Running up the score

Although I am a Green Bay Packers fan, I am also a fan of Bill Belichick. I think he might be the greatest NFL coach ever, and I think his team has a very good chance to go 19-0 this year. Not only do I not see any problem with his team running up the score against opponents, I think its actually the right thing to do. The players are professionals, being paid to do a job. The offense's job is to score points and the defense's job is to prevent opponents from scoring points. If the offense is on the field and not trying to score, they are not doing their job, and if a coach is not calling plays that will help them score, then that coach is not doing his job.

 

The same issue arose in college football this weekend, in an incident that got national attention when Wyoming coach Joe Glenn "flipped the bird" toward the Utah team after the Utes attempted an onside kick while ahead 43-0. Glenn was reprimanded by the Mountain West Conference on Monday, and rightly so. We hear enough stories about bad sportsmanship, trash talking, and on-field brawls, that a head coach should know better than to behave like this. If a head coach, a professional, an adult with years of experience, behaves like this, what can we expect from the unpaid 19- and 20-year-olds playing the game?

 

The only thing in this incident that I disagree with, is Utah coach Kyle Whittingham's later comment that the onside kick with a 43-0 lead was a "bad decision." Winning is never a bad decision, and neither is winning big. Utah was not playing a "warm-up" game against a I-AA opponent, this was a conference game. Whittingham should not apologize for his team's ability to score; if anything, Glenn and the Wyoming team should apologize for their poor performance on the field.

 

As a Kentucky fan, I have been on the wrong side of a blowout game many times. While its certainly no fun, every time I see my team lose badly, I know that it's not the fault of Steve Spurrier, Tim Tebow, Les Miles, or any other opposing player or coach. They did their job; it was my team that wasn't able or prepared to compete. The right response is not for the loser to blame the winner, but for them to make changes and adjustments so that the next time the teams meet the tables are turned. That's exactly what Bill Belichick did after losing to the Colts last winter, and that's why he is such a great coach.

How to fix college basketball

When you really dig down, the root of the problem with college basketball is the relationship with the NBA. The NCAA likes to talk about "student-athletes" while universities build palace-like arenas (and now practice facilities), pay coaches millions of dollars, and charge ticket-holders professional sport prices. The NCAA has not been able to decide if they are an amateur athletic league for students or a professional minor league, and they are trying to take the best (for them) of both.

My (unrealistic) proposal is to split the top tier of NCAA basketball (division 1-A) into a semiprofessional or professional minor league and a league of true student-athletes. Teams opting into the professional league might maintain some relationship to their schools, but would drop any pretense of academics; they would essentially be "basketball schools." They might implement some rules regarding player age or experience, but players would be paid like the professional athletes they are. Teams opting to remain amateur would operate more like the "lower" NCAA divisions, limiting or even eliminating athletic scholarships (and certainly banning athletic recruiting); players would be students who happen to enjoy the sport but are not on an athletic career path. With such a division, basketball players seeking a professional career would no longer be forced into pretending they want a college degree, the NBA could have a real "developmental league," and university administrators could spend more time and energy on improving the academic quality of their school.

The biggest problem I see with implementing such a system is that the schools that must be convinced are the schools with the most to lose, schools such as my alma maters of the University of Kentucky and Michigan State University, schools like North Carolina, Duke, Florida, UCLA, and Louisville. To ensure a smoother transition, and to make this proposal more palatable to these schools, they should be permitted to keep a substantial stake in their teams. For example, the "University of Kentucky Wildcats" might become the "Kentucky Wildcats," a minor league professional team owned and managed by the University of Kentucky. Or they might create the "University of Kentucky College of Basketball" (OK, School of Basketball in the College of Athletics).

The problem with NCAA basketball

The events of the last week at the University of Florida are emblematic of the problems inherent in the current arrangement of the NCAA.

First, after announcing his departure and signing a contract with the NBA's Orlando Magic, Billy Donovan asked to be released from that contract to return to Florida. The Gators welcomed him back with open arms, and for most practical purposes it is as though he never left.

In returning to Gainesville, Donovan accepted a six-year contract worth $3,500,000. At the same time, Florida football coach Urban Meyer received a six-year contract for $3,250,000.

Compare this treatment of college coaches with the treatment their players receive; if a player even retains an agent, it is unlikely he will ever be allowed to play college basketball again. At best he might be allowed to return after sitting out half of a season. And don't even think about paying your players; the "student-athletes" are supposed to be grateful for their college scholarships -- scholarships they only need so they can play basketball for a few years before entering the NBA.

Coming soon: How to fix basketball.

How to make basketball better

In the last two or three years, the rookie of the year has been a high school player. There were seven high school players in the All-Star Game, so why we even talking an age limit?...As a black guy, you kind of think [race is] the reason why it's coming up. You don't hear about it in baseball or hockey...If I can go to the U.S. Army and fight the war at 18, why can’t you play basketball for 48 minutes and then go home?
- Jermaine O’Neal, Indiana Pacers’ forward

When the new NBA and players union decided to include an age limit (19, or one year after their high school class gradudates) in their new collective bargaining agreement there was widespread celebration from NBA and college coaches. The NBA coaches are happy, because they expect to get more experienced and mature players, and college coaches will no longer have to contend with NBA recruiters.

Unfortunately, this deal is not as good as these coaches have made it out to be.

First, for every Carmelo Anthony, delivering a national title to their team, there are twenty versions of Stephon Marbury and Tim Thomas: players who leave after one season, sending programs into downward spirals and costing coaches their jobs.

What if Lebron James was not allowed to play [in the NBA], would he still have gotten his Nike contract? I think he would have. So I don’t think he is going to college. So what does he do?
- Duke head coach Mike Krzyzewski

In the future, players like James have only two legitimate options for that one year. They can go to Europe and get paid while competing against lesser talent, or (more likely) they can play in the NBA Developmental League, which will be the NBA’s version of a minor league. If the very best players go to the Developmental League, then the second and third-tier players coming out of high school — guys with a very realistic chance of making the NBA eventually — will begin to follow and fortify the league. As the NBADL rises, Division I college basketball will fall.

What solution is there for college basketball? Some (of the few who have acknowledged a problem) have suggested paying college athletes. College basketball, however, can never provide the basketball development experience that full-time play in a minor league could, and will never be as attractive to players anticipating a professional career.

The solution can be found in every NCAA advertisment: put the student back in "student-athlete". Recognize that someone desiring to become a professional athlete can be better served by a development league than by a university, and focus on those who simply play the game for fun before beginning their real career. Require college basketball players to pass the same admission standards and the same academic requirements as other students.

This is unlikely to happen because large universities, alumni, and the NCAA are too wedded to the current system (a minor league in denial about its nature). Alumni care more about their alma mater's win-loss record than its academic reputation, and universities (and hence the NCAA) are at the mercy of alumni money.

But wouldn't it be great to have real amature basketball, with athletes playing for fun and for respect in their spare time? Basketball players desiring to go pro could do so out of high school (through minor leagues) rather than faking interest in a degree. Universities and coaches would not be concerned with their players transferring because the players would be there for a degree first and the game second. We can always dream.

Note: Lest readers think that this is a "sour grapes" column, I am an alumnus the University of Kentucky (the winningest program in college basketball), lived for the past several years in metropolitan Detroit (home of the Pistons, NBA champions in 2004 and runners-up in 2005), and am currently a graduate student at Michigan State University. And when I was there, my high school had an outstanding program which produced several NCAA stars and NBA players. So I have nothing to be bitter about!

Tags: sports, basketball, NCAA, NBA

Yahoo! News - Armstrong Sets Tour De France Record

Yahoo! News - Armstrong Sets Tour De France Record