1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

SHOCKING! Bobby Knight rails against NBA's "one year in school" rule

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Piotr Rasputin, Feb 19, 2007.

  1. Piotr Rasputin

    Piotr Rasputin New Member


    I do happen to agree with him, but it's obviously no surprise he feels this way. Has it raised the quality of play and player in college? I think so. But does it further diminish the NCAA and schools' abiliy to even try to present themselves as caring about academics?

  2. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    Not buying it. Kids left after one year before and after the rule. Schools have used kids for their own benefit for years. Knight has integrity on this issue, but he's pissing into the wind if he thinks this the NBA rule makes this all new.
  3. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    I'm confused. If a guy's jumping to the NBA as, say a junior, and knows it, is there anything to keep him from ditching class? Is there anything to keep an outgoing senior from doing it? Is Knight arguing that guys like Durant go to college with the idea that they won't go to class?
  4. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Since the whole point of the rule is to force these mouthy young negroes to wait before they get their hands on the big money, why doesn't the NBA simply require a player must have reached his 21st birthday before becoming eligible to play??

    No more arbitrary and illogical than saying "one year out of high school." No less defensible in court, either.
  5. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    You could substitute "four years out of HS" if you wanted a non-age-dependent cutoff point.

    Why not? If we're going to force these young punks to go to school, why not force them to go for four years, just like in the good ole days?
  6. Because, IIRC, Spencer Haywood beat that rule to a pulp in court.
  7. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    Just from a moral point of view, society should encourage these mouthy young negroes to forgo real effort in any academic setting, high school, faux prep schools and the silly 1 semester in college. (Really, they only need to be elgibile for the fall semester, the season is over b efire spring grades)

    Once a young negro is identified as having some game by the 7th or 8th grade, he should be removed from the home, 'hood or ghetto and placed in the appropriate Sonny Vaccarro-like developmental camp, such as Nike, Adidas, Conversese...

    Lets not waste time trying to educate the future basketball players of America. If only 1 out of thousand get a check, the average income among all thousand will still be greater than if they all went to college.
  8. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Wow. Talk about ugly.
  9. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    You mean that's not what starman meant? The world is conspiring to keep black high school kids from becoming multimillionares, all I'm suggesting is that we allow it, in spades.
  10. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    In spades? Hmm...sorry if I'm still dubious, especially with you typing in blue font.

    And what you wrote was still pretty ugly.
  11. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    No dark sarcasm in the classroom.

  12. Shaggy

    Shaggy Guest

    Remember -- it's not the NCAA's rule.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page