🏀 KuBuckets Archive

Carlton Bragg is the perfect recruit. How does it get better than this? 6'9", 220 lbs. No hint of OAD stench. This guy is ranked in the top 20. He has "tenacity" and has all the markings of the perfect Bill Self-type player. Self always play inside out loves toughness. Bragg is one inch taller and 10 pounds heavier as a recruit than perhaps the best post player in the Self era, Thomas Robinson, was as a H.S. senior. Most of all, as a highly ranked player, he needs KU and the development Self has to offer to play in the NBA. Bragg needs a coach like Self. His profile (below) begs to be coach by Bill Self. This is recruiting perfection.

Not only is Bragg recruiting perfection, this is a player of great need. We will go into next season with three post players who are not top talents, and will likely lose Alexander to the draft. A solid, highly skilled post player to provide perhaps three years of stability in the post is just what the doctor ordered. This type of stability makes life in the OAD world palatable -- and more workable. It provides cover for misses. It provides a foundation of talent.

If Self has a top priority, it has to be Bragg. Memo to coach Self -- don't let Bragg get out of town without a commitment. If we bag Bragg, everything else is icing on the cake.

Here's Bragg's ESPN profile -

Strengths:

Bragg is an ultra-athletic specimen who can impact the game in a variety of ways. He attacks the offensive glass, finishes in transition, and is an explosive around the rim. He has a lengthy frame with long arms and he has great feet. He plays with tenacity at both ends and his hands are terrific. Bragg has extended his range out to the arc. He runs the floor on the break where he spots up waiting for the advance or kick out pass.

Weaknesses:

Bragg is coming on strong and has improved from a season ago, but his skill set is still a bit raw. He needs to improve his ability to score with his left hand and continue to add to his face-up game. Utilizing the triple threat game (jab step, up fake, etc.) while facing up his defender will enhance his overall game. Bragg will need to play with more energy and urgency and compete throughout the game which will lead to increased production.

Bottom Line:

Once his offensive game matures, he has all the physical intangibles to be an elite high-major and has the potential to play after college. Bragg has to improve his motor but all all the other tools to be a special player with continued skill develop. He has the motor, bounce, and length to be a McDonald's All-American-he's that talented.

@HighEliteMajor I like it, sign him!

He's pretty smooth HEM. Ok count me in.

[link text](

@HighEliteMajor

If Bragg = TRobb, then Bragg will play only minor minutes next year. Can we flourish with our other three bigs, while Bragg takes a year to develop?

@jaybate-1.0 no, well after watching video, he's further along than TRob. He has a nice jumper too.

@DoubleDD Wow nice jumper! Nice ball handling in the open court with that spin move. Seems like he has good court vision and IQ. He did shy away from contact on a couple drives. Seems a little more of a finesse player than T-Rob, but I don't remember much from T-Rob when he was in HS. Count me in too. Would love to see him play along side a footer. I'm not sure if the ship has sailed with Zimmerman or not. I hope Zimmerman would be a 2AD. If not, pass.

@DoubleDD Oh, he may have to lose the headband? :)

@Crimsonorblue22 Bingo.Bragg is more Darrell Arthur. Diallo is more like TRob minus the bulk: high energy, supreme athlete, but very very raw. I think the ESPN blurb is a little misleading. Bragg's back to the basket game is definitely a work in progress, but he's hardly raw. He can put the ball on the floor, face up, and finish going right. He doesn't have a great drop step or any of the Embiid/Dream-shake moves, but shooting form, rebounding, passing, and solid fundamentals are all things he has today. He also has a much better feel for the game than TRob did out of HS.

@konkeyDong

Spot on. Some of the ESPN descriptions can be dated and do not reflect recent progress.

Love at first sight for me. I haven't had a crush like this since the days of Pamela Sue Anderson on Baywatch.

I think by the time his senior year is over, Bragg will be a top 10 recruit. Look at that speed, athleticism and fluidity in the open floor. Look at his jumper and ballhandling. Kid can play.

It looks like his game is pretty developed. He can shoot. Could he end up being a OAD, after all?

Great comparison to Arthur .. Bragg is more highly skilled at this stage than TRob. But more physical, it appears, than Arthur. More "ready now" than TRob, to answer @jaybate's question.

Could Bragg be a starter from day one? Sure, but that depends on the competition. Arthur didn't start, but was clearly the first big off the bench. TRob didn't start. But in TRob's case, he was the definition of raw, needed to slow down a bit,. Could he have started? Of course. It would have been a major roller coaster ride.

Really, and we know this, each player is unique. There are comparisons, but Bragg is Bragg. Bragg could start -- but that will be competition related.

Suppose we land Bragg and Zimmerman? It's most likely that Zimmerman would start with Ellis, with Bragg off the bench. But who will be Bragg's competition? Traylor. A senior. Playing time is competition related. See TRob .. in another season, TRob might have started as a freshman, even with his "rawness", so speak. But a guy like TRob doesn't start as a freshman, limited p.t., and he's a top 10 NBA pick following a dominant junior season. Great selling point.

@Hawk8086 The only way Bragg is an OAD is if he definitively plays himself into that spot -- and that would mean a heck of a year for KU. Even with that, seems remote that he vaults into a top 10 spot, which would be the compelling case to go pro. But the presumed OAD line is a blurred one, for sure.

@HighEliteMajor maybe they will change the rule by then?

@HighEliteMajor Great thread HEM & welcome back to the table. Have also wondered about several other rats who have been absent from buckets for awhile-icthehawk, jdoc, etc. Thanks, we've drastically needed high quality some food for thought since we're all drooling for the season to begin. Is a cryin shame we can't get Alohahawk & Oakville over here to spiff up the joint a little more. Some of these guys are much better at analysis than many of us will ever be.

Landing Bragg could be a great coup for Self, but with the OAD mindset he seems to be in now, it's highly possible for a kid to go backwards in "seniority" yearly as the next big thing comes along. So many kids want to play from day one so the 2-3 year guys now have to take that into consideration. A couple of my apprehensions as we speak are that we can still loose a Greene or Frankamp to transfer as this process is currently ongoing & seemingly will not soon end.. I hated like hell to loose AWIII & always thought he was the perfect Self guy-hard worker, kept up academically, never a whisper of discontent. Great all around athlete & good soldier for the years of attrition it takes for, let's say a Releford type guy, to earn his minutes & ultimately get his due. Lucas is another guy I truly believe could have been, & still can be an extremely tough & valuable Self type guy. If we had not landed one year Black last summer, where do you think Landon could be now? My point I guess, is that when guys can just come in off the street & take up major minutes, it certainly has to be in a potential recruit's thought process that the added potential to get bumped down in the pecking order at any flippin time is there, especially at a place like Kansas.

@globaljaybird Well, you have hit on one of the big negatives when going "all in" on OADs. How could a potential recruit not be concerned about getting recruited over at Kansas?

Jesse Newell had mentioned in the late spring that there were CF transfer rumors. His fate will be sealed this season, one way or another. And you cite Lucas and losing seniority. In this day, I can't imagine why a guy like Lucas would gamble his future at an elite program like Kansas. My statement sounds pretty stupid without context. But simply gaining playing time, based on our menu of recruits each season, seems like an uphill battle.

But going back to AWIII. As much as we all would have loved the guy to succeed, I do trust Self's assessment of his talent and fit. Clearly, Self would rather have Greene and Oubre.

This game is all about opportunity. What would AWIII have done last season if Wiggins wasn't signed? White started off last season very solidly, and looked ready to grab big minutes. His off season was reportedly tremendous. But Self has to make hard choices, and his talent assessment favored Greene and Oubre over AWIII.

Those hard choices is why this season, and the battles that lie ahead, are so compelling. The hard choices will shape next season, as well:

1. Who is our starting PG, who's next, and who sits (and thus is a transfer possibility?

2. Who wins the 3 spot, Oubre or Greene? And if Greene is second fiddle, does he get his nose twisted out of joint and thus consider transferring? This could leave us without Oubre (perhaps turning pro) and Greene next season.

3. Who wins the battle between Mickelson and Lucas for relevance? And who is banished to 5th big guy oblivion? The 5th guy may never see substantial P.T. in his career here.

4. And does Svi -- this season's x-factor -- get any meaningful role? If he does, more roster carnage is sure to follow.

Watched some of the Royals win today. Chiefs are in the lead. KU football won. But KU hoops rules all!

HEM, I like your synopsis on Bragg. I think the Shady Arthur comparison is likely closest, we shall see. I hate to put all my hopes on 1 18yr old kid by thinking our chances are "bust" without him (but I know you are simply figuratively speaking to make your point, which I agree with). I recall we had 1 Wiggins + 1 Embiid, and just sufferred the most lackluster season in Self's 10 years.

Like you, I firmly believe in the 10ish-50ish ranked guys, without the team chemistry disruption, and TEAM development interruption that defines the "top 10/OAD" merri-go-round.

Put it another way, Calipari has got to be ecstatic to get 3 or 4 guys back (near-OAD level) that have Final4 experience. Look what returning experienced high-level talent did for Calipari in the 2012 Championship season of theirs. The same season Self was caught a bit flat-footed in the talented-depth dept. Not that Selby cares, but I wonder if the light-bulb on "not NBA ready" has ever went on in his head yet...? (could have used a healthy, cocky Selby in Yr2, but its just my KU-selfish thought there...)

I think Self just doesnt ever want to get caught flat-footed. The concern is how will his 'product' be if he dumbs it down too much for the inexperienced newbies trying to execute it? (hint: see 2013-14 season, worst team Self has put out on the floor).

Bill Self has put out several coaching videos (over 400min of in-depth breakdown of his system), which detail "breaking any zone D", "team and on-ball D", "high-low offense", "complex motion offense with multiple options on every possession", etc...Notice how this last team, with the highest talent potential, had the least experience in executing, as well as a couple of key starters being SOFT. Thus you get the embarrassing results against zoneD's, pressingDs, and trouble executing in the half court sets...the dumbed-down version of the half court sets, that is.

Dont want a Kentucky-style OAD factory, because it wont work with Bill Self's system, and a watered-down Self-system is NOT an acceptable basketball product (as we saw last season). I didnt like letting Jay Wright's smallball Nova embarrass us, just like I didnt like giving a West-Coast upstart (SDSU) a win against us in AFH. Bill Self sure didnt make us the winningest program for 6yrs straight with performances and products like the '13-14 Hawks.

To cement my point: consider if Wiggins and Embiid both came back for another year, now experienced...how good would Self's product be. His is NOT an OAD friendly system. Efficient execution on both ends of the floor, and tough physicality...simply favors the multi-year player.

Self's been devastating opponents since his Tulsa days with his system, so I hope he doesnt fall for Calipari's sales job. Notice how KU is trying to build posh dorms for the players, like KY. Everybody needs to remember KY can only get 3-5 OAD's/yr. That's all they have room for, without causing mpg strife. Unless Cal is able to slick-talk a top 20 kid into riding pine for a year, so that he too can have that magical power of experience+talent (like he's about to have this year.) At least KU has that going for it this year, as a lot of talent returns, now experienced.

Bill Self needs to stay Bill Self. Quick yanks and all. (Although whoever is operating under the "RushRules of mpg" will not suffer the quick yank nearly as often).

@ralster

You explained much better than I did why Coach Self's system does not work well with OADs and is better suited for teams with more experience. The system could work with only one OAD per season but more than that and then it starts to weaken. Hopefully KU restricts itself to one OAD per season, although from the coach's perspective I can see where it would be very difficult to pass on elite players, even when they will stay only one year.

When sports evolve so should coaches. Coach Cal has dominated recruiting and has been to 3 of the last 4 final fours doing so. Embrace the OAD era or become out dated. Its like your old lap top, it still gets the job done but there are computers that are so much better. HCBS is smart enough to see how coach Cal is getting it done over at UK and will make coaching changes or system changes to WIN championships. Bragg wont sign with KU because he and his parents know he will be recruited over if he stays longer than one year. I would imagine the rest of our roster is getting anxious knowing that most of the top 25-100 guys have signed with a school but the top 25 are all waiting to see what the others are going to do. Most of these top 25 guys walk in to KU and start over the guys that have waited their turn. KU will land a few of these guys and pretty much anyone we sign will start. HCBS system is evolving so he can WIN point blank. The old way of doing things aren't enough to get the job done any more. If you think that coach Cal isn't going to the final four this year then you are delusional. So weather his system of coaching works with OAD's or not he has to evolve or we play second fiddle to UK for a long time.

@JayHawkFanToo The "plug in" OAD ... where there is an obvious hole and talent is not sufficient to cover that spot. That would be optimal. But really what we're talking about -- and @ralster hit the nail on the head, is that coach Self's system thrives on experience. All systems thrive on talent. But Self's systems, and coach Self personally, seem best suited for a touch of experience. That experience being something other than a freshman, really. That first year is just rough under Self.

The plug in OAD may work in the post heading into next season, but he needs to be ready to play. Zimmerman seems a reasonable choice, paired with Bragg. Add those two to Ellis, with our other post depth, and we won't be worried inside. I still think Zimmerman may not be an OAD -- OAD fringe, maybe. Don't know for sure.

Now, this is where I normally go into an anti-OAD rant, and how you could win a title without them (like all but two title teams have), but I won't.

@HighEliteMajor

"Carlton Bragg is the perfect recruit."

Better... he's the perfect "Self recruit!"

@ralster

I agree with your ideas to a point. I agree that Self has a lot of in depth things that he runs and that those things require practice. However, I disagree that last year's team was Self's worst - I would argue that the team from the Rush-Chalmers-Wright freshman season was worse.

The other thing to remember about last year is that the two things that hurt us most were Embiid's injury and a lack of elite (or even above average) talent at PG. If Embiid is healthy, I think we get by Stanford and probably beat Dayton. The Florida rematch is a toss up, but a healthy Embiid probably sends us to the Elite Eight. Heck, a healthy Selden may have been enough to get to the Elite Eight. But with neither Embiid (at all) or Selden (operating at what, maybe 75%), KU was reduced in overall talent level to a point where Stanford was pretty close to as good as us. Selden at 75% isn't an NBA caliber talent. Tharpe isn't an NBA type talent. Neither is Ellis most likely, although he is a very good college player. No Embiid at all. Traylor is a good college energy guy, but its not like those guys aren't available to every other school in the country. Frankamp and Mason don't set us apart from a talent perspective. Injuries reduced us to a Stanford type level.

Every system works better with experienced players because college practice restrictions mean that most times, unless the core has been together for a full offseason, the level of reps is not very high. But talent cannot be substituted for with experience. A guy like Landen Lucas is nice, but he can't replace a talent like Alexander. Andrew White is nice, but trust me, you would rather have Ben McLemore, Andrew Wiggins and Kelly Oubre for one year each.

@justanotherfan I hope HCBS is selling the fact that we get unlimited practice time next summer for the university games and recruits 3 OAD's to represent the US and to get a jump start on the season. I hope he is out there selling KU and the USA telling them that if they choose KU they WOULD win a NCAA championship with 3 OAD's and a deep talented bench!

@Statmachine Coach Squid changed the entire structure of college basketball. Last year's recruiting class solidified our place at the OAD table. It literally came out of no where. One minute, we couldn't get a top prospect to save our lives- the next thing we know, we have them in bushels. We have two top 10 players coming in to replace our 2 Top 3 picks in the NBA draft. That's some tall cotton we're walkin' in. We should get our share of the 2015 elites as well.

We aren't going to be able to put the genie back in the bottle. I know some folks disagree, but I think Coach's seminal moment came in that title game against Kensucky. He saw KU's most experienced team get whipped by a team that that was more talented. Hey, we had the ALL-American down low, we also had the best rim protector since Wilt, we had a fast as lightening point guard, and the best defender on the team at the 3. We were simply one of the best defensive teams in the country, and we were dominated. I;ll never forget Tyshawn getting his stuff smacked back in his face on every drive to the basket he made. We started 3 5th year seniors...seniors in their 5th year, and we couldn't give them a game. That's about the time period when Coach was interviewed, and said he'd rather have talent than experience.

@KUSTEVE

The thing with the OAD era is that if you consistently have that talent, as Calipari has shown, you will always have a seat at the table when it comes down to it. As I wrote a while back, since 2006, Calipari has only missed the Elite Eight in 2009 and 2013. Other than the UCLA streak of championships under Wooden and Coach K in the late 80's and early 90's, I don't think there has been such a long string of consistency as far as postseason success by a coach, and if so, I can't point to one in the last 15 years.

The simple reason why Calipari is there that much is that he fields one of the six or seven most talented teams every year. If his team is healthy come March, you can basically write him into the Sweet Sixteen or Elite Eight. I think Coach Self saw that and has decided that he wants the same thing. If healthy, I think we had a Sweet Sixteen/Elite Eight squad last year and I think we have the same this year, maybe more.

A lineup of non-elite recruits - something along the lines of Mason-Greene-White-Ellis-Lucas - isn't a lineup that you look at and say is an Elite Eight lineup, even though that's a more traditional college lineup of a two sophomores and three third year players. But a lineup of Graham-Selden-Oubre-Ellis-Alexander could absolutely be a title team. The experience (assuming those guys all played between 10-15 minutes during their previous years in the program) can't make up the talent gap when comparing the Selden-Oubre-Alexander trio to Greene-White-Lucas.

@justanotherfan Agreed, except for Greene. Of all the players on our team, the most interesting to me (beyond the new guys) is Greene. I am transfixed with his skill set. I am mesmerized by the scowling look, and the Rebel without a Cause media interviews. This guy is pure 100% competitor. I don't think we're talking huge dropoff with either Selden or Oubre on any level with Greene.

@justanotherfan So why is it, then, that in the OAD era only two title teams have had even one OAD (Syracuse '03; UK '12)?

It is a huge mistake to think that OADs are the answer. For the right coach, and the right system, they can be "a" path. But they are not "the" path.

The KU lineup of Mason, Greene, White, Ellis, and Lucas -- I think the only one we need to trade out is Lucas. And with Self's recruiting, we should have a top 60 guy there. Add that in. Say a Withey. Actually, let's use an old go-to name ... a Karviar Shepherd-type player..

That is definitely a national title contender.

And I would take that lineup, with *experience", over a grouping of OAD talent any day of the week. But you also added in Selden and Graham to your preferred lineup. Neither are/were presumed OADs. You would rather have Oubre and Alexander as freshman, over top 60ish guys as juniors, for example?

And I would actually say that the OAD deal doesn't get you a seat at the table. See Kentucky in 2013. They played in the NIT. So while there are peaks, there are big valleys (that isn't all bad, but it refutes the premise).

Relying on OADs is fools gold. It's headlines. It's style over substance. It ignores that freshmen, by and large, need to develop.

@KUSTEVE Some times no matter how much you practice talent out does you. Lucky for Lucas, Mickelson, and Traylor they all should have enough credits to graduate and potentially be free agents next year if we sign 3 bigs and they are not feeling good about their role as quality substitutes.

@HighEliteMajor

Very nicely done HEM. I guess the one area we agree is that the OAD route is not a long term answer and a less talented but more experienced team would have the edge.

Having said that, and with the prospect of the NBA changing the eligibility rules so players stay in College for two years, then Coach Self's system becomes effective again.

@HighEliteMajor when UK played in the NIT they had about the same record as our team last year and they didn't win there conference. If Nole was healthy experts that year said they would have been in the field of 64. So HEM are you saying that UK has just been lucky the last 3 out of 4 years? How lucky will they be this year with all the talent on their roster? Are you also saying that HCBS is not capable of corralling and getting a team of OAD's to gel? I think you are going to be pleasantly surprised and you will come to embrace the OAD culture after a few titles...

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/kentucky-basketball-another-toppled-god-150630484.html ↗

Speaking of UK players.

@Statmachine Ooooh ... I like questions.

I admit that there are holes in my argument on OADs. It isn't clear cut. There is gray area. I admit that I point to examples that may (or may not) prove my point, but they appear to prove my point.

One "truth" we can agree upon -- talent is extremely important. Agreed. Freshman, sophomore, or Julio Franco hitting doubles off the wall at age 45. Talent is talent.

But in a team game, there are many more moving parts.

I do agree that overwhelming talent is hard to argue with.

In my many OAD discussions, I've relied upon one important factor -- coach Self. I do not believe that his strength is mixing together an OAD pie. He is a system coach. Calipari is not.

Calipari obviously works well in the OAD environment. For the technical coaching aspects that some say he is lacking (which I don't buy), he makes up for in the ability to manage high talent, and large egos. His coaching is about the players. Last season was masterful.

But coach Self is about the system. Learning the system. working within the system. Restricting players within the system. Heck, an NBA scout prior to draft cited that Wiggins was held back by Self's system. It's a common belief. Plus, coach Self is famous for his impatience with freshman errors. His mindset favors comfort, and experience.

1. UK has not been lucky three of the last four seasons. They have been very good, and very well coached.

2. I don't know how good they will be this season. But I assume Cal will have them playing well come March.

3. Yes and no. Coach Self is capable of corralling OADs, but not in his current mindset. I think he would have a very tough time. Look at last season. Two of the top three picks, and we have our worst season in quite some time. How do you beat that talent? Couldn't play defense.

4. If we get a "few titles" (I assume you mean real titles .. the NCAA kind), yes, I will embrace the OAD culture. Heck, one would suit me fine.

@KUSTEVE

You wrote...

but I think Coach's seminal moment came in that title game against Kensucky. He saw KU's most experienced team get whipped by a team that that was more talented. Hey, we had the ALL-American down low, we also had the best rim protector since Wilt, we had a fast as lightening point guard, and the best defender on the team at the 3. We were simply one of the best defensive teams in the country, and we were dominated. ll never forget Tyshawn getting his stuff smacked back in his face on every drive to the basket he made. We started 3 5th year seniors...seniors in their 5th year, and we couldn't give them a game.

I don't believe that KU got "whipped" by or that we were "dominated" by Kentucky in that game. KU was within 5 point with 1:38 left in the game and if not for a couple of easy missed shot, this game could have gone the other way. Unfortunately KU dug itself a deep hole in the first half that could not overcome. Do you realize that KU outscored Kentucky by 6 points in the second half? How is that for giving them a game? If not for Doron Lamb (a sophomore by the way) going nuts, this game ends up differently. Not bad for a bunch of lower ranked recruits playing against top ranked and experienced players of which the top 3 performers at the game Lamb, Miller and Jones ***WERE NOT *** freshmen, Miller was actually a senior...so experience does count.

Also, I don't know where you get your information but KU did not have "3 5th year seniors...senior in their 5th year; " Withey, Releford and Young were all Juniors. and played another season for KU. You are probably thinking of the 2012-2013 season.

As far as the All-American, he clearly outplayed the Unibrow and had better stats in every category except blocks, which were Withey's job on that team.

Anthony Davis: 1-10, 6 points, 16 rebounds, 6 blocks.

Thomas Robinson: 6-17, 18 points, 17 rebounds, 0 rebounds.

Remember that prior to the draft he used to wear a t-shit that said look at the numbers/stats, or something along those lines; a clear reference to the title game. Granted that Robinson missed a couple of dunks late, but overall he performed very well.

@HighEliteMajor

I added Selden because if he had been healthy last year, I absolutely think he could have been an OAD. He returned because of health issues limiting his production. I added Graham because KU hasn't had an elite PG recruit since Sherron Collins. I wish we had a better PG, honestly. But we don't. We have complained about PG woes for the last few years. If you are banking on experience, you're basically betting that a guy will get better at basketball than he is right now, because he isn't good enough right now. But what if he doesn't get better? If you're betting on talent, you're betting that a guy will be good at basketball now, without hoping that he will get better later on. The talented guy will make inexperienced mistakes, but also make talented plays. The experienced guy won't make as many mistakes, but there are some plays that he just won't be able to make.

UK has proven that you can be good year in and year out with OAD's. They went to the Elite Eight with Wall, Cousins, Bledsoe, went to the Final Four the next year with Brandon Knight (probably would have been the favorite to win it all had they had an eligible Enes Kanter), won it all with Davis, Kidd-Gilchrist, etc., missed the dance with an injured Noel and Co., then went to the title game with Randle, Young and the twins. They are in the hunt just about every year. Not just projected to be. Actually there.

The thing with experience is you get maybe one shot every three or four years. With talent, you can be there just about every year. Why did UK beat a very experienced KU team in the 2012 final? They had more talent. They were just better at basketball. Had we had McLemore to go to, we could have played with them because we could have evened out the talent. But the simple fact was that regardless of experience, when you have Anthony Davis and Michael Kidd-Gilchrist at the college level, you have a defensive behemoth that almost nobody can touch. No amount of execution can eliminate Davis' shot blocking.

I would not take the lineup with White and Shepherd over Oubre and Alexander. Oubre and Alexander are better at basketball than White and Shepherd. As I've said before, to win a title, you have to get some breaks along the way. Every title team gets those. But more than that, you have to be in the conversation. Oubre and Alexander give us a chance to be in the conversation this year. White and Shepherd would not. You can hate UK all day long, but if they are healthy, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see them playing deep into March again this year.

@justanotherfan You say Oubre and Alexander are "better at basketball" than are White and Shepherd. Are you sure of that? I'm with you, though. I assume so.

But are Oubre and Alexander better as freshmen, than White as a junior and Shepherd as a sophomore? That is more relevant.

Even more relevant .. are Oubre and Alexander better as freshmen in Self's system than White as a junior and Shepherd as a sophomore would be (assuming both played prior seasons under Self)?

I don't know the answer for sure. Embiid was damn good as a freshman. So was Wiggins.

Try this --

I would trade Alexander right now for Karviar Shepherd. Straight up ... IF .. IF .. he had played for Self last season as a freshman. Would you? Would you rather gamble on a highly talented guy that has a year under his belt in Self's system, over an unknown quantity? Instead of Shepherd, think Marcus or Markieff as sophomores.

That said, I would trade Oubre right now for Andrew White -- for this season only. That's a closer call in my mind. But I'd do it right now. Is Oubre more talented? Sure. But with OADs, it's a one shot deal. (of course, Oubre might not be an OAD. The sophomore season could be incredible). Oubre could close any gap if stayed another year. But this is a one year, OAD deal. If I had to bank my March on one of these guys, I'd go White. Again, much closer call for me than the Shepherd/Alexander deal.

But you do make a compelling argument. There are some topics I feel "for sure" about .. this ain't one of them.

@HighEliteMajor

Under the conditions you outlined, I too would take Shepherd for Alexander. However, I would not take White over Oubre. We talk a lot about White and his potential...but so far it has been only potential and the reality is that he could not make the starting team or get playing time last season, and,with one year of experience under his belt, chances are he he would still not have made the starting five over Oubre. This would seem to indicate that there are limitations to his game that we do not know but the coaching staff is aware and hence his transfer to a different program..

@JayHawkFanToo So you would take Shepherd as a sophomore who would probably average Ellis's sophomore season numbers best case scenario over 16 points 10boards from the #1 PF in the 2014 class? IF and its still an IF, Big Cliff goes #1 or even top 3 in next years draft he brings more publicity to KU than Shepherd. Added bonus either way you look at it.

@JayHawkFanToo We were never in that game. Ever. Not when we were 5 points away, not when we were tied. We never took the lead - we never took control. Now, we were so good defensively, we stopped them winning by 20, but we were never in the game. I apologize for my recollection of our experience. I did get the two years mixed up..lol. Still, we were way ahead in the experience category. Maybe my mind is searching for a lofting point of when our program changed from a "up the ranks" to more of a OAD approach, and I'm simply trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Perhaps not. Because it was about that time that Coach talked about preferring talent over experience. It's my speculation, and dang it, don't disturb it with facts...lol. I'm sorry for my Skip Bayless moment. The dynamic remains the same - we listened to two hours of announcers yammering about how young Kensucky was - and they were.

I have refrained from commenting on whether I actually like or dislike the OAD system. We have Brady Morningstar as an example of why experience doesn't always work, and Josh Selby as an example of why a OAD doesn't always work.

@HighEliteMajor You will be talking next year how wrong you were about Oubre...lol.

Two points:

1. Hypothesis--Cal did not change the game. George Raveling and Nike changed the game with talent stacking. Cal and Sean Miller just happened to be the guys picked. Likewise, Pitino and Self are not reacting to Raveling and Nike. Adidas is. Pitino and Self just got picked. And Raveling and Nike are not acting in a vacuum. They are reacting to adidas earlier increased push into D1. This is a two player game--Nike and Adidas. All the coaches are trying to do is figure out how to adapt their legacy systems of play to the talent distribution asymmetries being created by a two player producer struggle for branding, endorcers, and market shares.

2. The key to coaching remains unchanged: fit the right pieces together with the most MUAs to beat six opponents in 3 two-game tournaments in March.

Systems are a collection of slots filled by personnel. Pick the right ones and they become greater than the sum of their parts. But even then they have to start with INDIVIDUAL MUA. For this reason, Self has to learn how to work with at least two OADS, maybe 3, OADS simply to get the one every game MUA player needed to play for rings.

@HighEliteMajor said:

I would trade Alexander right now for Karviar Shepherd. Straight up ... IF .. IF .. he had played for Self last season as a freshman. Would you? Would you rather gamble on a highly talented guy that has a year under his belt in Self's system, over an unknown quantity? Instead of Shepherd, think Marcus or Markieff as sophomores.

I understand that you're making a totally different point here, so don't take this as a comment on OADs at large, but in this particular case, I actually would take the frosh Alexander and here's why: Alexander got ejected from a game last season with two technicals, and suspended from the next. Karviar Sheperd got T'd up once last season, and it was for hanging on the rim after a missed dunk.

Now I know what you're thinking; how the hell is getting ejected from the game a good thing, right? But Self's best big men have tended to be the ones with that level of passion. TRob got T'd up 4 times his jr season (and honestly, it probably should have been a couple more), taunting, walking over opponents, and overall just fighting for his portion of the hardwood (he even threw an elbow and was ejected from one of his first NBA games). The Morris twins as jrs stopped getting mad at bad calls or rough play, and simply got even (and though I would have never admitted it at the time, they were master cheap shot artists). JoJo got T'd up 3 games in a row, going so far as to put a fist to a jaw.

Who didn't get T'd up? Wiggins. He had some amazing games, but he never put the spurs to anyone. I don't remember Xavier Henry ever getting one. Selby too. McLemore's only T was doing a goofy dance after hitting a 3 in the Big 12 tournament. That's not to say that you have to get T'd up a lot to be a great player, or that you want guys just running roughshod and getting thrown out of games, but when push comes to shove... Well, shove someone, dammit. Let the Marcus Smarts of the world take their flops, or scowl at the refs. I want the kid that's going to stand his ground. Alexander may be raw and he more than likely won't develop to his full potential in one year at KU, but I have no doubt in my mind that he's going to play hard, hit hard, and be fearless on the court. OAD or NBA long shot, I want a team of what Kelly Oubre called 'savages'. I'm hoping he and Big Cliff are true to their words, and that gives me hope for a better ending to this season than last.

@justanotherfan

"You can hate UK all day long, but if they are healthy, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see them playing deep into March again this year."

If they remain healthy they should be the team to beat this year in March. They've got the tallest D1 team of all time. 3 footers to go along with their tall twins out on the perimeter. They are stacked with All-Americans, and many of those are back for year 2.

Their weakness is Calipari being out-coached. Their weakness is still the twins, if opponents can get over all the intimidation of playing such a tall team and get out there and put pressure on the twins. The only way to beat this team is to beat them at x-axis basketball. Win the game from about 6'3" and lower. Big perimeter pressure, steal passes and dribbles, play more physical and get rebounding position and win the boards, draw fouls with fakes, control tempo... just get Kentucky out of their game. The twins will still choke if there is enough pressure. They are still only a few months older than they were last year when they constantly choked. Last... their weakness is too much media all year creating chaos and slowing down their development.

Self is going to have to put the heat on these kids. The pressure starts from the coaches, and ends with the kids putting up big pressure on the court.

We could easily lose our B12 streak this year. We are going to have to really hustle to win it this year.

@JayHawkFanToo I don't believe we were whipped in that game either. However I do believe we played into their hands. At the time I was surrounded by UK fans, and while debating that game with them, I said that we should play Davis straight up (no double team), take away everyone else and make him beat us. The best part of his game was his passing so we should've taken that away. This was the thing that worried the UK fans the most leading up to the game. That strategy worked well for us twice against Durrant and Beasley here at AFH. I was really surprised and disappointed when that didn't happen. Wow, I wasn't posting here then; that sure felt good to get that off my chest! Sorry if this is all old news! :)

In regards to Davis and TRob stats, everybody had already crowned Davis National Player of the Year before the season had started. We could have held his stats to zero, had Releford lock him up with big D, and had TRob wear off that unibrow with the bottom of his shoe while hanging from the rim, and it wouldn't have mattered. ;)

Thanks everybody for letting me get that out. It's been two years coming!

On the OAD thing, I hear everybody's points but I'm ready to jump off the train. One or two to fill a need is fine, but man, it's going to make an old man out of me quick!

Maybe the biggest fear I have is that we lose all the great success stories that we get from players growing and then having a chance to make basketball their life. Guys like Releford and DJack are making a living with basketball because they weren't recruited over and were given a chance. Jamari may be the last one if we continue down this road, and that's just sad.

@KUSTEVE Now, I'm not down on Oubre at all. Looks like a great player. Just comparing to AWIII as a junior. But I sense you are subtly reminding me of my Tharpe love last fall ... duly noted.

And you cite Morningstar for the proposition that I'm supporting. This is an alternative universe. If there ever was something to cause me to rethink my entire existence, that might be it!

@statmachine Remember, it's not Shepherd this next season. It's Shepherd after theoretically playing one season under Self. And you sure do have lofty numbers pegged for Alexander -- you are projecting essentially Julius Randle numbers (15.0 ppg/10.5 rpg). Heck, how many players under Self have ever averaged close to those numbers? TRob 17.7/11.9, Cole 14.9/11.1, Simien 20.3/11.0 & 17.8/9.3. I might temper those expectations a bit. Embiid was 11.2/8.1.

As a note, Shepherd was 9.1/6.8 his freshman season at TCU.

But I really can't argue with your projections too much ... Alexander might be = Randle. I thought Randle was the right plug in OAD last season for us and would have preferred him over Wiggins. Alexander is a nice plug in OAD this season and fills a clear need. My point is that I wish we didn't need the plug in OAD and had quality, high talent depth instead.

@konkeyDong I like that outside of the box thinking. So who are the guys with attitudes on this team? Mason, Greene, Alexander. Anyone else?

And by the way, I'm not down on Alexander or Oubre at all, so that's clear. I think they both will be great assets. And Self pursued and bagged the best talent available. The OAD discussion for me is always a macro approach to team basketball under Self.

@HighEliteMajor Gotta give it up for ya Maj. once the OAD merry go round starts it tough to get off. They've got to tweak that friggin rule, it's ruining the college game. Surely the L doesn't want that, it's their minor league-for free !!

@globaljaybird

"They've got to tweak that friggin rule"

Amen on that!

"Surely the L doesn't want that, it's their minor league-for free !!"

We should all be thrilled at the lambasting of Goodell in the NFL. I'm thinking all the other pro league head offices are thinking of cleaning up their act before their heads go on the chopping block.

There are going to be stories coming up, showing athletes like Selby, who went from 0-100 in two seconds, then back to 0.

Suddenly all the pro sports start thinking about their image and hire marketing and PR people to help them review policies.

The OAD rule might end sooner rather than later because a football player punched his girl in the elevator.

BTW: there is only ONE sport in this country.... M O N E Y ! Catch it while you can!

Filmed at 11...

@globaljaybird Hey! I was wondering this weekend just what happened to Oakville? He was one of my favorites from the old site. Do you have any idea where he's at? Any way to send out a search party and coax him from wherever he is to here?

@jayhawkbychoice Glad you asked. Some of the guys that are still registered at kusports.com have IM'ed him & they've received no response. About the first of the year we even started a thread on buckets to entice him to join in our forum but to no avail. Slayr, HEM, nuleaf, myself & several others wrote snippets on the thread for several days why we needed Oakville to join buckets, but our efforts fell short. Maybe it's time to revive our quest. He is one funny & hoop savvy guy, & he's buried deep in enemy territory (ST Louis). Another recon is a damn great idea. Reading Oakville oddities is about the only reason I ever even click on the LJW site anymore. Oak would be in the starting lineup here at buckets-he's one witty dude.

@jayhawkbychoice Not only sad, but wrong. IMO

@Statmachine

Shepherd is a very good player that Coach Self pursued heavily. My comment was based on HEM's premise that he had already played one year under Coach Self. It is the proverbial premise of whether you pick a proven player with good potential or an unproven player with greater potential. Also keep in mind that Shepherd will like stay in college longer than Alexander and will continue to improve and it comes a time where you have to look at the long term outlook (Shepherd) rather than a short term boost (Alexander).

@jayhawkbychoice

I agree. As I indicated, KU dug itself into a deep hole in the first half and even when it outscored UK by six in the second half, it was not enough to overcome the deficit. By the way, KU last year's team was younger than the UK.2012 team The three key players in 2012 UK championship game were 2 sophomores and 1 senior.

@KUSTEVE

You wrote:

We were never in that game. Ever. Not when we were 5 points away,

I guess when KU was down by 9 points with 2:12 left against Memphis in 2008, KU was never in that game either, right? How did that game work out?

@JayHawkFanToo Ahhh...I wasn't trying to rub in our loss. That game still gnaws at me today We played pretty well in that game. It was one of the first times I had seen a KU team simply get beat by talent. And that's a testament to what an amazing program we have. Most of our losses as a team are in games where we simply give the game away in one form or another- where our best effort would've won the game, no matter who we play. This game was different - we didn't play badly - they were simply better.

@HighEliteMajor "And you cite Morningstar for the proposition that I'm supporting. This is an alternative universe. If there ever was something to cause me to rethink my entire existence, that might be it!"**LMAO. That's PHOF material.

@JayHawkFanToo

The nature of college basketball makes it tough to really build for the long term. You are never guaranteed to have a core of players together for more than a few years, even if they all stay in school and graduate.

Think back to the recruiting class of 2004 - Darnell Jackson, Sasha Kaun and Russell Robinson. You add Mario Chalmers and Brandon Rush the next year. That's a good group. Then you come back the next year and get Sherron Collins and Darrell Arthur. That's the championship rotation. But it took us three years to put that group together and we had two chances with that group. One chance went down the tubes because of Sherron's late season injuries in 2007. If Rush goes pro, we never get another shot with that group. Three years of work would have likely been down the drain because of a guy getting banged up down the stretch of the season. We would have had an Elite Eight and a first round loss to show for it.

As I have said, for experience's sake, you have one shot every three years or so. Maybe not even that. The 2009 team wasn't talented enough to go deep into the tournament. Sweet Sixteen was their absolute ceiling, I believe. We should have had a shot in 2010 (due in large part to the addition of OAD Henry), but a random upset knocked us out. That's just bad luck, but that knocked off a team that otherwise probably would have had a chance. In 2011 we got to the Elite Eight, but ran into VCU. Had OAD Selby been healthy, we probably have a Final Four team, maybe even a title considering that was a pretty weak year. 2012 I firmly believe had we had OAD McLemore, we could have beaten UK. Without him, we didn't have the firepower. 2013 we didn't net a single elite recruit (I don't consider Ellis an elite recruit because I feel his ceiling is very good college player) and without our big guns (Taylor, Robinson) back in the fold, we again didn't have the firepower. This year, more bad luck with injuries knocked us out.

So the question is - do you want one shot every few years when things go perfectly, or do you want a shot every year (or every other year). If you want a shot every few years, recruit for experience. If you want a shot every year, you need the best combination of talent every year. That means OAD's, because it's likely that OADs will produce better in their only season than most of the experienced juniors and seniors will.

@justanotherfan

From a talent perspective, you are right, and we stand a better chance by recruiting higher talent.

What really pays off is when players that maybe should have gone pro, hang back for another year. You mention '08... what really worked for us was Rush getting hurt and coming back for another year. We had a good fortune as a result of his bad fortune.

It is hard to talk about chance without talking about luck. We were fortunate because of Rush's injury the year before, then we were fortunate to keep our guys healthy through the run.

In 1988, turns out we were fortunate to lose Marshall for the second time. It is hard to say that, because we all suffered so much with Archie. But there is no guarantee we would have won it all with a healthy Marshall. Losing him gave that team all the heart they needed to win out in March, even against a tough Oklahoma team with all that talent.

In 2012... heck... were we really the second best team in the land? We didn't have a single McD's AA, but we had a team that had endured the loss of Robinson's mom. That lit a torch in the souls of those guys to step up and push harder. I know that is the most proud second place I'll ever experience.

The one aspect that is gone from a team of OADs is the relationship of being a team for a longer period of time. That helps the guys come together as a group, especially when something horrible happens and they have to fight through it together. You never hope for bad things to happen, but it took some bad stuff for us to come through in '88, '08 and '12.

Look around at other teams. Louisville losing Ware... UCONN being banned from post season play.

I'm curious to know if we went through the list of champions, how many went through some kind of major struggle that toughened them up to win.

I'm making a point, but I also agree that snagging big talent helps our chances. We just need to try to have a mix with some quality older players, too.

@justanotherfan

Indeed. The nature of the college game has changed big time with the advent of the OAD, at least for the elite programs.

You can build a team 3 ways:

OADs - This is the UK model that depend heavily on OADs, a couple of less than stellar classes and the program can crash. Even with top recruiting classes, a key injury can land you in the NIT and loosing to Bobby Mo.

NO OADs - This the model that most schools use, not necessarily by choice but more likely because they cannot land the big time recruits.

Hybrid - This the model used by KU and several other elite programs that can recruit some elite, OAD players but not enough to go full OAD like Kentucky. Since the program does not depend heavily on OADS, a couple of poor recruiting season might set the program back but would not necessarily create havoc.

I personally prefer the approach that depend on top but not necessarily elite players that will stay in school at least 2 years and preferably more. Let's face it, if a player is good enough to go to the NBA, chances are he will not stay 4 years, and if he is good enough, he should not; not that many senior in the NBA draft anymore.

To me, the best approach is one similar to the model baseball uses. A player can go directly from HS to the NBA and players like Lebron and Durant do not need to go one year to college, but if the player chooses to go to college then he must wait 3 years.

Several positive results with this approach.

Allows exceptional players a direct path to the NBA.

Prevents HS to NBA busts.

Players that go to college are better prepared for the NBA.

Improves the level of college basketball and competition becomes much better. I will guess the NBA fears a higher level college game that could compete with them for audience.

Last but not least, allows the student-athlete to make substantial progress towards a college degree that he can use if the NBA does not work.

The OAD rule was established by the NBA for purely selfish reasons. There had been a number of HS to NBA busts and the league wanted to observe players in better environment than HS games and hence college basketball became the NBA's laboratory.

Can you imagine the level of competition we would see in college with teams full of NBA caliber players in their third year? It would be awesome. Would any team be able to beat a KU team with top players in their third year under Coach Self's system?

@drgnslayr Chemistry. Elusive, subjective, non-quantifiable. Chemistry is built. It rarely happens overnight. It can be inspired by events, as you describe. Most commonly, the "us against the world" approach, or the coach bringing the team together by inspiring the team to hate him, thus giving the team a common cause or enemy. Masterful coaches build chemistry in many subtle ways.

Chemistry combined with coaching acumen, most times, overcomes pure talent in team sports. At some point, of course, talent will be overwhelming.

The key is to have high talent, and have the time to mold and meld it into a cohesive group that can execute a competent coach's desires.

@HighEliteMajor "Remember, it's not Shepherd this next season. It's Shepherd after theoretically playing one season under Self. And you sure do have lofty numbers pegged for Alexander -- you are projecting essentially Julius Randle numbers (15.0 ppg/10.5 rpg). Heck, how many players under Self have ever averaged close to those numbers? TRob 17.7/11.9, Cole 14.9/11.1, Simien 20.3/11.0 & 17.8/9.3. I might temper those expectations a bit. Embiid was 11.2/8.1"

The last 4 to 5 #1 PF's on ESPN's top 100 in the NCAA have averaged those lofty numbers. I would imagine Alexander is going to have a long enough rope to achieve those numbers or foul out every game.

@JayHawkFanToo

The baseball model would be interesting for basketball. I don't think the level of play in college would increase, as most elite players would opt to go the juco route because they can leave juco early rather than being tied to the three year commitment of NCAA ball. For instance, a player like Selden or some of the other highly touted freshmen may opt for juco because they can leave after one or two years rather than committing for three. It could literally cause most top 50 players to opt for NBA, Juco or D-League. Almost no top 100 baseball player ends up actually enrolling in college. Most head to the minors instead. I doubt the cut would be that deep in basketball, but I could see the top 30 or 35 players all skipping the NCAA.

As for HS to NBA busts, there have been surprisingly few. Let's look at every player that declared for the draft straight from high school.

Looking purely at how they performed in the NBA:

1970's - Moses Malone, Darryl Dawkins, Bill Willoughby. Willoughby was the least successful of this era, but he played 8 years in the NBA. Dawkins played 14 years and Malone is a hall of famer.

1980's - Shawn Kemp. One of the best players in the 1990's.

1990's - Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, Jermaine O'Neal, Taj McDavid, Tracy McGrady, Al Harrington, Rashard Lewis, Korleone Young, Ellis Richardson, Jonathan Bender, Leon Smith. Garnett and Bryant are future HOF's. Jermaine O'Neal and Tracy McGrady were perennial all stars. Harrington and Lewis were both rotation level players for the bulk of their 10+ year careers. Bender fell out of the league due to a congenital knee problem. Young and Smith were both busts. Richardson and McDavid weren't even D1 recruits when they declared, so its no surprise they didn't make it.

2000's - Darius Miles, Deshawn Stevenson, Kwame Brown, Tyson Chandler, Eddy Curry, DeSagana Diop, Ousmane Cisse, Tony Key, Amare Stoudemire, DeAngelo Collins, Lenny Cooke, LeBron James, Travis Outlaw, Ndudi Ebi, Kendrick Perkins, James Lang, Charlie Villanueva, Dwight Howard, Shaun Livingston, Robert Swift, Sebastian Telfair, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, JR Smith, Dorell Wright, Jackie Butler, Martell Webster, Gerald Green, CJ Miles, Ricky Sanchez, Monta Ellis, Lou Williams, Andray Blatche and Amir Johnson.

Big group here. James is one of the best of all time. Howard and Stoudemire have both been elite players when not saddled with injuries. Chandler, Livingston, Jefferson, both Smith's, Ellis and Blatche have all been starters for multiple years in their careers, at times performing just below all star level. Williams, Johnson, Wright, Outlaw, Webster Stevenson, Brown and Perkins were/ are all rotation level players during their careers. Butler, Sanchez, Key and Lang were not big D1 recruits. Darius Miles' career was cut short due to chronic knee issues. CJ Miles and Gerald Green have been in and out of the NBA. Villanueva went to college and eventually became a lottery pick. Curry, Diop, Cisse, Ebi, Swift, Collins and Cooke were all busts.

That's 49 players total, a little less than a full draft. There are no less than four HOF or future HOF (Malone, Garnett, Bryant and James). You could make a case that Dwight Howard is a future HOF. For all star caliber players there's Kemp, O'Neal, McGrady, Stoudemire and Jefferson. That's 9 players that are at least all star level players. There were only 15 players that should be considered busts in the entire group, and 6 of those guys weren't even major D1 recruits. That means that there were as many all star level (or better) performers as there were outright busts if you consider the players that had a reasonable shot, since declaring for the NBA draft really only requires paperwork.

I actually had a high school teammate that didn't even start for us consider declaring for the NBA draft just to get his name in the newspaper since all of the declared players are listed. He had no aspirations of playing in college, so his eligibility wasn't at risk. It was going to be a joke more than anything. He didn't, but I kind of wish he had. He had as much chance of being drafted as a guy like Taj McDavid.

@Statmachine I don't (and wouldn't) expect Shepherd to average 15 and 10 as a sophomore. That makes your case more convincing. If Alexander bangs out those numbers, my mind will be pried open to the OAD way of thinking. I think your citation to those stats is very compelling.

That got me thinking. Sullinger was one of the PFs you cited. Same height as Alexander? Sullinger a tad bulkier. Never seemed really overmatched height-wise in the post. But that might be a very good comparison. I'll take Sullinger's 17.2/10.2 and shut up about OADs. Question is, @Statmachine, can you deliver the goods?

@HighEliteMajor Anthony Davis sported the shirt #'s don't lie in a pre draft interview lol. We will just have to see how Big Cliff does in comparison to his predecessors?

@justanotherfan

The model would work the same as it does now but instead of being 1 year removed from HS it would be 3 years. The JuCo is a no go since it does not provide the level of competition or exposure that players need and the 3 year period after HS would still apply. The only options would be the D-League and overseas teams but there is only a limited supply of space there, so the bulk of players would still go to Division I schools.

As I indicated, the true elite players can still go directly to the NBA and skip college altogether. As far as the busts, the NBA GMs themselves indicated that the one year rule was establishes specifically for this purpose; I personally heard Kevin Pritchard, former KU player, indicate this much in a radio interview on 610-AM while he was still GM of the Portland Trail Blazers. keep in mind that every lottery player that does not pan out ties the team to $12M-$15M, not an insignificant figure. There is lots of information on players that left after one year and did not do well in the League. The consensus seems to be that only players selected in the top 10-11 (almsot all lottery picks) have consistently performed well, but players selectedbelow that are hit and miss and most end up as journeymen in the League.

Our culture is so different than it was 40, or even 20, years ago. One of the problems is that so many of these kids come from single-parent homes. Many of them have come from homes that have been in poverty their whole lives. It's understandable why a Selby or McLemore would want--or need--to start earning money ASAP.

One thing that could alleviate the OAD issue would be for the players to be paid a decent stipend for playing D1 basketball. At the very least let them borrow money at low interest. They generate millions of dollars of revenue but don't get enough to help their family back home.

I don't think either Selby or McLemore would have been an OAD If Ifnances had not been a factor they had to consider.

@JayHawkFanToo

The thing is, most any player selected outside the lottery is hit or miss, regardless of experience.

For example, let's take the 16th overall pick. That's a non-lottery, mid first round pick. John Stockton was a 16th pick. That's pretty good. Ron Artest, Hedo Turkoglu and Nick Young were, too. Not bad. Bill Wennington. Tony Delk. Some solid players here.

But Troy Bell, Jiri Welsch, Randy Woods, Kirk Haston all were 16s and they were not productive at all. You can find a good player at any pick, but outside the top 10, there are some massive misses.

The sad truth is that there are some guys that can play at that level and some that can't. If you can, you will last in the league, even if you struggle for a few years. If you can't, you will wash out regardless of experience.

Take Jermaine O'Neal for example. Through his fourth year in the league, O'Neal never played even 1000 minutes for a season. He didn't average even 5 points or 4 rebounds in any one of those years. I suspect many people would have labelled him a bust at that point. The next seven years in the league O'Neal averaged 13/10, 19/10, 21/10, 20/10, 24/9, 20/9, 19/9 and was an all star six times. Jermaine O'Neal was able to survive because he was a good enough player to merit an NBA roster spot that entire time, and once he took off, he took off. After that peak, he spent 3 years averaging a very solid 13/7.

Now the question is this - would Jermaine O'Neal have had a better NBA career if he had gone to college? Looking at that peak again - six all star seasons, averaged a double double 4 straight seasons, averaged over 20 per game 4 straight seasons - does college improve on that at all, or was Jermaine O'Neal prepared just as well by sitting on the bench in Portland for four years as he would have been playing at Clemson or North Carolina. I would say this - going up against NBA players every day in practice was much more beneficial to his development on the court than going up against guys with no pro future because it made him develop his skills even more so rather than depend on his superior athleticism and size in college.

@HighEliteMajor I have ran many numbers to figure the odds of Alexander producing the numbers I have previously posted and my way of figuring things produce a +-1. I did it on Wiggins for example and his numbers were 2 points higher than his predecessors but if you were to average minutes per game and then punch in Wiggins MPG (which were higher) its a 1 point difference using Wiggins MPG instead of the average MPG of the previous 3 SF's. MKG, Shabaz, and Barnes #s are about 1 point different than Wiggins Freshman stats. So depending on MPG Cliff should produce that 16 ppg and 10 rbg +-1. As long as he plays at least the average amount of time his predecessors did. Its a work in progress...

@Wigs2 I would point out that no one made Selby or McLemore go to college. They each could have played immediately overseas -- Israel, Turkey, Russia, wherever -- and could have sent money home. Further, if they really needed to help at home, then they could have skipped college all together and got a job. The problem isn't the NCAA and stipends. You suggest now stipends so they can send money home, which is different than the "pizza money" narrative. The problem is simple poverty and that's a broader problem. Yes, the kids are part of a process that makes millions. but so are the employees at McDonalds earning minimum wage. The college hoops players get value far exceeding minimum wage. Simply because you participate in a multi-million dollar industry doesn't mean you deserve to earn an owners' share of the profits. The players are replaceable parts. The NCAA and colleges own facilities, trademarks, and the business itself. Selby and McLemore each made a choice to come to college under the LOI they signed. I do wonder though, even if both would have had let's say, Zach Peters' parents' financial situation, would they have still gone pro? I don't know.

@Statmachine -- When I was looking back at others' numbers, I saw Aaron Gordon was 12 ppg and 8 rpg. Does your analysis take into account system and teammates? For ex., if a kid is the top option, or one simply one of many weapons?.

@HighEliteMajor I feel strongly Ben Mac would have stayed, he was crying when he left. Going to school, having hot water, food, a bed, mentors, tutors, friends, etc. meant the world to him. He truly was happy here. Selby I don't know. I do feel sorry for him!

@HighEliteMajor Is that a realistic possibility? Are overseas teams seeking to sign American high school players? I've heard of it being mentioned to go overseas right out of high school, but I'm not aware of any who have done it. And--judging by what I've read about Svi--if they want to play in the NBA, it might be detrimental to their long-term future if they decide to play overseas first.

And although you say that the players "get value far exceeding minimum wage," I 'm not convinced that's a good argument since they are in school to play basketball--not learn business or psychology. I think that all too often, they are being used to make big profits for the schools and the NCAA.

Other students who are on scholarship don't have the same restrictions and demands that athletes do. I'm from the old school, but I think it's time to start allowing some financial assistance.

@Wigs2 coach browns hot recruit went overseas, mundiay(sp).

@Wigs2 Dante Exum played overseas instead of college and so did Brandon Jennings, although Exum was a foreign player, I think.

Reed is a good example of a player who is getting a good value for his time here. I think he is at KU Med school right now. I'm sure others know more about that.

@jayhawkbychoice

KU graduates just about every player that stay 4 years and many that left early come back to finish their degree; Cole Aldrich was Academic All-American Player of the year in his third and last year at KU and took summer classes to complete his degree and proudly walked down the hill, which is something that he had promised his parents. BTW, the "greatest walk-on" at KU, Christian Moody, also went on to Medical School and Sasha Kaun got a degree in Computer Science.

A small group of players that attended (and hopefully graduated from) KU end up in the NBA, a few others are coaching or working for Athletics programs but the great majority of players end up working in a fields other than basketball or sports.

@HighEliteMajor My analysis doesn't get that in depth atm. Gordon was not the #1 PF on the ESPN top 100 (which is weighted more than other poles).

@Wigs2 Here are a few considerations:

1. Playing overseas is completely realistic for many players, particularly the better players. This season, Emmanuel Mudiay signed a $1 one year deal in China, and just signed a $3 million shoe deal. He had signed with SMU, then changed his mind. But that's the big money example. If a kid has talent, there's a lot of crappy pro teams he could eke out a living with. The point you are making is money, and playing for pay.

2. This is perhaps the best point. If anyone argues, well, who would want to play for such little pay? Or there aren't real opportunities? Ok, then, that's a consideration -- there is no real market for their current skill set. You said that for their long term future, playing overseas may be detrimental for their futures -- ok then. The best deal they have is the NCAA. It's all about choice.

3. Other students on scholarship have no parallel to student athletes. Those other students aren't in a sports competition. where outside influences, boosters, etc., could taint the entire playing field with outside money, benefits, etc. Moreover, and more importantly, the only reason the basketball player is getting a scholarship because he can play basketball, not because he has a high GPA or ACT score. It's because of basketball. Take away the hoops, take away the scholarship.

4. And that's the next point. If a kid wants the freedom to work while in school, or market his skills, don't accept the basketball scholarship. Get a student loan, or grant, and work, and go to school. Quite obviously, the basketball scholarship is the better deal.

5. You imply that they aren't in school to "learn business or psychology." Folks make this mistake all the time. The college athlete many times chooses the easy path. The African American studies path. But others choose a more challenging path -- look at Tyrel Reed. It's there for the taking. Or Christian Moody, a walk-on, as cited by @jayhawkfantoo. All the tutoring one could want. Most often, the easier path is chosen, and that probably fits many times with a player's academic acumen. Many people forget that. Many of these kids choose easier degrees because they just aren't smart enough to pursue more difficult degrees. No shame in that.

6. "Fair value" - Free tuition, free room and board, free food, free books, free tutoring, free clothes, free cable tv, free room phone. Oh, but they might have to pay for a pizza. But guess what? At KU, part of the meal plan includes a certain number of pizzas. If a kid comes from nothing, his standard of living increases many fold living on scholarship.

7. You mentioned it again -- you said, "I think that all too often, they are being used to make big profits for the schools and the NCAA." I say, so what? Look at McDonalds, Home Depot, Nike -- they make their billions in profits of low paid workers. Why are they low paid? Because they have no other appreciable, marketable skill. Same with the NCAA basketball players. The NCAA and colleges have all the risk. Folks forget that. It's the big, bad rich and powerful. But the NCAA and colleges build the facilities, manage the programs, negotiate TV deals, create sports networks, and create the environment to permit athletes to play in college for free, and to hone their skills so that they have a chance to make a living in their chosen sport.

Look at today's story at kusports.com. Jaylen Brown says he may play overseas because he wants to help his family. Good for him. Stephen Zimmerman's mom says he won't ever sign a LOI because of the restrictions. Smart. It's freedom of choice. The lower tier guys just don't have as much leverage. But it's still all about freedom of choice. Every kid has it.

Here's the truth about athletic scholarships

1. Scholarship athletes, particularly in the money making sports of football and men's basketball, are typically steered away from more challenging majors by academic advisers. I know this for an absolute fact. Advisers will set the student's schedule for them, and they steer them towards easier courses with "athlete friendly" professors so they don't have to worry about eligibility, and because being an athlete requires missing a healthy amount of class, especially at the D1 level. This isn't about intelligence so much as its about whether the athlete will insist upon changing their schedule (and major) and going against the adviser. I personally know athletes that wanted to pursue a particular field and basically had to fight the athletic department academic adviser as well as the coaching staff to let them take certain courses or switch majors.

2. Many of these athletes have other skills. It just so happens that their most valuable skills are athletic. Many of these athletes are skilled musicians, writers, artists, etc, but none of those professions offer them a chance to make the kind of money their basketball skills could translate to. If you have one career path that could lead to a $1m per year job and another career path that could lead to a $35k per year job, which would you pursue first?

3. Colleges fear the changing of the OAD rule because of the things I cited above about the possibility that NCAA basketball starts becoming more like NCAA baseball. That is the unspoken thing here. NBA GMs do not say this on the record, but the scouts do - they are already heavily critical of the level of play at big time college basketball programs. It's just not very high. Look at KU's schedule last year, the toughest in the nation. You want to evaluate Andrew Wiggins as a wing player for the NBA. How many games did you have where you had enough opposing talent on the wings to really evaluate Wiggins? Let's count - Duke, Florida, Colorado, San Diego State, and Oklahoma State (2). That's it. Six games with NBA caliber talent/size on the wing to evaluate Wiggins against. KU played 35 games last year. 29 were worth very little from a level of competition standpoint for a guy like Andrew Wiggins. If you start having the OADs skip college again, the level of talent will be even lower. At that point, the TAD's and others with NBA potential are, at least from a basketball perspective, better served to play wherever the rest of that talent flows. If you have to stay three years, the top talent won't be flowing to the NCAA. That means either juco's or the D-League will be getting most of those players. That terrifies the NCAA since the NCAA tournament represents about 85% of the entire income for the NCAA in any given year. The NCAA is the currently accepted path, but if there's a rule change, there's no reason that has to continue.

4. That whole "walk on" if you want freedom thing? Not true. Check out the Baker Mayfield situation between Texas Tech and Oklahoma. Mayfield was a walk on at Tech last year that happened to end up being their starting QB. He has since transferred to OU, but Tech initially blocked his transfer and he is now in a position where he may not be eligible to play this season, even though he was not on scholarship at Tech. OU may not even be able to give him a scholarship because of the transfer situation with Tech. And this for a kid that was a walk on to begin with.

5. The NCAA and colleges take almost 0 risk when it comes to student athletes. One of the false assumptions is that a scholarship is a four year investment. Completely untrue. A scholarship is a one year commitment, renewable for up to five years. We see all the time that students are released from scholarship for all sorts of reasons, be they academic, behavior, or athletic. But just because you make grades and attend practices, there is no guarantee that your scholarship will be renewed. That is at the discretion of the coaches each year. If a player doesn't perform as well (or if a better one comes along) you can just not renew the scholarship of a returning player. The student athlete is guaranteed nothing - not a four year degree, not full tuition, nothing. The athlete is the one risking injury performing for free. They play while banged up or risk that their coach will tell pro evaluators they lack "toughness" or "heart". I know for a fact that this has happened in the past, too.

Changing the OAD rule could be a boon for colleges if top players continue to come to college. It could also turn D1 basketball into a product that looks a lot like D1 baseball.

@HighEliteMajor What is the risk for the NCAA? And, out of all those schools that have taken so much risk, can you name any that have lost anything by taking that risk?

@drgnslayr I read your post about the 2012 Hawks and "proudest 2nd place finish", and no doubt got a bit emotional about it in a Dick-Vermeil-sort-of-way. The issue with that team was the whole season they got off to slow starts, and it caught up with them vs KY, despite outscoring KY in the 2nd half.

I'd remind everybody that we had 2-3 missed dunks (point-effin-blank), and about 2-3 clanked FTs in that game...if that team could have won, I may have liked them better than the 08 champs, since '12 could have done IT without all the pieces that '08 had.

@Statmachine I agree with you about the value of talent, and think KY this year should be ranked #1, due to their incoming talent PLUS their 3-4 *talented guys returning who have Final4 experience". Look what that mix did for Calipari in '12. Look what raw talent alone did for KY in '13 (NIT), and for KU last year (lackluster).

The other point to make about talent is this: Self isnt bring a bunch of Bradys & Tharpes in here...the guys he brings can still jump outta the gym, etc...they just need what his keen eye thinks he can add to their game, which is a priceless process to watch. I dont want to lose such a true, pure, and intuitive coach like that. Tyshawn#70, TRobTop50, WitheyTop30, RelefordTop40, EJ5starTop20. Not a MickeyD on that team, but no slouches either. I'd take TRob OVER McdAA Ellis anyday! (fire under Ellis intended.)

Winning a NC every season is simply NOT possible. Making it back to the champ game back2back is statistically highly unlikely. In a one-loss-go-home tourney format, yall ask yourselves how often do these decade-o-dominance ku/Self teams even make it to the BigXII Tourney Champ game? Definitely not every season. So temper the Final4 expectations back to realistic proportions...is what I tell myself the last few years.

@Wigs2 Well, it's really the member institutions. The NCAA is a governing body so my reference including the NCAA is not that important in this point. But money doesn't grow on trees for member institutions. Facilities cost millions, coaches and their contracts cost millions, etc. The "risk" is not all paid cash on the barrel head. There is debt carried forward. Further, you have the involved individuals such as administrators who have their livelihoods tied to the athletic ventures. And don't forget, the revenue from sports covers a large chunk of non-athletic expenditures. "Risk" is also the venture itself. If the venture starts to fail, as in any other venture, that's when the balance sheet bleeds red. When balance sheets turn negative, folks lose their jobs, services (programs) get cut, assets are liquidated -- it's business.

@HighEliteMajor

I agree with every point you made...the world must be coming to an end.

The underlying theme of our culture is that we have choices, some might have better (or worse) options but in the end we all have the option and freedom of saying yes or no.

The average athlete at a programs such as KU has a lot more options than the average student that has to depend on family money, loans, scholastic scholarships (none even close to an athletic scholarship) or part-time classwork with part-time work or a combination of all. Enough said, you presented perfectly.

@HighEliteMajor For most of the NCAA institutions, your point is probably more accurate than it is at KU and other elite basketball schools. But most schools don't have anyone thinking about OAD--e.g. UMKC. Hardly any have someone who would--or could--decide to play overseas instead of playing college ball.

We're talking about upper-crust, elite players--not those that even a school like K-State is normally recruiting. Those players who are almost sure-fire NBA talent.

Assuming that there are 13 full-paid scholarship players each year, the amount of money you're talking about is at most $400K. Considering attendance, television and radio, apparel sales, etc., how long does it take KU or Kentucky or Duke to make that amount of money? Ten minutes into the first game?

I say there should be some way to provide additional financial assistance beyond the scholarship to get them away from the OAD mentality.

@Wigs2

"One thing that could alleviate the OAD issue would be for the players to be paid a decent stipend for playing D1 basketball."

They just need to own their own names. In any other situation this would be protected by federal laws... but the NCAA "slave league" somehow wins out over federal law.

If they owned their names they could already be pulling in licensing revenue. As we well know, even top HS recruits might already be millionaires coming out of HS... funny thing... they already have big reps today while in HS and a big value with advertisers and shoecos. They have that value WITHOUT any involvement from D1. Wiggins should have been a millionaire in HS.

Someday there will be one smart attorney with ethics and the balls to take this challenge the right way to the courts, and not just what the NCAA does with players' names, earning them a small cut.

@Wigs2

What planet do you live in? No disrespect intended.

You are looking at a tiny fraction of the expenditures for the basketball team.

Operating expense per participant: $127,886

KU total Basketball expenditures: $10,724,156

KU Total Basketball Revenue: $16,412,415

The revenues are not generated by the players alone. Revenues include TV contracts, endorsements, trademark even concession stands. All of this require a number of administrators (and yes, attorneys) to get the revenues flowing. The Jayhawk trademark and brand popularity alone likely contribute the most and are largely player independent.

Here is the official government source:

Source of financial information for Educational Institutions... ↗

@JayHawkFanToo Agreed that the revenues are not generated by the players alone. However all those revenues you mentioned would not happen without the players--especially the elite players. And I'm not saying to pay them all several million a year. But I see no problem with the school loaning them money till they get to the NBA.

But if Josh Selby had been able to have been able to help his family while he was in college, he almost certainly would have returned to KU for at least one more year. Then he could have paid that money back when he got to the NBA. Unfortunately, he most likely felt the need to go for the instant money rather than wait to develop into an NBA-caliber player.

@Wigs2 said:

@JayHawkFanToo Agreed that the revenues are not generated by the players alone. However all those revenues you mentioned would not happen without the players--especially the elite players. And I'm not saying to pay them all several million a year. But I see no problem with the school loaning them money till they get to the NBA.

But if Josh Selby had been able to have been able to help his family while he was in college, he almost certainly would have returned to KU for at least one more year. Then he could have paid that money back when he got to the NBA. Unfortunately, he most likely felt the need to go for the instant money rather than wait to develop into an NBA-caliber player.

Ben McLemore comes to mind too. Might have returned to school if his name could have made him enough money to support his family. Regardless I think even if you give players the chance to make money which I agree with, most will realize that the tree's are greener just around the corner (NBA). So while a kid can love the College life/game /value education the chance for professional fame and much bigger money is always going to win out.

@Wigs2 paying players is a slippery sloop. Is not getting a free education good enough? If a family was poor raising a future NBA star (so rare), then why couldn't they live in poverty for a few more years so their son can not only hit the NBA lottery but have an education to go with it? You know in case the basketball thing doesn't work out? You know as well as I do so few actually make it.

Sorry back on point here. So who's to say that KU offers a player 3,000 a month to come play at KU, and then UK offers that same player 4,000 to come and play? So what happens now? Where is this line? Who looks over this line? Where does it end?

It's not as simple of hey we should pay players in the college game. Maybe if some of these families actually cared about their sons. They wouldn't put pressure on them to skip an education (like they did)(are you seeing the madness yet?), or experience that will last him a life time so that he can chase some lotto money that will leave him broke and his family.

As for borrowing money? What happens if said player doesn't make it? Then what. How this kid supposed to pay back this money that he never earned?

Just my two cents.

@BeddieKU23 I never understood why Bens mom didn't come to Lawrence. So many parents have come and found jobs while the kids played.

@DoubleDD "If a family was poor raising a future NBA star (so rare), then why couldn't they live in poverty for a few more years so their son can not only hit the NBA lottery but have an education to go with it?"

I've never had to live in poverty, and I doubt many on this board have. That comment about living in poverty "for a few more years" is an example of how so many who have never had to live in poverty feel about the underprivileged.

If any system like this were to be implemented, it would have to be based on financial hardship. Again, I am not suggesting that schools just start doling out huge sums of money. But I think if there was a serious concern by college administrators and coaches, they could make it happen.

And I do think that a player such as Selby would have returned for a second season if given the opportunity to prove that he belonged in the NBA. Unfortunately, leaving after his freshman season probably cost him millions that he will never recover.

@Wigs2 well my friend I grew up quite poor, and my family never demanded that I lead them out of hardship. Never once did they consider me a as their meal ticket, or the way out of poverty.

You keep bringing up Selby, but lets bring up Embiid. He didn't need the money, and wanted to stay. Yet all his advisors said go. So he went.

Bottom line when a young man is looking at millions just by signing on the bottom line, they're gone. Whether it's the right thing to do or not.

So let me ask you this question. What happens when this players don't pay back the money when they don't make it? No really I'm curious. Are the colleges supposed to absorb these costs? You do know that most colleges that participate in sports are in the red? Meaning they are loosing money. And you want to add the burden of supporting these players families on loans that are mostly likely not to be paid back?

It's quite obvious that we have views that are quite different. You feel the being in poverty is a society problem and that we should just throw money at the problem at that will fix it. Yet 90% of all people that when the lottery are worse off than before they won that pile of cash. We could also point to the fact that all those great college players that go pro, Over 60% of them go broke. I grew up poor, but made a decision that I wasn't going to live from paycheck to paycheck. Not to toot my own horn, but I have had a job since I was 12 (well except that time I was laid off after 9/11)(yet within 4 days I had another job), I'm nothing special, just realized no money coming in doesn't pay the bills. I'll shovel cow shit to pay the bills if I have too.

@DoubleDD I have not suggested that money be tossed around to just any player who wants it. Nor have I suggested that all schools participate in a program.

The reason I have brought up Selby is that he is the KU player that I think has been hurt most by leaving the program early. And I don't think he would have left if he had felt he had a viable alternative. I would have mentioned McLemore also if he had not been drafted. Embiid's case doesn't apply.

At the time I first mentioned the concept, we were speaking specifically in reference to OAD's. And only those elite, upper-crust players who have financial hardship. The ones who could go to the NBA right out of high school were it not for the rule that requires they be 19 to play in the NBA.

The elite players don't go to schools like UMKC. Almost all go to elite basketball programs like KU, UK, Duke, UNC, UCLA. Those programs are not operating in the red.

Another alternative would be to allow them to bypass college and participate in the NBADL but not in the league till they turn 19.

@Wigs2 one problem my friend. Your wanting to make special rules for only certain schools and certain players. That's not fair to other schools and other players.

The Myth ↗

The truth ↗

@Wigs2

Correct me if I am wrong but I don't recall Josh Selby leaving for the NBA for financial reason. If I remember correctly his mother was colelge graduate and had a job and was not in financial distress as McLemore's family was.

@JayHawkFanToo I don't remember that either.

@DoubleDD

"Wigs2 paying players is a slippery sloop."

I agree with that.

It's even a slippery sloop with my method of letting players own their names. It would get corrupted.

Problem is... isn't it corrupt today?

Let's face it, few all-star players' parents are starving before they get to the league. They may not be setup in big houses and cars.... but I'm sure, in most cases, they get provided for. The biggest drive for the kids to get to the league is to soak up all that gravy. And their posse pushes them to go quick because they want a taste of that gravy, too.

Star college players take a risk of injury by staying another year. They also risk injury more by going to the league too quickly. Joel... he's taking a big risk going early. But I'm really pulling for him...

Anytime big money is involved, you have corruption. I don't care if it is sports, politics, financing, investment... real estate.... commodities... Big money attracts bull snit.... bull snit attracts flies.... flies attract lizards... lizards attract snakes...

@drgnslayr said:

@DoubleDD

"Wigs2 paying players is a slippery sloop."

I agree with that.

It's even a slippery sloop with my method of letting players own their names. It would get corrupted.

Problem is... isn't it corrupt today?

Let's face it, few all-star players' parents are starving before they get to the league. They may not be setup in big houses and cars.... but I'm sure, in most cases, they get provided for. The biggest drive for the kids to get to the league is to soak up all that gravy. And their posse pushes them to go quick because they want a taste of that gravy, too.

Star college players take a risk of injury by staying another year. They also risk injury more by going to the league too quickly. Joel... he's taking a big risk going early. But I'm really pulling for him...

Anytime big money is involved, you have corruption. I don't care if it is sports, politics, financing, investment... real estate.... commodities... Big money attracts bull snit.... bull snit attracts flies.... flies attract lizards... lizards attract snakes...

The other angle that is not talked about as much with players leaving early vs staying is the money involved in getting to the 2nd Contract and maximizing that into a profitable career for a 3rd-4th deal etc.

You take a 19-20 year old kid who has done 1 year in college, is high on draft boards and is considering coming back to school for Soph yr. Now if he does come back he's 20-21 or 21-22 going pro after his Soph/Jr/Sr year and has missed 1/2/3 years of getting paid.

He's now that much further behind in getting off the Rookie pay scale into a lucrative 2nd contract or hitting free agency. Time is limited for these athletes to maximize earnings potential with so many risks in the way. So its hard to expect young kids to play a game they know they are good at for free when they know a potential big pay day for his family is within reach.

The NFL for example has seen a tremendous spike amount of Red-shirt soph's or Juniors going pro because the Shelf Life for Football players is so limited already that the younger you are and hit the league gives you the leverage for a bigger 2nd contract and so on. Once kids talk to agents and realize the risk of being older and getting the big money drops every year you are not earning for a living is hard to pass up.

@BeddieKU23

This is the issue I have. Most of us pay to go to college for at least 4 year to get a degree or more if you want graduate degree, the we work all of our lives and if you are lucky and after 20 years you are making $200k you are in the upper 4% of the population; at $100K you are in the top 7%.

Now, a student athlete gets paid to attend college at level that most every other student can only dream, leaves after a year after completing maybe two semesters and will be making in one year more than most every other person makes in a lifetime. I understand that their playing days are limited, but why is it that after, say 10 -12 years, he has to stop working? None of us do, why can't they start working at something else like the rest of the population? Yes, they are gifted athletes but many of us are gifted engineers, doctors, accountants and what have you and yet we don't feel entitled to quit working after 10 years.

A few years ago when basketball players went on strike I had an interesting talk with other sports fans about the impact of the strike on society at large. The question posed was which strike affect you personally and society most and least, a basketball/pro-players strike or a sanitation workers or policemen, or doctors or grocery store clerk and others? The answer for most was sanitation workers and you can guess what the answer for least was ...kind of makes you think.

There's an old saying that the most valuable dollar is the first dollar.

I didn't come from poverty, but I did come from a family that was not well off. I definitely understood what it meant to live paycheck to paycheck growing up. However, I did know quite a few people that grew up in poverty. When I say poverty, I don't mean paycheck to paycheck - I mean actual poverty, where you don't have enough money for necessities like food, clothes, shelter, etc.

@DoubleDD, I believe you are a reasonable person. How many days would you want to go hungry? How many nights would you want to fall asleep in the cold? How many days would you want to live not knowing where you would sleep that night? That's what poverty is. You have to ask (and answer) those questions every day. Living like that for even one minute longer than you have to would be crazy.

@DoubleDD said:

Maybe if some of these families actually cared about their sons. They wouldn't put pressure on them to skip an education (like they did)(are you seeing the madness yet?), or experience that will last him a life time so that he can chase some lotto money that will leave him broke and his family.

Have you ever thought that perhaps those sons looked at the struggles their family went through and couldn't imagine asking them to live like that another year? For a kid from poverty, living in dorms at college is quite a bit more comfortable than where they are from. So you get to live in comfort while your parents and siblings live in abject poverty? That's something that most people, especially those that care about their parents and siblings, would do. I know if I were in that position, I would not ask my family to live in poverty while I hung out in college for another year.

I agree with @Wigs2 that the players should be able to capitalize off their name and likeness. That's an easy fix. If a player could earn money by appearing in commercials or endorsing products, college would be an easier thing. Wiggins could have signed with Adidas and spent four years at KU if he wanted, earning millions while in college. But that's currently against the rules. Wiggins can't touch a cent from Adidas unless he goes pro.

@JayHawkFanToo I agree that most go to college for a degree and work at our career. But the thing with being an athlete is that, at best, your career as an athlete has a window that closes when you are 40. You have basically 20 years to capitalize on your athletic talents. After that, the opportunity is gone. Whether you pursue that at 20 or 25 or 22 or 30, your window closes at 40. And it closes forever. You simply can't earn money as an athlete after that window closes.

That doesn't mean they can't go into another line of work. It just means that the earning opportunity of being an athlete only lasts so long. I've posted often on the differences in earnings between Rasheed Wallace and Kevin Garnett (back to back picks in the 1995 draft). Because Garnett was 2 years younger, he made twice as much money as Wallace during his career. Yes, Garnett was a better player, but his age allowed him to sign big contracts three times during his career, while Wallace only got two big paydays.

Let's ask this another way. If you knew you wanted to be an accountant, and you could be an accountant at 20 (and be paid to do so) would you stay in college for the experience, or go be an accountant. Let's say that you also knew that no matter what, you knew that you would not be able to continue being an accountant past the age of 38. Add in that at any time, your career as an accountant could end because you may not be physically able to continue being an accountant (although you would be able to do other things). Would you insist that all accountants stay in school for four years, or would it be acceptable for really talented candidates to pursue their career after only one or two years of school. I know that this is a bad example because of the education required to be an accountant, but put that aside and look at only the opportunity and the limited window. Would you demand that every accountant stay in school, or would it be okay for the most talented candidates to leave and go make money?

@justanotherfan

Over a lifetime (40 years), high school grads average $1.2 million; with a bachelor's degree, $2.1 million; a master's degree, $2.5 million. Even at the higher end, the average person makes in a lifetime less than half of what the average NBA player makes in one year (average is$ 5.15M). Unless you inherited a position in the family's corporate business, even the higher paid executives have to work almost a lifetime to get to that level.

Also, no one is demanding that athletes stay one year or three years in college or that they attend college in the first place; that is entirely their decision. BTW, a lot of careers have even more stringent requirements in order to work on your field. As an Engineer, I have to take a test after finishing college to become an EIT or Engineer-in-training, after that, I have to show 4 years of relevant experience working under a licensed engineer in order to become eligible to take the PE (professional Engineer) test , and after passing it, then I can officially work as an Engineer; I would say those are much harsher requirements than staying in college 1 or two years. Of course I don't have to take these tests or become licensed, but without a license, I cannot work as an engineer and if I do I am subject to legal penalties. The same is true for lawyers, doctors, yes...accountants and many other professions. So when it comes to requirement to work on your chosen field, athletes have it pretty easy and the monetary compensation is huge.

@justanotherfan You don't know me dude. I spent many nights eating out a jar of peanut butter and covered in 4 to 5 blankets because we had no heat. You think I worked at 12 because I wanted to? No sir my mother (God bless her heart) had two other boys. You see sir I grew up fast and hard. I didn't want to be a burden to my mother and my family, so I set out into the world woefully unprepared because I had no father to teach me the ways of life or have my back when I needed it. When life knocked me down (and it has) I got up and knocked off the dust. So please spare me the you're an expert on the poor.

If you want to solve the world's poverty issue then by all means, but don't tell me Colleges should set the players families up in homes and cars because it's the right thing to do. As long as the money is there from the NBA the players will leave for the NBA. As Embiid did. It doesn't matter whether you grew up poor or wealthy. So spare me the ideology that the only reason young men leave for the league early is because of the poverty they and their families come from.

You want to help people? Don't give them welfare, give them a job.

@DoubleDD I'm assuming you are doing well now? Life is not fair but I'm glad you turned it around! I love seeing how Ben Mac is doing, and he's giving so much back to his community! I hope he gets his degree!!! Really sorry you had a tough time!

@Crimsonorblue22 My friend I've learned a lot of hard lessons. I like to think of myself as a late bloomer :). Yes I'm doing quite well. I have no complaints only that I wasn't so hard headed ;). My daughter is headed off to college at either Iowa or KU. I know but Iowa has an excellent language and arts program (I'm still holding out for KU). My future and health benefits are secure.

The biggest problem being poor or growing up poor is everybody feels sorry for you (like you have some kind of a disease). They want to give you charity instead of giving you the tools and education to fend for yourself. The worst thing you can do for a poor person is make them dependent on your charitable donations. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against helping the poor, but if you want to really help them give them a job. There's no feeling like making your own money.

@DoubleDD you are a proud man, there's nothing wrong helping a friend out, whether it's a warm meal or a warm coat! But you are right, education is the best way to better your life and your family's. Keep working on your daughter!!!!

Double D I would love to hear your story.. I am white but here I go.

My parents were poor but fortunately from a close family with six great-aunts who would give my father odd jobs to help put food on the table beyond his job. My parents upgraded from a one bedroom trailer to a two bedroom trailer when I was 4 and there were six of us. When I was 8 they rented a house and as the only boy I got my own room. You can imagine how 3 sisters (one older) felt about that. Back in the day, about the only thing a girl could do was baby sit while I could roam the neighborhood and make money picking up dogsh*t, shoveling snow! etc. I wish we had a system where anyone could easily go make a few bucks within walking distance. I just learned to make a buck where I could, when I could after school and weekends after football and track practice. I have my first paycheck stub from painting at our local pool.
65 cents an hour (gross) on weekends before summer started.

I believe we all deserve the chance to make a buck in a bunch of ways just like that- but the work isn't next door and some don't go look for it. There is a gray area I can consider unjustice for some ethnic groups who seem caught in a losing cycle of poverty and government dependence, but I also consider some think they are entitled for a handout and work the system rather that lift themselves up.

One of my favorite movies is "Dave". He runs a temp agency and ends up as a substitute president. He comes up with a jobs bill where everyone who wants a job can have one. I would love that program in the country. Yes, you may start at the bottom sweeping trash, but it's a start-now you work your way up depending on the value you contribute.

Please forgive me if I'm missing something, I am a well paid OIl & Gas exec but it still pick up dogsh*t in my yard and take out the trash or give my kids allowance to to the same. I think we are on the same page. Please don't take offense if I missed something and let me know where I made the wrong turn.

@JayHawkFanToo If you're a bread winner playing by the rules, the journey is never swift to financial stability or success. To even work as a journeyman AWS certified welder at, let's say Ford or GM- or Procter & Gamble or KCP & L, the BNSF RR, or Black & Veatch, or wherever that's not a flippin sweatshop & allows a middle class blue collar guy to stake his claim, you must have at minimum, 8 years journeyman level experience verified on company letter head. And this has zero to do with either a skilled or unskilled trade union. If you want more than an entry level job flipping burgers for a minimum wage or $15 per hr fast food job, (dream on) my suggestion would be this...Train either in an educational or apprenticeship discipline or & earn your worth as you train. If you have less than the required levels of hands on working experience to earn a craft or management skill, than go ahead & flip burgers or ring a cash register at the local Kroger, or whatever your skillset allows you to perform, at the going rate. A kid right out of HS could knock down at best, maybe 20-25 K per year doing whatever, so small ball in Europe, straight out of prep ball or after year one of college paying more than 25Kper year-look long & hard before you turn it down. The NBA has damn few openings. Water actually does seek it's own level. If you want to give extra to a kid playing sports while receiving a Scott free 30 to 40 dollar K per year scholarship so we don't feel guilty, or give him a meal voucher at a fast food restaurant so he can treat his chickadee to an icee or a float, that's about the limit. A kid on an academic schollie has to be damn fortunate to get any kind of grant at all, plain & simple. Let him GET AN EDUCATION like most of us here and believe you're skilled & savvy enough to make your own way in life. Last time we checked, we already have an entire generation following us now that are perfectly content with living off of their relatives, or government entitlements, or Universities or off of anyone or any way they can without lifting a finger. If a 120 -150 thousand dollar educational stipend is not enough, then I'm sorry, I just don't think there is much more left in the well. These "student athletes' who claim financial duress is the reason for their labors for one tough year at a D 1 college to get in the NBA & feed the familiy(ies), wake your butt up. The D league & foreign BB will pay while you learn the trade. Straight outta HS-you really don't know Jack & your market value has not yet been determined.

@JayhawkRock78 though it doesn't really matter I'm also white (whatever that is). I grew up on the streets of KC both sides. Spent a lot of time on Strawberry Hill just west of Downtown. As we moved around a lot (we couldn't pay the rent). Some places where better than others, but in the end it was always about surviving. My mother tried so hard.

My first job was sweeping a parking lot at a convenience store. A lot of trucks stopped there and it picked up a lot of dust. So I would sweep and water down the lot. It paid $20 dollars a week, not bad for a 12 year old. :). I was a huge baseball fan at the time yet this store didn't sell baseball cards. So being the hard headed person I was finally convinced the owner (a very nice lady)(after all instead of feeling sorry for me she gave me a job) to stock baseball cards in her shop. She couldn't keep them stocked they where selling so fast. ;). So she gave me a promotion. Not only did I sweep and wet the parking lot but now I would stock the shelves and freezers. Yes my pay increased :).

I left home when I was 15, not out of hate or anything, Just didn't want to be a burden on my beloved mother. I did odd jobs here and there always making enough to get by, and send a little home when I could. As I got older I meant a women that was meaner and tougher than I (A Full blooded Italian women). For some reason she loved and believed in me? You know the saying, behind every great man is a great woman? Well I think it's true, not that I'm great man or anything. It was only after getting and searching for an education that my life began to turn. I knew how to make money, but I didn't know what to do with it? How to budget? How to save? How to plan for the future? How to make my money work for me instead of just working for money?

So I began to invest in real estate. Sure the first purchase was a bitch (excuse my language)(but it was). The second one came a bit easier and so on and so on. Also my skills as an employee improved also. I began to trade up in jobs, income, and experience . I was always looking. I figured if companies and cooperation's are going to do what's best for them, then so am I. When I say I'm the Jack of all trades master of none I mean it. LOL

The topic of being poor gets me a little riled. As so many persons want to feel sorry and right a check so they can sleep at night. Like they solved the problem or something. It's the whole give a man a fish and he can eat for a day, but teach him to fish and he can eat for a life time for me. I'm totally against putting anymore financial burdens on colleges. As I believe they are the Mecca of what makes this country truly great.

Paying players is one thing, but paying their families also. Really?

What I meant by,"white" was I worked and lived in a white neighborhood so when I went door to door asking for work or selling Watkins Vanilla bottles or collecting for UNICEF, people answered the door. I think I had an advantage as times were different and people felt safe answering the door. I will still answer the door for anyone, but my wife seldom does. She doesn't feel safe and unfortunately I think a lot of people don't. It's too bad. Most charity came from churches early on at a personal level-and teaching someone to fish as you pointed out was the goal. The Govt method perpetuates dependence, and I have a distant relative working the system. It burns me up.

@DoubleDD

Much respect for your story. I did not mean to offend you, and apologize if I did. You are right that I did not know your story, and now that I do, it offers some insight into what you wrote that I did not have before.

The story behind my comments is this:

I grew up in sports. I'm African American, so most people were of the belief that sports was all I had going for me. They were wrong. I was a very good student in school, scored in the top 10% on the ACT, went to college on an academic scholarship, went on to graduate school on scholarship, and now work a white collar job. It's nice, no doubt. I wouldn't have been able to afford college without those scholarships. So it is unfortunate that many feel that all these athletes have is sports when for many, that is not the case.

My frustration is the fact that because they play NCAA sports, they cannot do anything else. They can't work or profit from their name, image or likeness. That really upsets me. I think I told the story of a university marketing campaign that I appeared in while I was in school. A group of students were appearing in an ad campaign and as a part of that, we were being paid to be in a few pictures. When I say paid, I don't mean a lot of money. I think it was either $25 or $50 each. One of the people that was going to be in the ad was an athlete. However, they couldn't be paid for that because it wasn't related to their sport. Athletes can work summer camps and stuff, but they can't be paid for other things. As I have said before, I didn't think that was fair then and I don't think it's fair now.

But more than that, I remember being in school and talking to an athlete who was literally on the floor crying. This kid had just gotten a call from a family member telling him that his mother and two youngest siblings had just had their power cut off. This kid was in tears contemplating dropping out of school that night. But what made it even worse was the fact that as he sat there talking, he didn't even know how he would get back home to help his family if he dropped out because he didn't have enough money to buy the gas it would take to get him back there (I think he was from somewhere in Texas). It was just a really sad situation. Yes, he's getting an education and that gives him future hope, but none of that was going to do anything to help his family in that moment, which is what made it so sad. Granted, this kid wasn't a future pro, but the fact remains that the NCAA restrictions that monitor every penny an athlete earns, every free meal they get, etc make it really hard to do anything other than go to school and play their sport.

@globaljaybird

You point out the issue of qualifications. What exactly are the qualifications to be in the NBA? What is the skillset required? It's the same as being an actor, or being a musician. The skill is being able to do that at the highest possible level. Should a singer have to go to college before having a professional career? An artist? An actor? Schools have music, art and theatre programs, but I don't see anyone restricting who gets into those fields even though literally thosands of people wash out of those careers every day. Where are the people to say that those individuals need to go to school and shouldn't be working until they have an education. Where are the rules that prevent movies or music producers from signing those people until they are out of high school for at least a year? That's my issue. Why is it that we think it's not right for an athlete to go pro and make big money right out of high school, even as Taylor Swift and Miley Cyrus make millions as teenagers?

@justanotherfan My opinions are not intended to be any type of negative rant about restricting earning power at all. Everyone should be able to earn their fair market value regardless of their education level or age with no exceptions.

The real dilemma with paying an athlete on scholarship is that boosters will pay them to go to their alumni without doing anything at all, therefore undermining the entire process. When my nephew would have dinner with us while playing D 1 ball at UMKC in the early 90's it was a violation if he brought a teammate with him. That's awful picky IMO, but that's the way it was. So when you leave the barn door open the fox slips in for the chickens as soon as he knows it's unguarded. Or the Laird Nollers & Crown Chevrolet guys show up with the keys to a Navigator or a Corvette & say you're an emp performing marketing for the dealership. I've no problem at all with a kid working while playing ball, as long as it's a legitimate endeavor & not a façade. The NBAPA is the entity that requires a kid to be one year out of HS to join the L, so the real reason for that is purely job security for the guys paying them 5-10% of their salary for representation. That's mighty big dough for union dues & also can be viewed as job insurance for the union itself. Also the owners & GM's get a very nice view of the players they covet & have followed since very young children, for virtually free. And with any type of purchase in life & to quote my Dad, "It just don't get no cheaper than free."

This is not an easy problem to negotiate though I am certainly not in favor of it. If the talent level or skillset is present for them to work in that craft I'm all for it. My point is that most of these CBB players do not & likely will never attain those skills, & either an education which is presented free of charge or an apprenticeship in the D league or Europe, South America, etc; will allow them to earn while they hone their skills, or work & endure as a professional in a foreign league to have a fruitful career. Keith Langford is an excellent example of earning power in the world market of foreign pro ball. He may still be the highest paid player in Europe & at one time was earning about 2 mill a year. The real issue that most kids out of HS must deal with is maturity to understand the difference between earning a living from an employer, & "playing" around with a fantasy. We all learn that sooner or later the gloves come off & the real fight begins so to speak, & responsibility & obligations take precedence, and priorities & self restraint become the assignment going forward. My boys have heard me many times say that the most difficult task in the world is carrying that lunch bucket back & forth to a job you detest. But also it must be accurately perceived as only the means to an end. You still go home to your family & loved ones each night, and you really only do reap what you sow.

@justanotherfan Yea but Actors and musicians don't get free rides in college. You're not fixing the problem, and your just passing the buck unto colleges. You want to put the financially responsibility of the poverty on colleges because they make a little money off some of those kids. You say a college player can't make any money of their likeness, which is true. Let me ask you a question who makes who? Does the player make the college or does the college make the player? Some thing to think about.

I could understand if the colleges were just sitting back collecting and rolling in the money. Yet they don't. Every cent that is earned or made is reinvested in the college education or experience. It's not like they are hoarding the money. Not to mention most colleges live and die with the amount of money they received from alumni.

Ok so I'm going to college I'm not a ball player but my family is poor. I get a call that the lights are going to be turned off. Is the college going to give me some money? Why not? What because I don't make the college money? I disagree to play basketball at a college like KU is a privilege, not a right that comes with a salary. In fact any young person that can receive help with their college education should be thankful instead of greedy.

Besides as somebody already pointed out. If these kids need the money so bad and right now, because his family who raised him in poverty for over 18 years can't live another day being poor. Especially when they see the potential millions that the NBA might be offering. Then go over seas, and get paid. It's not like the education part of the equation is important anyways

@DoubleDD One more scenario and I'll let this subject go.

Mitchell Ballock, from Eudora, in a couple years could be one of the top high school basketball players in the country.

Coming from a small town, many locals will start to build him up as a future D1 basketball star--maybe even future NBA star. Many kids from around town will idolize him. Local merchants will sell jerseys with his number and name on it. Go to Eudora basketball games, and hundreds will be wearing that jersey with "KU" or "Duke" emblazoned across the front of it. Merchants are making thousands of dollars selling these shirts.

His name and number are being used--possibly without his permission.

Should he be entitled to any of the profits off the sale of those shirts?

P.S. This same scenario happened in Ottawa two years ago with Semi Ojeleye, now at Duke.

I've a serious problem with all this reference to people "living in poverty." And I've also an apprehension for people to identify their ethnic background as relevant to the process. That said, my ancestors immigrated from Europe before the Civil War, fought in it, became paraplegic because of it, yet married, worked & had extremely large families that succeeded from their desire & diligence to do that, while toiling their lives at methodical tasks like loomers & dirt farmers to put food on the table, and am willing to wager that 75% of the membership here has heritage of just this fashion. Most younger rats on this blog have a real problem understanding economics/hardships prior to the days of sign & drive autos or relating truly "going without" into their own life equations. By younger, I reference to about a 1975 birth date or more recent.

First off define poverty. Is it a tube tv & not an led, is it digital reception or satellite/cable, is it dial up instead of wifi? Is it a flip phone & not smart? See my point? Some of us older guys/gals grew up DAMN POOR, but were raised to live within means as there was just not options for installment loans, credit cards, or other options to rectify economic improvement without physically working for it. This is the way proud, honest, God fearing people were raised & lived. I was mowing yards with a reel mower when I was 8 years old & running a diswasher in a coffee shop/restaurant & baling hay about 12.. People born after say 1980 perceive much of what they see economically completely different. They see a government & society that throws other peoples money around at all kinds of problems & always has, and not beyond the money itself. And my opinion is that the denigration of the American family is a real culprit in this process of unaccountability for our own situations. Is entirely too easy to shift the ownership of one's problems to another entity & ignore the true factors, and many people of my children's generation have never existed in a world that was different. Like I said previously- we have one entire generation of people who are perfectly comfortable living off of someone else, be it their parents, their governments, handouts or crime. Hell if I didn't give a shit about how I put food on my childrens' table when we thank the Lord for it, I'd have to consider being a damn drug dealer, liquor store proprietor, or just moving to Colorado. When I was a kid if you had a car, that was a luxury-a garage to put it in? Tall cotton.
My Dad drove a 1929 Ford until about 1958 when he upgraded to a 53 Belair. His priorities were in order, but he died in 59 so it was back to square one for Mom & 3 dependent children. She worked split shifts at menial employment & did what she needed to do to own up to her responsibilities. She never took a penny from social assistance & we never went hungry. Oft times we didn't eat that well, & when there wasn't enough bacon to feed 4 people, we soaked up the grease with bread & went on. I'm willing to bet that there are a lot of rats on this board that will never be able to relate to the phrase, "Poor people have poor ways." But when you have your priorities in order, life's obstructions are steps that must be taken to provide for the children you've been given the privilege of loving & raising. And it is a God given privilege to provide for them, as well as the ultimate responsibility of conscience and right. Making babies is absolutely not just a recreational pastime that is without consequences.
You are accountable to your children & that's the bottom line. Where there is a will, the really are ways to accomplish the goal of raising a family the right way. Also I'm assuming most peopledo know right from wrong. What you do with it is entirely up to you.

I'm not advocating for anyone to "give" the players anything. I am saying that if people are willing to pay them for the use of their likeness, they should be able to.

For example, last year, Jabari Parker cooked up something called Jabari bars. Guess what, he couldn't sell those and profit from it without putting his scholarship in jeopardy. That's where I think this has all gone sideways. It's not that I want the student athlete to be given something. I just want them to have the same ability to generate income for themselves.

If a business sees a student athlete and says "hey, I want that kid to promote my (insert business here)" why is it that that's illegal. I know you argue that its a slippery slope, but isn't that business making a business decision about where to allocate their marketing dollars? Would some businesses use it to just shuttle thousands of dollars to athletes? Of course, but in the free marketplace, why should we say a business can't waste money on a spokesperson.

Do you ever notice that when showing clips promoting the NCAA tournament, the NCAA uses images of players who no longer have eligibility? Do you ever wonder why? It's because the NCAA (and it's member schools) own all rights to those images, and they do it without paying any royalties whatsoever. That's why the NCAA has been fighting this unionization thing. If the student athletes unionize, the whole structure through which the NCAA promotes its events will have to change because the union would require the NCAA to compensate it for the use of the likeness of its former members. That's what's coming and that's why EA Sports stopped making college sports video games. The pro games already pay licensing fees to the pro players associations. The college games did not. The whole structure of the system will change if students are allowed to profit from their name and likeness, or if it is determined that the NCAA cannot use the name and likeness of student athletes without compensation.

@globaljaybird
OUSTANDING,POST. To your point, we have people living below the poverty line living in decent homes or apts with cable, color tv, microwave, car, etc. with plenty of food to eat at that. Responsibility to your children-I never heard my grandparents or parents ever say that phrase but their priorities and actions said that phrase in bright lights.

@justanotherfan And so goes the college scholarship as we know it--and the game. All for greed !!

@Wigs2 These young players can have their likeness and get paid it's called pro ball. You know professional players? Persons that get paid to play a sport. They don't have to go to college. Yet for some reason they do wonder why?

You pay college players and you upend the very structure of College Sports altogether. However if we are going to go down this rode then there needs to be a college draft. You know so one college doesn't buy up all the talent. Hey if players are going to get paid then they shouldn't be able pick what school they go to. They should be drafted. Then after a little time maybe they could create a free agent market freeing the college players to test the market after two years for one team.

I can see it now.

Coach Cal: hey kid come to UK and will give you a candy bar and shoe deal. You'll make millions before you even play a game.

Recruit: Yea but UCLA wants to use my likeness for a franchise of fast food joints. They're promising billions.

This is a slippery, slippery mess. Be careful what you ask for. The grass isn't always greener on the other side.

@Wigs2 "The elite players don't go to schools like UMKC. Almost all go to elite basketball programs like KU, UK, Duke, UNC, UCLA. Those programs are not operating in the red. "

In case you never heard of this guy, you should see the bio. Also our nephew played on this squad & had tryouts with the Hawks, Sonics, & Bulls. Could not pass physicals or probably would've played somewhere professionally. Ronnie could shoot the lights out, but never looked back. Got the degree & has been a successful businessman & father for 20 years. Tony played a long time & made considerable money doing so. Was Dallas 1st round pick.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Dumas ↗

@justanotherfan

I understand what you are saying but I believe you are looking at it the wrong way when you say student athletes don't get paid.

I have posted before several publications that outline what student athletes get and it is not a small sum; on the average it is well over $50k per year in direct benefits (tuition, room and board and incidentals), not including the training they get from top of the line coaches and trainers, the facilities available only to then as well a the exposure they receive.

The real word is not that different. If you work for a corporation and they want to use your likeness in advertisements they can do so and you are not allowed to use it for a competitor. Likewise, any process or product you develop becomes property of the employer and not the employee.

So what if an athlete cannot get $25 to get his picture in an advertisement? He is probably getting close to $100K in benefits every year and a reasonable person would think that with those benefits the school has to receive something in return? Wouldn't you think?

How about the Jabari bars? First, if you just Google "Graham cracker dessert bar recipes" you will see that there are literally 100's of similar recipes and the Jabari bars are likely just one of those recipes and a patent is pretty much out of the question, so is the person or persons wanting to market the product doing it because it is a new product (it is not) or because he is a UK player? How about if his business partners, say a business partnership in Vegas, ask him to alter the outcome of a game in order to continue marketing the product? This is where the lines become blurred and the game gets corrupted. You can see where organized crime would quickly step in to "fund" student athletes business ventures and the integrity of the game goes away.

An athlete that does not like the constraints of college sports can always by-pass it by joining the D-League or playing in one of the minor leagues or overseas. The one year after HS is not an NCAA rule, it is an NBA rule. Playing in the NBA is not a right, it is a privilege attained by showing competence in the sport and excellence in college is the best but by no means the only way to make it to the League.

@HighEliteMajor Thought this thread needs to get back on track of topic.
If we miss on Bragg, it may be as costly as the whiff on Julius Randle.

http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/27/report-carlton-bragg-setting-up-visit-to-ucla/ ↗ ↗

@globaljaybird Thanks for the link .. I read there that Bragg is going to decide in the late signing period. That is contrary to what I had read elsewhere. Hoping he doesn't wait.

When the music stop, I cannot imagine that one of top post guys doesn't pick KU. The question is if we get two, and the question is if we can get a highly talented, foundational, non-OAD guy -- Bragg seems like the only option on our radar that fits the bill.