Dave Sez

Give Me Five

As I wrote about in a Quick Link the other day, the National Association of Basketball Coaches recently proposed to the NCAA that players be allowed a fifth year of eligibility. Evidently, the NCAA is taking the recommendation seriously, as president Myles Brand had nothing but praise for the plan yesterday.

The main thing that I like about the five year plan is that it rewards student-athletes who are just that - student-athletes. The hotshot stars who want to head off for the pros will continue to do so. They'll play for one or two years in college, if that. That's not going to change. It's been proven that talented players can handle the NBA at a young age. The NFL hasn't yet seen this happen, but it nearly did this year. Only a last-minute court order kept Maurice Clarrett and Mike Williams out of the NFL. It's only a matter of time before those floodgates open as well. College sports will never again be what it once was and that's fine. Let's give the game back to the players who want to be in college.

Many older coaches, like John Wooden and Dean Smith have campaigned for a return of freshman ineligibility. They say that this will help these young men (and women) adjust to life in college and get their academics in order. Most Division 1 athletes aren't at the same academic level as the other students in school, so this first year could help them catch up without the pressure and time constraints of varsity sports.

Well, that's never going to happen. The top players barely want to play one year in college as it is. They won't want to wait a year to play. Having an extra year on the end though, a fifth year, accomplishes some of the same goals. On many teams, there would be fifth-year seniors, or whatever they'll be called, who will get playing time that freshman now get. With more upperclassmen in programs, younger players would have to wait. They would still have the time constraints of a varsity position, but they wouldn't have as much pressure to perform. Also, since many athletes simply aren't equipped to handle college classes at a pace that will see them graduate in four years, this would help. They would five years to get through instead of just four. Even non-athletes tend not to graduate in four years. The average college stay is 4.8 years.

One of the complaints many have about college ball now, both football and basketball (and I'm really only talking about those here), is that the athletes don't really want to be in college. They only attend because they have to. Their goal is to play college ball, succeed and then head to the pros as soon as possible. Mercenaries wearing the colors of Old State U. The players who stay for a fifth year would be different though. The only guys who would stay for that extra year are those who know they aren't going pro. You'd see guys like Jackie Manual or Marvin Lewis stay for an extra year, a year where they're just playing because they love the game. They learned by the end of their fourth year that the NBA isn't calling, so why not stay in college an extra season? These players would make college ball much better - they'd be mature, experienced and skilled.

One concern about having players stay an extra year is that it would eat up scholarships. If players stayed longer, it would mean fewer new scholarships each year. The way to combat that is to raise or eliminate scholarship limits. The days of programs stockpiling qualified players are long gone. Recruits won't go to schools where there are so many players that they wouldn't get playing time for a couple of years. Guys want to play now, so scholarship limits really do no good.

I like the idea of a fifth year so much that I think I'm going to share some other ideas I have. Some more radical ones. Again, the crux of these changes is that college sports has changed and the rules need to evolve as well. One huge aspect that hinders and corrupts college athletics is the notion that athletes must be amateurs. This is an antiquated notion that goes back to the days of the British class system, where only the wealthy could afford amateur sports and college educations. It's unnecessary today. Olympic athletes are pros. Even college athletes can be pros, just not in the same sport. I say it's time to break that wall down completely. Let the athletes be pros. I don't mean pay them (I'll cover that a bit further down), but let others pay them.

There's no reason why athletes should lose their eligibility just because they got drafted. Even college baseball doesn't have this rule. I say let football and basketball players get drafted and if they want, come back to school. They should even be able to sign contracts with their pro teams. If the NBA or NFL wants the player, but doesn't think he's quite ready, let him play another year or two in college. I could see coaches being concerned about players having two masters, but that's an issue for each coach to decide. If he doesn't want Jimmy Superstar on his team, he doesn't have to allow him back.

I think that if players leave college early for the pros, they should be able to come back later, after their pro careers, and finish their eligibility. Maybe they made a mistake leaving. Why shouldn't they be able to come back and play while they finish their degree? "Real" students do this all the time. There would have to be some constraints, like you'd have to play for the same college you left and maybe an age (say 30 years) or years of service limit (5 or fewer pro years). Why shouldn't a guy like Will Avery not be able to tuck his tail between his legs and come back to Duke? He tried the NBA and it didn't really work. Duke sure could use him. Other guys you might see back would be Josh Powell, Roger Mason Jr. and Dion Glover. Think how much more interesting it could make college sports with a few seasoned vets on each team.

Along with guys coming back to finish out, I think scholarships should be lifetime scholarships. Any athlete who signs a scholarship has as long as he needs to finish his degree for free. If it takes four, five or ten years, it shouldn't matter. If they take twenty years off in between, it shouldn't matter. The biggest reward college athletes have is that scholarship, but often they don't realize it at the time. Young athletes are dumb that way. They all think they'll be pros and won't need their education, so many blow their chance. It would be great if those guys could come back later when they're older and wiser and finish up.

I alluded to this above, but one radical change I do not agree with is paying players. I don't like the idea of athletes as employees of the university. They are students at the school. Yes, the schools make a ton of money off the players, but they reciprocate by giving them scholarships. If there's money left over, it should go into the academic side of the school instead of the coaches or athletic departments. Even though athletes are already paid in a manner, with their free food, clothes, room & board, etc, it's just different once you start paying cash. When you write paychecks, the athlete is now an employee of the athletic department and the implication is that that's now more important then their education. I'm not naive; I know that there are a million other implications of the sort, but we have to draw the line somewhere. For me, that's where the line is.

Will any of these changes happen? Who knows. My ideas are probably not on anyone's mind right now. Hopefully they will be someday, because something must be done to get college sports back to what it should be - students playing games.