As the NCAA men’s basketball championship approaches, so too does the season of players declaring for the NBA draft.
Those declaring come from a variety of backgrounds. They can be four-year veterans of college basketball, third-year players looking to capitalize on a standout season, sophomores who paid their dues or freshmen, the so-called one-and-done players.
And, per usual, it’s these one-and-done players that are garnering the most attention. In order to be drafted by an NBA team, a player must be at least 19 and one year out of high school. For some, that means heading to Europe for a season or two, but for most it entails taking their talents to a storied program for one year before bolting to the pros.
The one-and-done rule represents the very worst of college athletics. It’s cheap lip service to academics that forces players to attain 25 percent of a college degree they don’t want while potentially compromising their earning potential. For the sake of these athletes, the one-and-done rule should be abolished.
The one-and-done program does exactly one good thing: It lines the pocketbooks of everyone involved in college basketball except the players. It’s no secret that March Madness is big business – the NCAA expects to reap about $900 million, or 90 percent of its annual revenue, from the tournament.
And most of the time, the stars of those tournaments are one-and-done players. Last year, a whopping 13 first-round picks – nearly half – were one-and-done players. This year, some mock drafts have as many as six of the top 10 picks being freshman.
It’s obvious that there’s a huge chunk of basketball talent who would rather not be in school. These players are risking another year of their career for institutions that don’t care about them. And when the average NBA career is only five years – that’s an opportunity cost many can’t afford.
Granted, one-and-done is a pitfall that has its benefits. Florida Gulf Coast University, a little known public university in Fort Meyers, Florida, saw its application rates jump 35 percent after a deep run in March Madness in 2013. And that’s not even counting the millions some of these schools make off of March Madness.
Proponents of the rule will also argue that this step is important for maturity purposes – that players need extra seasoning before going to the big leagues.
That’s preposterous. If that were the case, players can play in the development league for a year for pay. But spending a year at a university they probably don’t care about won’t magically mature some of these prospects that deserve to make money for their talents.
This isn’t an indictment of college basketball. Far from it. Merely, it’s an advocacy for choice. If a player feels that they can benefit from going to school, they should be allowed to go and play. There are real benefits for players who want to get their degrees, play under a seasoned NCAA coach or see if the university life is for them.
For that to work though, the impetus must be put on the athlete to determine what is best for themselves. Make it their choice, not their obligation.