Page 20 of 235
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:34 am
by jfish26
(Shelby waves from the back row.)
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:13 pm
by Deleted User 62
jfish26 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:34 am
(Selby waves from the back row.)
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:12 pm
by Lonestarjayhawk
The NBPA is looking at it wrong. They should see that owners are trading rookie scale salaries for older player's established salaries. Better deal for the owners...
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:15 pm
by CrimsonNBlue
I don't know about that. These old veteran guys are taking pennies on the dollar and usually on one year deals.
They're also taking mid level exception contracts. Can't do that with rookies.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:32 pm
by PortlandHawk
So... any movement in the Silvio appeal?
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:58 am
by twocoach
TraditionKU wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:29 am
heard a comment the other day that if whomever had the first pick in the draft each year would just take the best high school prospect, that they’d “miss” only about 30% of the time...at most
2011 Rivals 150:
1) Austin Rivers
2) Anthony Davis
2015:
1) Skal Labissiere
2) Ben Simmons
2006:
1) Greg Oden
2) Kevin Durant
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:11 am
by jfish26
twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:58 am
TraditionKU wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:29 am
heard a comment the other day that if whomever had the first pick in the draft each year would just take the best high school prospect, that they’d “miss” only about 30% of the time...at most
2011 Rivals 150:
1) Austin Rivers
2) Anthony Davis
2015:
1) Skal Labissiere
2) Ben Simmons
2006:
1) Greg Oden
2) Kevin Durant
...so what you're saying is that, in the eighteen drafts from and after 2006, there would have been three misses? 16.67%?
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:27 am
by CrimsonNBlue
That also assumes that the high school recruiting media and NBA scouts are in agreement over who the #1 HS prospect is and is accordingly reflected in their respective rankings. That's certainly not the case.
e.g. Selby and Irving.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:29 am
by twocoach
jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:11 am
twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:58 am
TraditionKU wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:29 am
heard a comment the other day that if whomever had the first pick in the draft each year would just take the best high school prospect, that they’d “miss” only about 30% of the time...at most
2011 Rivals 150:
1) Austin Rivers
2) Anthony Davis
2015:
1) Skal Labissiere
2) Ben Simmons
2006:
1) Greg Oden
2) Kevin Durant
...so what you're saying is that, in the eighteen drafts from and after 2006, there would have been three misses? 16.67%?
No. Those were just the most egregious ones. There are numerous others that would have been a miss based on the fit with the team that picked first.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:46 am
by NDballer13
twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:29 am
jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:11 am
twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:58 am
2011 Rivals 150:
1) Austin Rivers
2) Anthony Davis
2015:
1) Skal Labissiere
2) Ben Simmons
2006:
1) Greg Oden
2) Kevin Durant
...so what you're saying is that, in the eighteen drafts from and after 2006, there would have been three misses? 16.67%?
No. Those were just the most egregious ones. There are numerous others that would have been a miss based on the fit with the team that picked first.
2008 was BJ Mullens ahead of Jrue Holiday and DeRozan. 2010 was Selby. 2012 was Shabazz Muhammed. 2014 was Jahlil Okafor. Michael Porter Jr would have been the #1 pick.
Use those 4 years and your miss goes up to 7/18 for almost 40%.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:34 am
by kubandalum
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:47 am
by Cascadia
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:03 pm
by jfish26
There's one percolating in the state legislature of California as well. Good.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:46 pm
by hartjack8
Judge rules against NCAA in antitrust lawsuit
http://www.espn.com/college-sports/stor ... st-lawsuit
The NCAA is going to mess this up. They can get ahead of this or continue to put there head in the sand.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:03 am
by ousdahl
The mere fact that this is getting the attention of federal lawmakers, and may ultimately take a fucking act of Congress, is an indicator of just how big the problem really is.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2019 12:28 pm
by jfish26
Certainly, the cost (in both dollars and investigative and prosecutorial resources) that has gone into carrying the NCAA’s water is shameful and reason enough to want change.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:13 am
by NDballer13
More coaches indicted today. This time completely unrelated to paying players. Apparently taking brides to label kids as "athletes" so they get lower standards to be accepted.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:28 am
by jfish26
I get the sense this really isn't about basketball, but is about abusing status as a non-revenue-sport athlete to get admission.
(It's here I'd note that basketball (and, most notably, the efforts of generally poor, black kids) presently subsidizes the education of these (generally, rich, white) kids who weren't qualified to get into the schools in the first place).
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:49 pm
by jfish26
Also - it's pretty fucking terrific that the NCAA has enough time to find reason to suspend de Sousa for two seasons, while not even bothering to see if non-revenue-sports kids even play sports.
Re: F the NCAA
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:20 pm
by NewtonHawk11
jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:49 pm
Also - it's pretty fucking terrific that the NCAA has enough time to find reason to suspend de Sousa for two seasons, while
not even bothering to see if non-revenue-sports kids
even play sports.
That’s the most bizarre thing. Like how does someone get admitted as an athlete, but they weren’t even on rosters or anything like that.
So dumb. NCAA is completely deflating more and more each day.