but i don't think that too many national league pitchers (minus arroyo) would mind taking a break between innings instead of stepping to the plate.
why it won't happen: both leagues are too set in their ways and too many memorable moments have happened on either side of this rule (fisk's waving hr in boston, gibson's walk-off in la, etc.), that either side can defend their position. in addition, too many players make too much money as dhs to ever allow that position to be given up. the al is considered more competitive and exciting because of the dh, and the players' union would certainly never allow the dh to be abolished. on the flipside, the nl embraces the strategic element of pinch hitting and pitchers hitting too much to give up. being that a rule change would require 2/3 of the vote, it will not be happening in the near future.
5) Guarantee NFL contracts
why its needed: the nfl is the only major professional sports league that does not guarantee its players the dollars for which they signed, regardless of length of time with the team, quality of play, etc. many point to this aspect of the league as a positive, as players must keep up their level of play in order to retain the contract they were awarded. however, there are several reasons why this is a misinformed position to take. first, teams backload contracts in order to push players away following their prime and take the least amount of salary cap hit they can. for instance, a player can be signed for 5 years, $25 million. at face value, this looks like a standard $5 million/year salary, which is pretty good. however, it could look like this: year 1 - $2 million, year 2 - $3.5 million, year 3 - $4.5 million, year 4 - $7 million, year 10 - $10 million. the team may have every intention of cutting a player after year 2 or 3, meaning that they only pay about 20-30% of the total contract, even after the player provides almost half the service to the team. second, if a player is injured, there is no team accountability to pay him after the injury. football is a violent sport, marred with career-altering or ending injuries. under the current structure, if a player breaks his leg and is unable to play ever again in the first year of his deal, he is cut and the team takes that money back, without taking a cap hit. third, teams could not spend frivolously and overpay mediocre players. they would be held more accountable to their financial decisions, since cutting or releasing a player would result in the team taking the financial hit for as long as the contract lasted after that. finally, the nfl's treatment of ex-players has long been scrutinized, hindering the livelihood of a cut or injured player following their career.
how it can happen: the nfl and nflpa would simply need to agree on this change to the collective bargaining agreement, and allow players to collect all the money owed to them over the course of the contract. although original contracts would be cheaper, the amount would be guaranteed, thus allowing the players to focus on their performance, instead of remaining healthy. in addition, their financial future would be guaranteed, so making choices with regards to finances would be easier and less controversial. teams would also be willing to listen to this offer, since there would not be so much salary cap manipulation year in and year out.
why it won't happen: although the nflpa would tend to agree with this stance, the owners would not. while the owners would have a bit more simplicity and order in their negotiations, the thought of paying a player long after he has been released or injured is too much for them. they would also be concerned with a performance drop-off with guaranteed money, as well as an inability to sell or move the club with so much already set.
1-agreed.
2-agreed-as long as it's only four or eight teams at the most. That's all you need.
3-no preference.
4-Never could stand the DH. I think it's a joke. And not a very funny one, at that.
5-no preference.
Okay the reason why MLB will not have a salary cap is not because of how much the Yankees or Red Sox spend, it is because there is a 25 man roster that plays 162 games and there is constant movement up and down from the minor leagues. There is no way to solidly regulate it. Although, I agree that it should be regulated, I believe a basement cap would benefit baseball better. Imagine this, the Marlins had a 14 million dollar payroll but how good could they have been if the team had to spend 40 million on salaries?
16 teams are too many. Take the top 8 and that's it. Put the eight teams in the four major bowls, have the winners advance, losers go home.
Keep the NBA out of the high schools. Quit focusing everyone's future on sports and focus it on education. That's one reason we have so many problems with young athletes and having a lot of money. They don't learn anything except that they have a lot of money.
Baseball does need to a better job
A plus one (four teams) would work for me
I think basketball players should be held to the same rules as football (three years removed from grad)
Get rid of DHs. If you can hit, you should be able to put a glove on and play the field.
Have the NFL turn into the NBA? That would be the worst idea for NFL.
I am all for eliminating the DH. Sorry David Ortiz, but from Pee Wee all the way thru college, everyone hits and everyone plays a position.
Contracts do not need to be guaranteed because of the ridiculous signing bonuses. You have these kids coming out of college and getting a 15 million dollar signing bonus before they ever play a game. Earn their pay just like we do at our jobs. My boss doesn't guarantee my salary if I am not working for it. If anything needs to be changed, it needs to be their health coverage for former players.
it seems like everyone is for the college football tournament and against the dh, so i have a bit of a consensus on those topics.
ricko - the changes i proposed which you had no preference on i can appreciate. i like all 5, but i have less of a conviction about those two. thanks for your comment.
edmonspk - i don't know how you can say you want a basketball player to play for three years before they break into the pros like college football. in football, that all works out because athletes need to gain muscle, break into the starting lineup, and learn schemes and how to play the position. in basketball, players need not be so muscular (as they are already tall enough) right away to play, and the game is less complex than football, allowing their bball i.q. to be adequate for the nba right away. imagine if oden or durant HAD to stay for 2 more years when everyone knows their ability.
as far as the nfl like the nba, i think that nba teams need to value their GMs and their decisions and have more accountability. i would hope that the nfl would experience this as well, and that frivolous spending would be curtailed. when teams like the knicks are paying ex-players of theirs tens of millions, it forces teams to be penalized for poor front office decisions. thanks very much for your comments.
pipsy - i disagree with your salary basement instead of salary ceiling idea, because all it would force the lower teams to do would be to pay their players more while the yankees and rox could continue to outbid them. for instance, say the devil rays offer carl crawford $10 million a year, or 1/4 of their total payroll minimum as proposed by you (pretty substantial). without a cap, the yankees could easily spend $30 million a year on him, which is three times what the rays could spend. a cap is needed to ensure parity and promote the league.
i can't offer up much more than i already did in my blog for the 18-year-old rule in the nba. they are adults who can make whatever decision they want, and it is much more advantageous in many cases to earn $8 million a year at age 18 than it is to risk injury and falling draft status in college. plus, i disgaree with your argument that college teaches these young adults fiscal responsibility. most are going for one year to party, play ball, and soak in attention. it is those around them (family, agent, advisors, teammates, coaches, etc.) who have the influence. if anything, stern should lower the age to 18 and put more money into the dl and orientation and advisement programs for rookies.
finally, i see your point about accountability for performance in the nfl. in our jobs, we have to perform in order to be paid. i would agree that more insurance and ex-player help is needed. the nfl and nflpa need to bolster that element immediately. i will also say that not all players get huge bonuses...in fact, most are under $500,000. that is a lot, but if that player is injured that year, he has that to live on until he can go back and get an education. many times, this money will be spent already, and with no way to earn more (and little help from the nfl after the injury), that can be a daunting situation. if that money over the course of the contract was guaranteed, then that player would get the money promised to him in the contract to live on. thanks for your comments though...much appreciated.
Okay then, explain to me how a cap would work? In football it is simple, you have a 53 man roster and that is it. In baseball you have AAA, AA and even A in some cases. When those players come up, how does it impact a cap? I am not saying that I want all the teams to offer ridiculous contracts to players but the cap would be hard to stabilize. The NFL salary cap is based off of their TV contract. Now everyone in this blog world knows that the baseball packages are ridiculous. I live in Nashville and am a Braves fan but did you know that if you order the MLB complete package, you don't get any of the Braves' games unless they are on TBS or Sportsouth? Baseball would never be able to regulate a cap and as long as there are teams that are only spending 15 - 20 million, they are not going to compete.
The 18 year old adult thing. I didn't say that college teaches them responsibility. I said keep them out of the high schools and focus on education. Do you know how many athletes are just given grades so they can play ball? There were athletes at my high school that didn't even go to class but yet could play on Friday nights. I am saying after they get out of high school, then let them make the decision but if you have NBA scouts in the gyms and the next LeBron James couldn't pass a third grade math test, then there is a problem. And don't argue the military aspect of being 18 and going to war. There hasn't been a draft in over 30 years and everyone in the military is there because they chose to be. Why create a developmental league for rookies or orientation. According to your arguement, they are adults and they can make their own decisions. There suppose to be ready right?
I can see where you're coming from with all of these topics. I take a bit of issue with #3. As a person that reaches the age of 18 is legally recognized as an adult...most of them are still lacking the life experience to make decisions with such a great impact. LET'S see how they do living on their own for a year or two in college before turning them loose on the rest of the world with a ton of money and limited common sense. I'M AGAINST you on this one.
DH RULE? I agree, but the only way it's changing is if they bring it to the NL. The AL will not get rid of it because it lengthens the careers of many veteran players. What would David Ortiz do if not for the DH? He can't play a lick of defense.
You may see Guarenteed Contracts in the NFL, but you certainly wouldn't see these outlandish signing bonuses anymore. You'd also see a dramatic DROP in the contracts of linemen, safety's 2nd tier corners and linebackers. This one is most feasible to actually happen as the CBA has already tabled it for their NFLPA agenda.
flying pig - i am for universalizing or eliminating the dh, one or the other. i agree that the al will never get rid of it, because so many of their stars (ortiz, hafner, and even thome, sheffield, etc.) are dhs. i don't like or dislike the dh, so establishing one rule for mlb is my opinion.
great info about the cba and nflpa - i had no idea this was on the table as a discussion. what you said is precisely my point...if contracts were guaranteed, then mediocre players wouldn't get outlandish contracts that both sides know will never come to fruition. i am all for limited bonuses and guraranteed contracts, as i believe you are as well.
i do, however, disagee with you about the 18-year-old argument for college bball and the nba. as i mentioned in another comment, a few years of school doesn't infinitely mature a young adult's psyche. they will go on to college and be just as immature as when they left high school. if they have the talent and stern does a better job protecting them from irresponsible lifestyle choices (through means i have already discussed), then it is unconstitutional to prohibit them from earning a wage commensurate with their ability and worth. if we can allow those young adults to choose our leaders and send them to their deaths, then we should allow them to play basketball.
pipsy - i very much appreciate the debate. thanks for all your comments.
in terms of the mlb salary cap issue, there would have to be significant tweaking to the current structure to enact this. in terms of the a, aa, and aaa players: first of all, their salaries are so insignificant that even if you called up 9 or 10 players during the year, it would only be a couple million more. second, there could be allowances for injuries and promotions/demotions on a per year basis. so, if someone is sent down by a certain point during the year, only have of their remaining salary counts towards the cap.
as far as tv revenues, in addition to mlb packages, many teams have local affiliates (i.e. fsn pittsburgh with the pirates), exclusive rights with networks (i.e. the braves and tbs) or control the networks altogether (i.e. the yankees and yes). these represent the size market of the team and would factor in to the new salary cap.
it is true that new methods would need to be put in place, and that would not be easy. i am also not familiar enough with the system to project specific processes. however, i don't see how teams with smaller markets would compete even with a $40 million dollar basement, when there is no ceiling. i would love to see the pirates or devil rays spend more money on more free agents to enhance parity, but the yankees and sox could still just offer the farm for their services. i am not against a minimum in theory, but a maximum is necessary as well.
Last edited by imstillmatic on April 4th at 12:34 PM.
It is no more unconstitutional than it is for companies requiring employees to be at least 21 to apply. There are plenty of companies across this nation that require minimum age requirement. The NBA is being no different. I'm not arguing that there aren't 18 year old talents that could go directly to the NBA but honestly look at what happened this year in college basketball. Florida returns at least 4 potential NBA players to win back to back championships. They chose to stay when they would have been given millions. Durant and Oden would not have been near the stories that they were if they would have went pro. Look at Morrison and Redick, two best players in college last year and hardly a mention of their names in the NBA. Yes, there are the select few that turn out above average. Garnett, Kobe, Amare and so on but you also have the busts like Kwame Brown.
If Oden or Durant leaves this year, they still won't be equipped to play NBA ball. I think three years transition in college would do the NBA wonders. It would make NBA a little more watchable on a night to night basis instead of just the playoffs. It's just an opinion.
You know imstill, I believe your right. There could be some form of a cap made but I'm not sure what level it would have to involve but I think a ceiling as well as a basement would have to exist. Eliminate the revenue sharing and institute a cap and it may work to even things out.
I agree that local affiliates have a lot to do with the MLB packages but I live in a city with no local ties. We are about equal distance from Atlanta, St. Louis and Cincinnati so I just wish if you pay for it, you should be able to watch it. I think if you and I both were to sit down to work out some form of a cap both top and bottom, we could present a pretty good idea how to impose one. It irritates me to no end to see the salaries like they are. Although we disagree, I think we both take a lot from our discussions. Keep it up man, it intrigues me to read and discuss things like this.
i also vehemently disagree with your idea about the 18-year-old age rule. it is basically boiled down to this fact: at 18, they are considered adults in every other sense of the term, and they offer a skill or service that attracts a particular salary. hence, they should be allowed to work in that field and earn a living, as they are adults.
the fact that there has not been a military draft in decades does not negate the fact that it is still legal and plausible in america. that's like saying "its impossible that a candidate will steal secrets from the opponent during a campaign." it hasn't happened in a while, but it could. empowering an 18-year-old enough to be tried as an adult, vote, be drafted, and be a minor's official guardian means that they should be empowered to work in a field of their choice as well.
as far as your opinion about pro scouts in high school gyms...i am not suggesting that that kind of influence is desired at such a young age. however, if they need to get a better sense of their prospective future employee, then it is necessary. also, i fail to see how greg oden today is any "smarter" and more worldly than greg oden one year ago. he may have passed the sat to get to college, but he has been breezed through ohio state as well, living in a protective bubble of influence. i would argue that he will not need more than "3rd grade math skills" given his career path.
Last edited by imstillmatic on April 4th at 12:48 PM.
edmonspk - i agree with you wholeheartedly. i don't believe i can think of a case when an 18-year-old straight from high school came in and had his best year as a pro. seasoning almost always does a player well, and the positive influences of good college coaches and teammates is immeasureable.
however, i do think that there is a difference between the nfl and nba in terms of talent dropoff you would see allowing younger adults into the league. in addition, i simply find it immoral to not let a consenting, fully capable adult use his craft to support his family, all while staying within the confines of the law.
in short, i agree with you practically, but not fundamentally. thanks for the comment.
pips - thanks for the comment and i agree with you. i never thought about a salary minimum before. i live in southcentral pa, and pirates fans around here are always complaining about the lack of money spent by the owners. the fan base is rabid and widespread, and with some talent on the field and solid, dedicated leadership off of it, the pirates would thrive.
a basement and a ceiling would work well, and i do think something could be arranged in lieu of the current revenue sharing and subsequent taxes. i believe we would still disagree on the range (i would say teams would have to spend between $60 and $100 million, whereas you would probably suggest $50 - $150 million), i do think this is a great idea.
as far as the tv contracts, that's up to mlb to fix on its own. while it impacts the salary cap numbers, the actual administration and distribution is a seperate issue.
i enjoy debating these issues as well, and i appreciate your comments. i'll have to check out your posts sometime.
18 year olds can work in a field of their choice but just like you and I, the requirements have to be met. I worked at a printing company in which you had to be 21 in order to work there because of heavy equipment (at least that was the reason given) and if I wanted to work there, I had to meet the age requirement. Budweiser, requires that their male employees do not have facial hair. In order for me to work there, I would have to shave my facial hair. Companies can require whatever the choose within their rights as a company. The NBA is a private company and they have deemed this requirement in order to play in the NBA. That is not that hard to accommodate.
Let's get away from the political thing because that is going to be an ongoing, around the table discussion. The age 18 legally makes one an adult, that I agree but in today's workforce, if one wants to choose their position in life, they also have to qualify for the requirements. Law firms require degrees, Military requires basic training and the NBA is requiring the player to be 19 or removed from high school for two years. And what if that rule was abolished and high schoolers did make the jump. What about the ones that don't get drafted, now they can't even play college ball (unless they did not sign an agent) but how many 18 year olds are going to go into a draft unrepresented? Once they sign, if they are not drafted, college is no longer an option.
Good reasoning by you on all arguements. Disagree on the 18 year old min age for NBA. Sorry, but these kids have been driving a car for a year and you expect them to handle millions of dollars? Look at all the trouble makers out there and you will see it's because they hire their friends from the old neighborhood to be their bodyguards, agents, hanger-ons and those kids get into trouble.
Disagree with the football tourney, but since I am a Trojan fan and have benefited from the current format, I prolly am a bit biased. I like it the way it is, and was, even when we were really bad, so I guess I am not THAT biased. (hee hee)
Since I am a bona-fide Yankee hater for the sole reason that they can and will buy the best players and pay the luxury tax without a shrug, I totally agree with that.
1. Basketball, no fouls/time outs after two minutes remaining in the final quarter. all your game winning strategy should have been used at the beginning and the rest of the game.
2. Baseball, first team to bean barry bonds hard enough to get rid of him for the rest of the season wins.
3. College sports, no bands, do not need any more stock footage for worthless band movies
4. Football, late hits and unsportsman like conduct should be allowed when opposing team player does some worthless dance or something similar after a worthless play. Same goes for defensive player who get all spun up after making a tackle when his team is down by 21 points.
1. If you are a Yankees or Red Sox fan NO. For the rest of us. A resounding Yes.
2. I'll take a plus 1 theory. Each year there are only 3 or 4 teams deserving of National Title consideration.
3. No. It waters down the league, and makes college hoops a lesser product. Let them live away from home, and become more mature before throwing millions at them.
4. I vote for a DH in both leagues. I don't need to see Roger Clemens at bat. Plus more potential for players getting beaned.
All things that I would probably agree with. But the fact that 18 year olds cannot drink, they are not a consenting adult in all ways, shapes and forms. It's just a minor technicality either way though. Not to mention college basketball is better than the NBA, so it would take away from the game.
1. Not gonna happen. The two highest payrolls in North American sports reside in the AL East.
The players union won't allow it.
This is the same union that won't allow blood tests for HGH, etc. (See Barry Bonds' forehead.)
2. NCAA F'ball 'playoff' is most likely as Plus One.
3. Let the little ballers turn 19 before attempting to enter the NBA. How many are affected by this rule? Use the fingers from one hand.
4. DH...not going away.
The union won't allow it.
Again, this rule keeps one overpaid schlub(argue now) on each team, forcing the average salary higher.
5. Guaranteed contracts! Get real.
Players sign contracts with HUGE up front bonuses.
"Hey, I got 14.5 million up front and was cut after 3 years. Sweet. Who wants to pay me now."
The concept of guaranteed contracts will drive salaries down. "Hey coach, my butt hurts and my doc says I don't have to play. I get my paycheck."
It ain't broken, leave it alone.
6. Now I'll go back and read the other posts.
I'm betting the Yankees/Sawks reference over/under at 5 1/2.
I have sat back and watched COLLEGE athlete after COLLEGE athlete leave school after one or two years because of over-hype, or over-self-worth, or bad information from an agent or a friend. Next thing you know...the guy is on Oprah crying about how he got dissed.
Only a FRACTION of a VERY SMALL percentage of highs school ballers have skills for the NBA. Why dangle a carrot in front of these KIDS faces when the chances of them making it are so freaking slim? Yet on the other hand, they COULD take a college scholarship and actually learn a trade so they are viable pieces of our society. Gimme a FREAKING break with the "unconstitutional" bull #### you are waving. These high school kids are free and clear to go make a living. Just not in the NBA because it's their rules.
I want to be a Rocket Scientist but I don't want to go to school for eight years. It's unconstitutional for NASA not to hire me because I have a right to work where I want to work?
Bottom line is...Agents and "being #### over by potential that never pans out" and lack of disipline and many other factors have forced the NBA to shop in Europe for players. If they try to force another change that opens the floodgates for 18 year olds...You'll only see NBA teams looking to Europe, South America and elsewhere for talent.
If you're truly concerned about these KIDS...tell them to thank god that their basketball talents were good enough to get them into college and then count your blessings for a chance at an education.
One thing we don't need is more 18 year old millionaires who are too UN-Educated to realize their God given talents.
Your assessment that 18 year olds are considered adults in EVERY sense of the word? I can tell you're young if you actually believe that. Hmmmm...Drinking age 21? Auto Insurance Companies? Hell...I think you don't get your first break on auto insurance until you turn 26 years old. Why is that? Could it be because 18 year olds are a bit naive, immature and lack judgement?
I'm not bashing kids. My kids are 21 and 19 and they are pretty mature but they can lack common sense and judgement quite often.
Hi friend,
Nice comments although it's a little long and we've rehashed and read most of these points over and over again. For instance I've finally given in to the fact that baseball won't have a salary cap because of the players union. But while it's still not fair enough small market teams like the Brewers have a better chance with the luxury tax and good spending habits. Sometimes the Yankees spend far too much and don't always reach their ultimate goal. As for college football we'll see when and what they decide for a playoff. I say an eight team playoff with the major bowls and a few other big ones invoved with the big conferences and a few other smaller ones like Boise State last year involved in it. Finally no to the 18 year old rule. Yes they're techinically working men but there's also a reason you can't have a drink until you're 21. I say the same theory for college sports. Two years for basketball and three years for football seem to be the best for development in my opinion. Nice post friend and good opinions. Best wishes.fenfan67
Last edited by fenwayfanatic67 on April 5th at 5:28 AM.
meandovine - thanks for your opinions. i agree that an ncaa tournament would be tough to establish, but i believe the game would be better (and, frankly, watchable) if this change was implemented. i am curious to know why you just responded "no" to the 18-year-old rule in the nba. i believe that to be a simple argument, and if you would elaborate, i would love to hear it.
hoffman - precisely. that's the underlying piece of the argument. the debate should begin and end at that statement.
lisa4usc - thanks for the props. i will say that i disagree with your idea that since 18-year-olds are only one year removed from driving and they hire their friends to be around them in all capacities that they should not be allowed in the nba. those who just got their driver's license are now driving tanks around the middle eastern desert to protect you and i, and they seem fully capable of that. the fact that they just got to drive a car, or just got to smoke tobacco, or cannot yet drink alcohol is irrelevant. their age makes them an adult with the power to earn a living. as for their entourage - you cannot fault them for wanting those who supported them along the way around when they have the means to distribute both responsibilities and wealth. perhaps, as i have stated before, stern needs to do a better job with orientation, advising, or player mentoring programs (i.e. making them mandatory on a monthly or bi-weekly basis) to counteract any negative influence of these friends.
i am curious as to why you like the current system in ncaa football. shouldn't any discrepancies in rankings be handled on the field to prove themselves champions?
i dislike the yankees as well, and the means by which they are successful each year sickens me. its not the players' or owners' fault that they give and accept money. it is the system that is flawed which allows both parties to do so.
nostradomus - appreciate the agreement on 4 of my 5 propositions. i will counter your arguments about the nba age limit rule however. you suggest that these young adults should live away from home before having their millions. i say that they never really live away from home like you and i would have in college. many times family and friends move to the location of the school (jimmy claussen's dad moved his whole family to south bend this year), thus keeping the status quo of the student's life from when he was home. also, boosters, students, coaches, administrators, and faculty keep these athletes within a bubble at the institution. they all know what a precious commodity he is, and they will give advice, grades, money, etc. to keep him safe and happy. this is not experiencing life on your own and does not increase your maturity.
as far as making college a lesser product - that is not the concern of david stern. his sole motive is making the nba product better. he believes he is doing everything he can to protect these 18-year-olds and make the nba safer, more responsible, and raise the level of play. the only problem is that it is not in his jurisdiction to do so, as u.s. law should supercede his power in this case. thanks for your interest...much appreciated.
flaflavor - thanks for your comment. as i mentioned in my last comment, the fact that the college game is "watered down" should be of no concern to stern or the nba and it is not in their power to change the rules to accomodate the ncaa. that's like saying "students who excel in high school should not be allowed to go to college early to further their studies because the sat scores for the high school will decrease as they leave." yes, the school will be hurt statistically, but they cannot hold back someone who has the credentials and ability to succeed.
i would also argue that the fact that 18-year-olds cannot drink is a federal government issue. there is a difference between public and private sector in both cases. having a federal law stating that 18-year-olds are adults, can vote, be tried as adults, and be sent to war supercedes that of an employer. in this country, 18-year-olds are also allowed to work and earn a living in their chosen profession. a situation analagous to your example would be having a federal law allowing 18-year-olds to drink, but then a chain of bars across the country prohibiting it. in any case, i very much enjoyed the comments and thank you.
1-agree, you have to level the playing field somehow.
2-agree, I dont know if it will happen but big ups to the SEC for trying to get it started.
3-agree, Football is the only sport where an atheletes body needs those few extra years to progress to the pros. Not that they all couldnt use it but baseball and hockey have been doing it for years so why beat up on basketball.
4-agree/disagree, not one or the other, just get rid of it all together. This is what allows old guys who cant play the field anymore to pad their retirement stats for the Hall!
5-agree, but at the same time lets do away with renegotiating contracts. Also all sports should have a rookie maximum salary regardless of where they were drafted. Lets say a set contract of $3 mil over 3 years as a max. Then we dont have to watch all of these big dollars being thrown to kids who havent proven themselves on the pro level. It would also guarantee that you wouldnt get that initial "I just got paid, time to relax" let down we see from so many atheletes. Ok, maybe it happens 3 years later but at least we know he is capable of being worth what he will be getting paid 3 years later because he willl have earned it.
fenfan - thanks for the comment. the point of this post wasn't to say that these five things will happen (because most won't or can't), but rather they are needed to improve watchability, fairness, and maintain principles in major sports. in fact, i include the "why it won't happen" caveat for each proposal.
i agree that the al east owners will veto any salary cap, and that the player's union will not allow a cap put on spending. but i do think it would improve the game. regardless of the brewers' chances this year or the recent yankees futility. the system in place is imbalanced, unfair, and hurts the sport.
i agree with you about the ncaa football tourney. again, its not if it will happen, just that it should in order to justifiably name a champion.
as i stated above, there is a difference between federal statutes (such as the one prohibiting drinking for 18-year-olds) and private sector rules. the same government which has a drinking age limit allows 18-year-olds to die for their interests...however, it also allows 18-year-olds to work and have a career once they turn 18 and are considered an adult. i do agree that seasoning for a couple years would help the college and pro game, but at the expense of their rights as u.s. citizens. thanks again.
Okay, I am tired of reading this horseshit of how 18 year olds are old enough to be sent to die in war but cannot pursue their job of choice like the NBA. First of all, every 18 year old who enlists into the military is trained to do their job. Their first duty as a soldier is to defend this country so get off the war ####. I don't agree with everything that is going on but again, every soldier, officer and recruit VOLUNTARILY enlisted in the military. 18 is not a magic number for all things being an adult. Yes the drinking age limit is 21, yes insurance usually doesn't give a break until 25. Who cares? What we are discussing on this blog is the right for 18 year olds to be able to go to the NBA. As NBA Commissioner, David Stern had every right to set whatever precedent he deems necessary for players to come into the NBA. Again, my argument is plain and simple, Doctors, Lawyers, Astronauts, Pilots or whatever have to be trained, educated, tested and so forth to perform their jobs. Just because it is a dream for an 18 year old to play in the NBA doesn't mean he fits the qualifications. The most intelligent 18 year olds that want to become doctors can't walk into a hospital and perform surgery because that is their dream, they have to meet the criteria.
slshusker - i agree about the lack of support for a baseball salary cap. however, wouldn't the game be so much better off for it, and possibly even combined with a salary basement, as proposed by pipsy?
glad you agree in principle about the dh and ncaa football tourney.
as far as letting "the little ballers turn 19," you claim that the number could be counted on one hand as far as how many were affected by this rule. this year alone, oden, durant, wright, lawson, conley, and others proved that they are ready on many levels for the nba. each year, there are 4-10 mcdonald's all-americans who, given their ability, could jump to the nba and finally bring their families out of poverty. the fact that stern prohibits that is appauling, no matter if only one player is affected.
i agree that guaranteed contracts are a long shot, although they are on the negotiating table between the nflpa and owners. my theory is that with guaranteed contracts, the huge signing bonuses would go away, and there would be a decrease in spending. teams and players would both be more accountable, as frivolous spending would be curtailed. it would add stability to the league and i do not believe players would sit out with injuries significantly more than they do now. thanks again.
Just so you know, you don't have to be 18 to work and if you really want to argue about being an adult, then why do we get driver's licenses at the age of 16. You can't vote but you have to abide by the laws set forth on the road. When a female begins ovulating, her body is able to reproduce but that doesn't mean she has to get pregnant.
The NBA is a PRIVATE company, not a public or government one like the military, so they can regulate whatever standards or requirements they deem necessary to qualify to play in the NBA. Now, if they said that EVERY NBA player has to play two years in college, that would be a different scenario because not all players can even get accepted into college. That is when there would be more of an argument.
The only way that Oden, Durant, Conley or any other player proved that they were ready was because they played on the collegiate scene. Let's say the rule wasn't into affect in the NBA, how many of the Odens, Durants or Conleys would you have heard of. Zero! Half of America wouldn't even know who they were. College in fact benefited these athletes because now they have displayed the ta
