Money Players

The NOT kinder, gentler NCAA

Beginning in 2010, players who want to return to college will have until May 8th to renounce their NBA eligibility. The NCAA and the various "stakeholders" were all consulted. All believe this rule change will positively impact not only the game, but also the athletes. Of course, I still haven't heard from one college basketball player -- the ones most impacted by this rule -- who thinks this is a good rule change.

I previously wrote why this change is not fair to athletes -- and also completely short sighted by those who claim to put "student-athletes first."

Yes, way too many underclass players put their name in the NBA draft, even if they do not have a legitimate chance to be selected. But that is not a fair justification to gut the rule. And neither are the other reasons cited...

The NCAA news release announcing the change provides the following rationale: "The shorter declaration period will assist coaches in roster planning and encourage student-athletes to refocus on academics before the draft and decrease the potential for amateurism rules violations." Yes, it will help coaches in roster planning. However, the notion that this encourages players to "refocus on academics" is absurd. If anything, it accomplishes the exact opposite. At least with the later date, genuine student-athletes who are on the semester system can finish their academic year and then crisscross the country to workout for the NBA teams. Now that these workouts must take place prior to May 8th, look for even more players to struggle academically -- or simply drop out -- during the spring semester/quarter.

Also, it is laughable to suggest this will "decrease the potential for amateurism rules violations." As if the next amateurism rules violation would be their first.

But, wait. There's more. "In addition, the proposal removes the option for draft entrants who are not selected to resume college eligibility. Student-athletes with eligibility remaining previously had up to 30 days after the draft to declare their intention to return." In the event a player who remains in the NBA draft gets hurt after May 8, too bad. Where's the compassion? What happened to the "student-athlete first" model the NCAA was allegedly trumpeting?

Fine, change the rule to help college coaches firm up their rosters and protect college basketball in general. But don't sell us on the notion that this will help players academically or that this snakeoil will solve any ills in college basketball.

For some real snake oil, try some Bankruptcy Tonic...

--Marc Isenberg

NCAA panel votes to screw athletes yet again

Last year, I wrote a Basketball Column opposing a proposal initiated by the Atlantic Coast Conference to drastically shorten the time period underclassmen basketball players would be given to test their NBA market value.

According to USA Today's Steve Wieberg, "An NCAA panel voted Monday to compress the time frame, giving non-seniors who enter the draft until May 8 to decide whether to keep their names in the pool or resume their college careers. That's more than a month earlier than the NBA's mid-June withdrawal deadline...The NCAA had given them until 30 days after the draft — until late July — to declare their intent to return to school." Of course, the NCAA membership spins this as a positive, suggesting this is actually in the student-athlete's best interest, allowing "underclassmen who pull out of the draft more time to refocus on academics and lessen 'the potential for outside individuals to have a negative influence.'"

I have no problem trying to rid the basketball world of outside negative influences, but first we need to agree on who exactly these negative influences are. Is it someone, maybe an agent, who offers information contrary to the college coach? It's easy to heap blame on agents when a kid turns pro, then falls in draft. But, that is an oversimplification of how these decisions get made. In fact, unless your Derrick Rose, Mike Beasley, K-Love or Blake Griffin, there is risk associated with either decision.

ACC proposal to shorten time to test the NBA waters

The NCAA's board of directors have agreed to consider a proposal put forth by the Atlantic Coast Conference to dramatically reduce the time college basketball underclassmen who declare for the NBA draft have to make their final decision.

A couple high-profile ACC coaches make the case for changing the NCAA bylaws that allows basketball underclassmen to methodically test their NBA market value.

UNC basketball coach Roy Williams: "If you give somebody forever to make a decision, they're going to take forever. It leaves your program in limbo, it leaves your current players in limbo."

As the artist known again as Price famously sung, "Forever is a mighty long time." Actually, there is a deadline for underclassmen who declare for the NBA Draft and who want to preserve their college eligibility. They must renounce their eligibility for the NBA Draft in writing prior to the draft. So players have up to 2 1/2 months to tryout for the NBA. (Players who declare for the draft, but don't get picked can maintain return to college ball as long as they keep their eligibility in tact. See former UK player Randolph Morris.)

Florida State coach Leonard Hamilton: "Too many kids are putting their names in and they're taking their names out. Their names shouldn't be in there in the first place...You have so many kids making poor decisions, it's obvious some of these kids are getting poor advice."

Coach Hamilton already thinks these "kids" are making poor decisions. Not exactly sure how reducing the tryout period will lead to better decisions.

I hate when I have to argue against smart guys like Williams and Hamilton. Instead, I'll rely on my friend Mike DeCourcy, Sporting News senior writer, to make the case. DeCourcy calls the proposed rule change "such a grand, epic mistake. It's based entirely on the coaches' self-interest -- not what is best for the college game, the sport in general or the players who make it all work."

DeCourcy continues:

Because every coach knows well that if he loses a draft-quality player in April, May or June, there is no hope there'll be a player available who's either talented enough or eligible enough to replace him...Searching for an unsigned senior in the spring of his senior year is like picking through a music-store cutout bin. You're not going to find a Beatles record.

The real "problem" here is this process makes a coach's life tougher for a few months. That's absolutely true. He's got to deal with the player, the parents, the teams, the unreasonable dreams. But this method also leads to fewer false-positives than an April deadline would.

In the final analysis, the system for college basketball underclassmen who "test the waters" is not perfect, but it is far better than the system for college football underclassmen who, once they declare for the NFL Draft, cannot return to school to play football again. Players and NBA teams probably can shorten the 2 1/2 month evaluation period, but they definitely need more time than the ACC is currently proposing.

--Marc Isenberg

A couple high-profile ACC coaches make the case for changing the NCAA bylaws that allows basketball underclassmen to methodically test their NBA market value.

UNC basketball coach Roy Williams: "If you give somebody forever to make a decision, they're going to take forever. It leaves your program in limbo, it leaves your current players in limbo."

As the artist known again as Price famously sung, "Forever is a mighty long time." Actually, there is a deadline for underclassmen who declare for the NBA Draft and who want to preserve their college eligibility. They must renounce their eligibility for the NBA Draft in writing prior to the draft. So players have up to 2 1/2 months to tryout for the NBA. (Players who declare for the draft, but don't get picked can maintain return to college ball as long as they keep their eligibility in tact. See former UK player Randolph Morris.)

Florida State coach Leonard Hamilton: "Too many kids are putting their names in and they're taking their names out. Their names shouldn't be in there in the first place...You have so many kids making poor decisions, it's obvious some of these kids are getting poor advice."

Coach Hamilton already thinks these "kids" are making poor decisions. Not exactly sure how reducing the tryout period will lead to better decisions.

I hate when I have to argue against smart guys like Williams and Hamilton. Instead, I'll rely on my friend Mike DeCourcy, Sporting News senior writer, to make the case. DeCourcy calls the proposed rule change "such a grand, epic mistake. It's based entirely on the coaches' self-interest -- not what is best for the college game, the sport in general or the players who make it all work."

DeCourcy continues:

Because every coach knows well that if he loses a draft-quality player in April, May or June, there is no hope there'll be a player available who's either talented enough or eligible enough to replace him...Searching for an unsigned senior in the spring of his senior year is like picking through a music-store cutout bin. You're not going to find a Beatles record.

The real "problem" here is this process makes a coach's life tougher for a few months. That's absolutely true. He's got to deal with the player, the parents, the teams, the unreasonable dreams. But this method also leads to fewer false-positives than an April deadline would.

In the final analysis, the system for college basketball underclassmen who "test the waters" is not perfect, but it is far better than the system for college football underclassmen who, once they declare for the NFL Draft, cannot return to school to play football again. Players and NBA teams probably can shorten the 2 1/2 month evaluation period, but they definitely need more time than the ACC is currently proposing.

--Marc Isenberg

Education Must Teach That There is More to Life Than Hoop Dreams...Just Not Through The Way Len Elmore Suggests

By Nate Jones

Len Elmore is a man I respect for his accomplishments on and off the court. He’s a rarity in that following his playing career he pursued and completed a law degree at Harvard Law. However, I must respectfully disagree with his comments in his op-ed piece for this week’s Sports Business Journal.

In his article entitled “Education Must Teach That There is More to Life Than Hoop Dreams”, Elmore suggests that the NBA should raise its age limit requirement to at least three years out of high school so that “hoop dreams don’t eschew young black males chances to develop tools that will last a lifetime rather than a short lived basketball career.“ Elmore believes that it is time to “practice more responsible paternalism and remove the pro option after high school”. He says that he doesn’t worry about the top prospects and that he “only worries about the thousands or tens of thousands of pretenders who without the riches of NBA stardom or the promise of an education, are left with few viable options.” His solution to this dilemma is to force kids to play college basketball for at least three seasons.

Elmore’s argument has several flaws. Most notable is his belief that NCAA Division-1 revenue generating athletes (football and men’s basketball) actually have the same opportunity to learn in a college setting as the rest of the students on campus. The honest truth is that most of them are not prepared to succeed in college academically due to the circumstances they grow up in. 

It’s no secret that the top college football and basketball players often come from low-income, single-parent, inner-city situations. Students from those environments often don’t make it to college, not because of their misguided hoop dreams, but because of lack of opportunity and preparation. If they are accepted into college on an NCAA athletic scholarship (remember the key word here…athletic), they are expected to perform at the highest level on the court, and just get by off of it. This is basically for two reasons: 1) College Basketball is a big business, and inner-city blacks playing for top schools across the country are the main drivers of that business. With all the rah-rah about the NCAA, the schools, the administrators and the coaches wanting to see kids succeed academically, the bottom line is that the priority is on the court performance.  2) Even if the colleges wanted them to succeed academically, most of them wouldn’t be able to because the education system they were funneled through failed to prepare them to achieve academically at a top university. This has NOTHING to do with chasing a hoop dream and everything to do with socio-economic inequity.

The bottom line is that college football and college basketball are big business. While the NCAA and its members often tout the academic side of college athletics, there are far more economic incentives in place to keep the best players (who are often the most at-risk students) eligible than to provide proper mechanisms to receive a meaningful education.

But beyond the reality that most revenue generating athletes aren’t prepared for and/or aren’t given the opportunity to succeed on college campuses, Elmore’s suggestion that forcing kids to stay in school for three years will have a trickle down effect of getting more blacks to aim for the college diploma is just ridiculous. Again, low income, inner-city blacks aren’t failing to graduate from high school because they are chasing hoop dreams. They are failing to graduate from high school because many of them come from unstable, single-parent, low-income homes; grow up in rough inner-city neighborhoods; and attend run-down, under-financed schools, with overworked and/or uninspired teachers and administrators.

Mr. Elmore is correct to believe that education must teach that there is more to life than hoop dreams. However, having the NBA raise its age requirement is not the way to get there. If you’re worried about young blacks making the mistake of forgoing education at an early age in favor of focusing on an unlikely career of professional sports, entertainment, or whatever, I think your focus shouldn’t be on preventing surefire first round picks from becoming multi-millionaires (and uplifting their families beyond anything they could ever do for them with just a college degree), but on fundraising, lobbying houses of government, and reaching out to the inner-city to help open up more opportunities for low-income black males, so that the idea of achieving in the classroom and completing a college education seems more attainable than becoming great a professional athlete, a rapper, or in the worst case, a criminal.

Lastly, I must say that Mr. Elmore is wrong to state the Brandon Jennings “is neither a pioneer blazing a trail for other young men to follow nor a hero” and wrong to write him off as “simply another impressionable young man, susceptible to the hawkers and hangers-on who tell him what he wants to hear instead of what he needs to hear.” While no reasonable person is ready to anoint Jennings, he has every right to pursue his professional aspirations sooner rather than later. And Jennings may well become a pioneer. With his move, he's opening top prospects eyes to the opportunities to play basketball outside of just the NCAA, the D-League and maybe even the NBA. 

There are only 450 roster spots in the NBA, but there are also many more opportunities to play basketball for good money all across the world. But because of the market power of the NCAA and the NBA, many players have limited themselves to the traditional path of playing for the NCAA for no money (while coaches, administrators, broadcasters, sponsors, NCAA executives, etc. all benefit financially from the system) and then fighting for one of 450 spots in the NBA. 

But with basketball leagues continuing to grow all across the world, and guys like Jennings, and Josh Childress showing that it’s okay to utilize the entire world market, not just the traditional path of the NCAA and the NBA, you are going to see more and more opportunities open up for talented basketball players. While the NCAA is often slow to recognize and embrace change (mostly because they've never had serious competition), the (Basketball) World is Flat, as Thomas Friedman pointed out in his seminal book. Basketball is the fastest growing sport in the world -- and becoming more economically prosperous every day. In future years we will likely see more young men blaze the same trail as Jennings, especially if Jennings shows there is a viable path to professional basketball that does not include a pit stop in college and also provides an opportunity to earn money and get their families out of poor circumstances at an earlier date. The NCAA should either respond to this fast-changing world by letting go of its notion that U.S.-born players should be compelled to attend college for a set amount of years or by enhancing the experience it provides these gifted players. 

Nate Jones is an aspiring sports agent and a rising 2L at the UCLA School of Law. You can read more of his work at http://jonesonthenba.blogspot.com/

Notes from the 2008 NBA Draft

Had a great time in NYC. Hung out with the Love fam, before and after the draft. Post draft celebration was a little crazy with the trade to Minny, but it all worked out for the best for Kevin.

Photo by the great Bill Feinberg

Bobbito Garcia aka Cool Bob Love blogs on Kevin Love. Bobbito and K-Love met thru the "Gunnin’ for that #1 Spot" documentary that debuted on Friday. Listen to Beastie Boys' Adam Yauch, who directed and produced Gunnin', being interviewed on NPR.

On the Draft...

7 out of the 30 players drafted in the 1st round matriculated from the Pac-10, including 5 of the first 11 picks.

From TrueHoop: Jeffrey Ma of ProTrade, whose advanced analysis is a part of Portland's draft strategy: "Mark my words: Kevin Love will be the best player in this draft."

Okay, I marked Ma's words. I hope he's right. Mark my words: Beasley will be NBA rookie the year (I wouldn't mind if Kevin proves me wrong), over the next two seasons the Bulls will triple the number of playoff-series wins they've won in the last 10 years (they've only won one series), and Darrell Arthur will get a new agent.

--Marc Isenberg

 

The wild and crazy world of basketball

Several interesting takes on the allegedly sleazy business of basketball.

The first one comes from Denise Bowman, mother of Jerryd Bayless, in an OpEd by Paola Boivin.

Bowman on the mixed up, crazy world:
"Jerryd's dad has a Ph.D.; I have a master's. But neither of us was ever taught anything about navigating this craziness."

Sometimes intelligence can work against smart people. The agent business certainly has thrived on athletes not knowing all that much. Hopefully Ms. Bowman will read Money Players!! (Another shameless plug: A nice review of book by Michael McCann, a noted sports law scholar.)

ESPN's Dick Vitale on the barriers to NBA entry:
"An absolute disgrace. An embarrassment to the student-athlete. It's a joke that they're being denied an opportunity to make a living. Look at the names in this draft. They have a similar ring."

A very forward-thinking comment from college basketball's biggest cheerleader. But keep in mind that the NBA is not forcing them to go to college; only that they are 19-years and one year removed from high school. The schools willingly accept these titular student athletes.

Apparently much ado about nothing

Don Seeholzer from Pioneer Press writes on OJ May and potential character issues.

ESPN's Jay Bilas on allegations against OJ Mayo impacting his draft status:
"He is the most NBA-ready of the guards in the draft, and I think is a really good prospect," Bilas said. "The idea that somehow he's tainted. ... First of all, if it's true, he's certainly not alone. He's just one of the guys that it's surfaced on. And second, it's hardly anything that the NBA would concern itself with."

Wolves vice president of basketball operations Kevin McHale on whether he was concerned about Mayo's character and the allegations that he violated NCAA rules:
"No, not at all. Tell you what, if you said that every person who ever took any money in college would not be drafted, it'd be slim pickings."

Wow. McHale's diss of college hoops makes Shaq rap about Kobe sound tame. Interesting on a couple levels. One, McHale believes most drafted players have (shocking) violated NCAA rules and, two, NBA personnel does not care. Let the debate begin.

It's not the shoe deal, Mars Blackmon

"Now I don't know what you do with your five-percent, but…when you put [my husband] in a Waterbed Warehouse commercial, excuse me, you are making him common when you know he deserves the big four—shoe, car, clothing, soft drink. The four jewels of the celebrity endorsement dollar."
                                                        —Marcie Tidwell in the movie Jerry Maguire

With the 2008 NBA Draft just a few days away, the focus is on this year's rookie class and the potential impact they will hopefully make in the NBA. The NBA Draft is perhaps the most predictable of the pro leagues in terms of how selections pan out. Yes, the NBA always has its share of draft busts (e.g., Michael Olowokandi over Pierce, Nowitzki, Carter, et al.), but on average, the higher the pick, the better the performance. On the other hand, the NFL Draft fares much worse as a predictor of future performance, particularly when it comes to drafting quarterbacks. In the 2007-08 season, 7 out of the top 11 rated quarterbacks in the NFL were drafted after the 1st round.

Why is it easier to predict how basketball players will perform in the NBA? Basketball players mature earlier, at least in terms of size, weight and strength. Forget the argument whether young players are ready to play in NBA right out of high school and now after one year of college: These players selected in the NBA lottery have, on average, fared very well.

Predicting the next big Money Players

Let's look at how much money this year's rookie class will earn. Their playing contracts are "slotted" by selection. The Rookie Scale, established in 1995 by agreement between players and owners, determines what the first round picks are paid. In 1994, the last year of a free market for rookies, Glenn Robinson, the #1 pick in the NBA out of Purdue, reportedly signed a 10-year, $68.15 million contract. In 1995, Joe Smith, the #1 pick out of Maryland, earned $2,051,000 in his rookie year. The first pick in this year's NBA Draft, most likely Michael Beasley or Derrick Rose, will be the first rookie to earn above $4 million from his playing contract since 1994.

Endorsement income

Since NBA rookie playing salaries are pre-determined by draft selection, agents recruiting first-round picks typically emphasize what they can do to exploit marketing and endorsement opportunities. There is a good chance that one, maybe two marketing stars will emerge from this year's NBA Draft, but who those players are is less predictable.

SI.com's "Fortunate 50" lists the fifty highest-earning U.S. athletes (which includes salaries and/or winnings plus endorsement income). This is a great list to be on. In 2008, the average total annual earnings of the 50 athletes was $25.1 million. The breakdown: 64% from salaries/winnings and 36% from endorsements.

I crunched the numbers for NBA players. There are twenty six NBA players on SI.com's list. Thirteen of these players earn $5 million or more per year from endorsements. For these really fortunate 13 NBA players, they earn on average $11.6 million out of their total $26.6 million a year, or 44%, from endorsements. Then the bottom falls out for the 13 "less fortunate" NBA players. They derive just $1.1 million out of their total earnings of $18.4 million, or 6%, from endorsements. The takeaway: Endorsement money dries up fast. Focus on your playing career, be a good guy and perhaps the endorsement money will flow your way.

--Marc Isenberg