Started By
Message
re: Would Eliminating 1-n-Done Improve SEC Basketball?
Posted on 2/23/14 at 2:53 pm to BluegrassBelle
Posted on 2/23/14 at 2:53 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
No. Kentucky was dominant even without the one and done (came around the 2000s) with only occasional competition from a handful of rotating programs.
I agree, UK is UK with or without it, but it's scary to think how good y'all would be if y'all had Davis and others this year and possibly next.
1
Posted on 2/23/14 at 2:53 pm to undecided
I think the one and done is bad for CBB in general. It is my opinion that if you accept a scholarship you should have to play the whole way through (all 4 years), in any sport, but that's just me.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 2:54 pm to BluegrassBelle
If we are going to discuss officials, we need to have a conversation about the idea of "SEC refs." There is no such thing, but this board seems to think they are real and are the worst.
The one and done rule has been great for college basketball. I will take watching Anthony Davis play for a year over not getting to see him at all.
Abolishing the rule is more to do with helping NBA teams scout, more than it has to do with improving the college game.
The one and done rule has been great for college basketball. I will take watching Anthony Davis play for a year over not getting to see him at all.
Abolishing the rule is more to do with helping NBA teams scout, more than it has to do with improving the college game.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 2:56 pm to everytrueson
quote:
I think the one and done is bad for CBB in general. It is my opinion that if you accept a scholarship you should have to play the whole way through (all 4 years), in any sport, but that's just me.
Scholarships are a 1 year deal anyways, not a 4 year promise.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 2:58 pm to undecided
So do you guys not think this would create any parity? I know that UK's of the world will be okay but would talent not be better developed and more even distributed among the schools
Posted on 2/23/14 at 2:59 pm to undecided
quote:
What do you mean when you say invest in coaching? How much do you think Auburn should be paying Tony Barbee for the shiteshow he produces? I think schools are willing to pay the money but are paying the wrong individuals
Invest in coaching = being willing to pay for quality coaching. Never said Auburn should be paying Barbee more.
quote:
Also, there's just not a lot of quality coaches in basketball as there is in football it seems? Especially because you can go to mid major schools and have success along with long term job security i.e. Shaka Smart?
Obviously if you're not a top program you're going to have to take a chance on a potential up and comer or find someone that has a few blemishes. But you also have to be willing to cut bait to prevent a further decline.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 2:59 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
Scholarships are a 1 year deal anyways, not a 4 year promise.
I realize this. It doesn't change my point. If you decide to go to college you should actually finish.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:00 pm to undecided
quote:
So do you guys not think this would create any parity? I know that UK's of the world will be okay but would talent not be better developed and more even distributed among the schools
How many 1 and dones are the worst SEC schools getting anyways though? The Auburns, South Carolinas of the SEC seems like this wouldnt affect at all. It seems like it would effect the middle programs the most who tend to have a 1 or 2 and done most of the time playing on the team.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:00 pm to reedus23
quote:
I agree, UK is UK with or without it, but it's scary to think how good y'all would be if y'all had Davis and others this year and possibly next.
If you do what the OP suggests, Davis likely never plays college ball.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:00 pm to everytrueson
quote:
I realize this. It doesn't change my point. If you decide to go to college you should actually finish.
Not sure why they should be forced to finish. Seems silly and totalitarian.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:01 pm to undecided
quote:
So do you guys not think this would create any parity?
fricking Butler played in back to back championships with one and done rule in place. There is enough parity
quote:
would talent not be better developed and more even distributed among the schools
If you eliminate the rule, the same schools that get better talent would still get the better talent.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:01 pm to thunderbird1100
Because there are others that could actually use that money?
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:02 pm to everytrueson
quote:
Because there are others that could actually use that money?
Colleges arent charities.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:03 pm to everytrueson
quote:
I realize this. It doesn't change my point. If you decide to go to college you should actually finish.
So then you think football players shouldn't be allowed to leave a year early for the NFL? Or if the Olympics occur during a swimmer's career they shouldn't be allowed to leave for that and postpone school?
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:04 pm to RTR America
With the two-and-through rule, KY won't be able to horde talent like they currently basically do. They won't consistently have that many #1 classes as those players would want easier paths to show case their talent. With that said, those guys probably won't go to most other SEC schools, but it could trickle down.
That doesn't necessarily mean the SEC would be any better as the talent everywhere would be better. I agree that it is mainly due to coaching and variance right now.
That doesn't necessarily mean the SEC would be any better as the talent everywhere would be better. I agree that it is mainly due to coaching and variance right now.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:04 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
So then you think football players shouldn't be allowed to leave a year early for the NFL? Or if the Olympics occur during a swimmer's career they shouldn't be allowed to leave for that and postpone school?
I actually do.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:05 pm to BasedGator
quote:
With the two-and-through rule, KY won't be able to horde talent like they currently basically do.
So instead of keeping talent for one year, we'd get to keep them for two if they decide to forgo the NBA.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:06 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
Colleges arent charities.
They shouldn't be free developmental leagues either.
Edit: I get it, it's a business that makes money (TV contracts etc) But I think it hurts humans in the long run. IF you are good enough to play a sport out of high school then do it, but otherwise I would like to see where student-athletes stay and finish before moving on. Crucify me if you want, it is just my humble opinion.
This post was edited on 2/23/14 at 3:09 pm
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:08 pm to everytrueson
quote:
They shouldn't be free developmental leagues either.
That's the college's choice and I'd like to keep it that way.
Posted on 2/23/14 at 3:08 pm to BasedGator
quote:
KY won't be able to horde talent like they currently basically do.
So they will go Kansas, Duke, North Carolina, Michigan State, or Arizona. The rule would literally change nothing, but make it easier for NBA scouts to evaluate players.
I'm all for them adding two years because I think a lot of guys could use it, but to think it would have any effect on recruiting doesn't make much sense.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News