Steve Kerr on age limit for NBA, via Grantland. He thinks it's good business to have a 20 year old age limit. On the one hand, I would argue that it's up to the clubs to make that cost/benefit analysis to themselves; if clubs don't think Anthony Davis isn't ready, they can just pass on him. There are arguably externalities, though. It hurts the whole league a little bit if top pick bomb, not just the club itself. And, if there was anything that really stood out during the lock out, it was that owners and general managers needed rules in place to save themselves.
From a "right to work" legal stand point, I'm curious as to how age limits work. There's an age limit for the US President and other political offices, but no one cries foul about discrimination or anything like that. Kerr points out that this isn't ruining their opportunity to earn income - just look at Brandon Jennings playing abroad. I definitely think the one year rule is a pretty big farce; as has been pointed out, you don't really need to attend your classes to play your freshman year. You'll be put on probation in your second semester, and failing those classes, you'll be suspended, but you're going pro anyways, so it's all moot.
I definitely think there needs to be more information given to these athletes, trying to get them on the right path in the long run, and in life in general, not just the quick money grab. With that being said, the NCAA definitely needs to fix up the image of the "student athlete" it's trying to portray. I don't know about paying student athletes, but I do know that the NCAA needs to make sure athletic departments get their priorities right: the students should come first.
No comments:
Post a Comment