| |
|
|
Reputation:95
Level:Superstar
Since:Feb 22, 2007
|
|
Although I am happy that this new rule forces kids, especially urban youth, to have some sort of academic success, I have my reservations based on principle.
No other sports other than football and basketball have limitations to when you can be paid and recognized as a professional. These two sports are the two that are most heavily dominated by the African-American athlete. Every other sport is dominated by the white athlete and there have been no provisions put into place regarding those sports and when an athlete can turn pro: Hockey, Tennis, Baseball and Golf do not impose age limits or college requirements.........why? What's the difference? Only difference I see is the color of the players participating.
If this is a great marketing ploy, then what are we really saying? I see another form of slavery......propogated by the idea of what's best for the athlete. These other sports, especially tennis and baseball, have their own horror stories about kids that mistakenly threw their hats in the ring of fire.....sometimes via the overbearing pressure of a parent.
When these sports impose the same rules, then I won't feel as though slavery is still so alive and well.
|
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Aug 28, 2006
|
|
Slavery? You're kidding right??
The main reason the NBA imposed this rule was to avoid situations where kids hired agents, lost their college eligibility and then didn't get drafted. Now those kids have no NBA paycheck, nor an education to get a decent job. Although money, marketing, and big business certainly play a role, I would like to think that the best interests of the athletes is part of it. Not to mention how many NBA players used to get into a lot of trouble with the law, women, etc. They instituted an educational system to teach the kids coming in how to handle success and money. A year in college helps them mature, learn about big business in school and be more ready to handle their impending success.
As for football.....it's purely a safety issue. The reason the NFL won't allow young kids in, and has an age limit, is purely because an 18 year old kid is not ready (except in the absolute rarest of circumstances) to take the pounding an NFL player takes
Racism still pervades our society, but when athletes retain their free will while making exorbinant amounts of money, calling it slavery is ridiculous. If they were treated, or felt like, slaves, if working conditions were horrible and they were made a spectacle simply because of their race, then they could walk away. But none of the above is true. Does racism exist in sport? Absolutely. Is there still far too wide a schism between the amound of African-American athletes and coaches and executives? 100%. But likening a business where kids make multi-millions of dollars and are revered as idols in our society to slavery simply because the rule makers in said businesses have seen the negative side of allowing kids that are too young and not ready into their leagues? Way too far
Also, there are a lot of African-American athletes that play baseball as well. I realize Latinos make up the majority of the major leagues, but there are quite a few African-Americans making hefty paydays in baseball as well. So that kind of repudiates your argument that the NBA and NFL are another form of slavery, considering that MLB doesn't follow the same policy and a lot of young African-Americans are paid handsomely for their baseball talents at any age
|
|
|
Reputation:96
Level:Superstar
Since:Jan 16, 2007
|
|
With basketball it's probably trying to minimize the risk of the investment. Some baseball players sign big bonuses but it's extremely rare.
I've heard the rule is in place with football bc of how physical the game is and it helps no one if the kids, whether they be black or white or purple, get seriously hurt bc their bodies aren't fully developed. I know it kind of sounds like crap, but you don't hear as much complaining about the rule in football and I've not heard many people questioning that.
At the end of the day however it comes down to money and I'm quite confident that if NBA/NFL players didn't make so much coin right away the rule would be less enforced.
|
|
|
Reputation:98
Level:Superstar
Since:Jul 8, 2007
|
the nba and the nfl are private institutions. they have the right to say who they will accept into their leagues. theyre just making restrictions that assure they get qualified players in the league. whether you like the rule or not, calling it anything more than a dumb rule is just bogus. i applied for a job not too long ago but was rejected because of my age. whats the difference? i can either... wait until i gain more experience, or find another damn job.
and hey, if basketball players dont like it, DONT GO TO THE NBA!!!!
lol, color of the players being the cause of these rule... wow, way to think outside of the box. im pretty sure there had been black players in the nba LONG before this rule, (i might have to do some research on that one, though), and there will be just as many black ballers in the nba now, after the rule.
btw, how does the age requirement keep black players out of the nba??? all a top high school prospect has to do is go to college for a year... no matter what color he is. he doesnt have to graduate, he doesnt need good grades. he just needs to get a scholarship for being a great athlete. and SOMEONE will accept him, as long as he is smart enough to sign his name.
and hell, even if the player CANT make it into college for one year, just sit out a year and practice! once he turns 19 he can go straight to the league! yes, white, black, hispanic, asian... all players can do that.
|
|
|
Reputation:98
Level:Superstar
Since:Jul 8, 2007
|
point is, if the nba doesnt stupid high school players jumping into the pros, most of whom end up busting and dropping out of the league, they should be able to. maybe its better for the players, maybe not.
but obviously, these players find it well worth going to school for one year, and then if they are good enough, go pro. the money is going to be there. if they arent good enough, they can stay in college and have another chance at a future. or they can drop out and try something else with their lives.
|
|
|
Level:Amateur
Since:Apr 25, 2008
|
|
I think it's so sad that people might actually believe that Professional sports leagues are making decisions about the structure of their leagues based on a racial prejudice. The structure of the sports your comparing are so drastically different it is not feasible to compare them. I feel that you are trying to find something that isn't there by stating that the business decisions of these leagues are based on race as opposed to the many other apparent reasons (academics, the athlete being physically and mentally able to handle being a Professional as part of the reason is for football).
Also, Hockey does have a age limit, while it is lower than that of football or basketball, it is still in place:
The NHL collective agreement states that only players who are 18 years old by Sept. 15 of each year are eligible for that year's entry draft.
To try and compare an age restriction in a sport to the act of slavery is a gross injustice to the term.
|
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Aug 22, 2006
|
|
wow? Talk about starting a fire bud. I don't see the correlations of race and age limitations. All the major sports have very different physical requirements. The NBA changed the rule due to incessant amount of flops that entered the NBA without going to school. So many of these kids were told how great they were and failed miserably. For every Kobe, McGrady, Garnett, Lebron there twice as many Sebastian Telfair, Darius Miles and Kwame Browns. As for football, the restriction is intended to protect the young athlete. There is a big difference between dominating other 18 year olds in high school, than playing with grown men weighing 250 lbs plus..
|
|
|
Reputation:95
Level:Superstar
Since:Feb 22, 2007
|
|
Smittstyles......you're not digesting what I'm saying. This country is built on free enterprise, the ability to take your talent or product to the open market for the highest bidder.....period. My point is: the African-American athlete has had stipulations attached in order to do so while the white-american sport remains an open market. That's the bottom line. I forgot to mention soccer as well. You're giving me all these reasons that don't matter. I'm talking about the bottom line. My argument has nothing to do with the day they sign a contract, its all about the stipulations that precede that day.
As for baseball, you must not be informed with what's happening. Take a look at any particular major league roster. African-americans make up about 5 - 10% of the league population, and it's getting worse. Look at NYY and Boston rosters and you tell me.
As for football, I understand that argument, but when did hockey become a non-contact sport? Are you going to tell me tennis isn't producing one failed attempt after another? You just don't hear about it because they don't have a televised draft that is analyzed and disected over and over again. And just like any other sport, an athlete that doesn't make it has the same opportunity for an education as any other kid in this country......so I don't want to hear it.
I guess you'd have to be a black man to see the injustice from a principle stand point of view.
|
|
|
Reputation:81
Level:All-Star
Since:Feb 14, 2008
|
|
