nobody will watch the g league. will you?? no. youd watch shu 100/100 times.
plus g league dynamic is terrible. ball hog gunner. and im an nba fan.
Gee, who could have possibly seen this happening
- Thread starter Halldan1
- Start date
plus g league dynamic is terrible. ball hog gunner. and im an nba fan.
Agree 100%. Do the owners want to fund it when they have a free system called NCAA basketball. The problem these “student athletes” have is with the NBA but they take it out on the college system. You don’t see any college hockey or baseball players having these problems.
I don’t see the G-league attracting significant eyeballs absent a scenario in which a truly unique talent went there. If Zion, for example, was there instead of Duke. Maybe some marginal interest. But with one-and-done soon to be over I don’t see that.
The G-league is or may be a better developmental league for certain players. It isn’t Siberia anymore. It has had lots of successful outcomes. But it will never gather the attention or revenue of collegiate sports which is from a fans perspective about the uniform and not who is wearing them.
The G-league is or may be a better developmental league for certain players. It isn’t Siberia anymore. It has had lots of successful outcomes. But it will never gather the attention or revenue of collegiate sports which is from a fans perspective about the uniform and not who is wearing them.
but his specific post said more people will watch. had nothing to do with it working. g league already works.
Saw a statistic that this year it worked out to where every roster opening night had approx. 3-4 G-league alums on it. That’s not insignificant by any stretch. Kids go there, get trained and coached by professionals and most importantly get to practice and play against huge talent and grown men fighting for jobs. That system works.
Coaches have contracts they don‘t even honor. They up and go when they feel like it, and that’s much more disruptive to programs than kids transferring — kids who aren’t under contract.
This is absolutely the way it ought to be. I’m sure Seton Hall will be burned at some point, but thats just the way it goes. They’re not here to serve us and they’re not here to serve coaches.
if we’re talking about what’s right, do you think there should be any exceptions for players getting into SHU, Villanova, Duke, etc if they don’t have the grades and scores the school generally requires for the non athletes?
There can be the same exceptions there’s always been. If an institution sees some value in admitting someone, then there they are. Letting in less qualified students began the day after college sports did!
So you accept the history of the exceptions but you don’t accept the history of the sit out. As long as they get all benefits and no tough consequences all is good.
there’s a deterrent of transferring from a place that made every exception to get them there. Call the whambulance.
Last edited:
It is an apples to oranges comparison. G-league is about professional growth - becoming better at your craft. College basketball is about that too in some respect (especially at the high major schools), but also about the experience, personal growth, educational growth, still having the ability to be a "kid" to some degree even though the demands are quasi-professional at times.
There is a universe in which both can and should exist. And it gives kids multiple options, which is a good thing.
There is a universe in which both can and should exist. And it gives kids multiple options, which is a good thing.
Didn’t say more people will watch than NCAA, but more people will watch and it could work like MLB, where there is a draft that includes HS age (like now) but more teams and slots. It works in MLB and no reason it can’t in NBA. Actually smaller rosters for BB so NBA can probably sweeten deals. It’s already happening.
I'd follow the Hall even if we were Division 3. Might have trouble finding the games on cable or whatever, but I'd be just as thrilled when we win and disgusted when we lose. There are a thousand things I'd watch before I'd be tuning on G League games. Maybe even one of those cheesy, awful, sappy Lifetime movies.
It's about the uniform, always. I watch the school I played baseball at online at times on the weekends, since they are never on TV absent when they've made the NCAA tournament.
I watched Powell a bit in some of his G-league games because I loved the kid as a fan and am pulling for him. But if at any point there was a conflict between a Seton Hall game or a game Powell was playing in (NBA or G-league, etc), I'd watch the Hall. I think virtually all of you would do the same. That's what fandom is at the collegiate level. The coaches and players change, but you root for the uniform.
I would follow the team too, like back in the day when there was no TV contract. There are kids that just want the college experience even if they aspire to play as a pro. But what if the NBA skimmed off 100-150 HS kids each year. The NCAA would still be fine, but it would change some things.
The level of play would be hurt, but again I think the fandom for us die-hards would still be the same, and probably the same for the casual fan as well. Let's be honest - the level of play isn't as good around college basketball as it was in the 80s (when I began following the sport) or the 90s. Kids leaving early has lessened the talent pool. But I still love the product. Even if we had less talented players because so many of the top kids were going to a NBA developmental league, we'd still have the games, the rivalries, skilled players, etc. So I don't think it would diminish my appetite to follow one bit.
it would have to be a pretty big restructure to make it like farm system baseball. at that point theyd be getting more exposure in college.
but ultimately it wont bring any viewers on tv and thats what rules the world. college will be infinitely more popular
Why should they not have all the agency of any other student to move from school to school? When I got my bachelor's from Seton Hall, I did it with at least 18 credits from three different institutions. No one made me sit out a transfer year, not should they have.
And I was just a regular student. Yes, it would've been nice if I could've skated through admissions at every stop, but I also wasn't a revenue-generating asset to any of these institutions as part of a multimillion-dollar sports and entertainment franchise like these players are. But that should've do anything to limit their rights as students.
Exactly. I only follow it because it is an extension of Seton Hall. I'd never watch a G League game. Hell, I don't watch the NBA. I'd be just as ardent a fan if we were some equivalent of D-III (and will if that's where we change ultimately puts us) because to me, it's about the university.
Did those schools make any exceptions for you to get in? I honestly believe there should be some academic qualifications to avoid the sit out. Can I get into Duke, Notre Dame, Stanford, or Nortwestern with a 3.2 GPA and 1250 SAT score? Not a chance in hell. What the hell ever happened to taking the good with the bad? The NCAA was never designed to be anyone's stepping stone to the next level. Just like no university is designed to make anyone a professional chess player because they have a chess club. Rules were put into place to keep competitive balance and avoid coaches from recruiting during the end of game handshake lines. Just think what's going to happen every time a coach goes up to a Powell type player and says something after a game. This rule essentially says you're flat out majoring in basketball. It's the #1 reason you're there. That's just wrong on all levels. I'd rather watch you play if you're at SHU for the right reasons than guys who hop from school to school for their own personal basketball (non academic) interests.
Last edited:
No, and no one needed to make any exceptions. But it would be nice to have that kind of leverage, as these kids do. I think it just come down to the idea that some people are 1) unhappy that inconvenient things may happen to their college basketball program, and/or 2) simply are offended by the idea that kids with above-average skills or talents might have more options than they did as students. That's something to work out with a good therapist. But neither one of these conditions are the fault of the students themselves.
I suppose these universities reserve the option to simply refuse admittance to players they think might become a transfer risk a year or two down the road. That'll take care of that problem! We can field a team of players who might not be as talented on the court, but will meet the typical admittance standard of typical students.
Until then, "competitive balance" rules are just ways to keep students locked down and limit their options while everyone else associated with that university can come and go as they please, on a moment's notice.
No the big problem is these people want to have equality as a regular student who transfers, but ignore every disadvantage the regular student has compared to the athlete. My cousin played for Shep, there's inequities in the athletic department favor of the basketball team compared to other sports, as there should be. You think the basketball players should stand up and say the volleyball team needs equal treatment as basketball? Doubt it. But this idea of equality and advantages for me, equality and disadvantages for you is ridiculous. Take the good with the bad. The regular student has to.
Last edited:
but as a regular student your credits dont transfer and severly limits your choices or time to graduate no?
The regular student doesn't have the same leverage so they have to accept it for what it is. What is their bargaining power? If I wanted to leave Seton Hall, I'm sure they would've made some small effort to retain a good student in good academic standing, but ultimately, I was replaceable.
Good basketball players at high-major conferences make contribute to the business of making money for that university. They are important and matter, practically speaking - in a business sense - more than I did or than volleyball players or baseball players do because I, the volleyball, and the baseball players all cost Seton Hall money for the time we were enrolled. Myles Powell made Seton Hall money. So does Kevin Willard. Kevin Willard has the agency to walk away from his contract tomorrow and go coach somewhere else (whatever buyout there is will be taken care of by someone involved in the transaction) and now a Myles Powell will, too.
It'll be more work for coaches to keep recruiting kids in your program, but so it goes. That's why they make millions of dollars a year, to figure it out and deal with it. For they, too, have the option to walk away from their university and go coach in the G League, or sell insurance, or whatever else they think anyone will pay them for.
Ahhhh so the top 1% should get special treatment while the rest of us get screwed. Got it. I’m cool with that. At least I understand that.
No. What I said was that they should be free to leave a university and transfer to another just as any other student (or employee) might. It's a basic right as a college student that they - for whatever reason - have been denied.
Do they bring something to the admissions table that a you or I might not have? Perhaps. That's up to the universities and their admissions offices to figure out. But that's not special treatment; that's them being more attractive to a school in terms of enrollment. But the student athletes' ability just to present themselves to a new admissions process when they see fit would merely be bringing them up to par in terms of other students in terms of what rights they have. If that sounds like "special treatment," maybe we're not talking about the same thing anymore.
sounds like theres a notion that regular students are free to transfer with not consequence, but thats not true
You mean like not all credits transfer and such? That's true - I didn't carry every credit from one place to the next, for one reason or another. And once you get inside of 30 credits to degree completion it can get dicey, but ultimately, no one is restricted from moving around.
no one os restricting athletes from moving around. transfer market has been huge for years. its a risk reward like any other thing in live. except now theres no risk. only free agency and an open lid on bag men
I think there's still plenty of risk with the portal. Some kids will win up in lousy situations, or bad fits, or hate their destination for whatever reason. Some just won't find the home they imagined. Some won't find a place at all. The whole process will still reward self-aware kids who do accurate self-appraisals and focus on a good fit. Some will and some will not.
And as far as I can tell, the rules were changed in the 60s to instutute the transfer year.
(I am sure TV had nothing to do with the rule change dadumdum)
Does anyone know the exact year it was changed? I looked for a while, some reference to the 60s but nothing definitive that I found.
(I am sure TV had nothing to do with the rule change dadumdum)
Does anyone know the exact year it was changed? I looked for a while, some reference to the 60s but nothing definitive that I found.
Similar threads
