|
Post by BlackOps on Apr 18, 2007 16:31:47 GMT -5
Every year at the end of the NCAA Basketball season, young superstars have to contemplate staying with the school they committed to, or declare for the NBA Draft. Many people criticize the players who go, others give them the benefit of the doubt. A lot of the prominent NBA players came out of high school, still others have yet to show anything. Discuss the new rule in place to prevent players going to the NBA straight from High School. What will the overall effect be? Some kids who might have jumped from high school getting an education or one-stop shoppers? In the NFL, you must wait 3 years after high school to enter the draft. In baseball and hockey, if my memory is correct, you can enter after high school. Try and talk about some pros and cons for each sport.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Apr 18, 2007 19:22:33 GMT -5
I'll talk about hockey, basketball, and football, because it takes so long for prospects in baseball to reach the MLB, it's not even worth it Basketball: It's been stated this year that it is now possible for a student to work and play in the first semester, and then completely skip the second semester and jump into the NBA draft. This is not acceptable. With that being said, college basketball would have never seen Kevin Durant or Greg Oden had this rule not been in place. It's no a secret that going to college is the smart thing to do. No one's life is set, and if an accident happens, these kids need to have a degree to support themselves with. At the same time, their basketball skills are refined in college. Even one year helps. Kevin Durant is going to be better next year then he would have been this year because he has somewhat of an experience playing really competitive ball. Wouldn't Sebastian Telfair be making a real impact by now if he had gone to college for 2-3 years? Just because Lebron James could do it, doesn't mean everyone can. NFL: The NFL has it right. Obviously, you can't have players coming in from high school because the death toll would most certainly go up. At the same time, you can't force someone to stay all four years, and the three years rule is a good one. NHL: The rule in the NHL is age, and I'm not certain about the specifics. But every player serious about the NHL does one of two things. Canadians play in Juniors. That's basically Canada's premier hockey league. Extremely competitive. Guys like Crosby, Gretzky, and Lemieux all played in them. American's play in college, which many say is the best option. In Juniors, players can get traded and some have been traded 3-4 times a season. Where's the education? Since trading can't happen in college, it's a much better atmosphere. Amongst most hockey experts, NCAA Hockey is now the preferred league to play in. Those are my preliminary thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by FootballFreak03 on Apr 24, 2007 15:34:41 GMT -5
I think the NFL rule is fine. 3 out of 4 years is perfect.
In the NBA i am not a fan of it at all. I think its a good idea to force the kids to college, but why only one year? Whats up with that? That is completely pointless to make them only go for one year cause there are some ballers that really badly want to jump after high school, but they cant so they will wait an extra year. Plus it also hurts colleges for scholarships because you don't know whether he will jump after 1 year, so they are not sure about how much money that needs to be paid.
I will argue only those 2 sports because i dont know about the MLB rule the NHL one.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Apr 24, 2007 17:09:20 GMT -5
Then research it. It's part of participating in a debate
|
|