New Rule to Prevent "Testing the Waters"

[dc_x]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=4086305&name=katz_andy&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines


The NCAA legislative panel voted to shorten the time frame in which underclassmen who declare for the NBA draft have to decide whether to stay in the draft or return to school.

If the NCAA board of directors endorses the legislative panel's decision to shorten the early-entry decision window from six weeks to approximately one week, then there won't be any reasonable way for underclassmen to "test the draft process."

Players really should declare whether they're in the draft or out. The current proposal makes the process of "testing the waters" or even "gathering more information" moot.

[wkrq59]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=4086305&name=katz_andy&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines

DC, what difference does it make if the NCAA sets new rules for testing the waters of the NBA? Unless the rule is enforced equally for all schools, and the one-and-done practice is eliminated by an NCAA rule similar to then NFL or baseball, the same crap of plying potential talent with false hopes and information will continue.

[Xman95]

DC, what difference does it make if the NCAA sets new rules for testing the waters of the NBA? Unless the rule is enforced equally for all schools, and the one-and-done practice is eliminated by an NCAA rule similar to then NFL or baseball, the same crap of plying potential talent with false hopes and information will continue.


Q, it would keep kids who are borderline from "testing the waters" and would usually result in those guys going back to school. Or it would mean that those kids declare and, unless they pull their names back quickly, they're going pro.

From an NCAA standpoint, it makes sense. Assume that X didn't have any scholarships available right now and D.Brown is testing the waters. What if we had Player A interested, but there's no scholly available? Well Player A commits to another program because he's not sure what's going to happen. Then D.Brown goes pro and we missed out on the player we wanted. Or say Player A says I'm going to Xavier and Brown stays. Then what? (By the way, I'm not saying this IS the reason for the change, but it seems to be a situation that is currently affected by the longer process.)

I think shortening the time frame to one week is plenty of time. These kids/coaches know whether they're borderline or not and, if they are, a week should be enough time for the coaches to make some calls and get a decent read on if/where the kid will be drafted. Plus many of those calls have already been made during the season. Right now (bad economy not in the picture) the kids who declare often get some free plane trips for workouts, practices, etc. The process really shouldn't mean much when it comes to a kid's draft position.

[sirthought]

I'd understand if they want to quicken the player's decision, but I think a week is too short. And I have no issue with kids testing the waters. It is their future and part of learning.

But when schools need to think of their own team's future I guess the two sides collide more b/c the timing of the workouts/camps/evaluations takes place during the short window of time that college coaches are allowed to go out and have one-on-one contact with recruits.

Now, if the NBA could move the draft.... :rolleyes: