|
|
     
|
Counting the cash before the draft pick is made - Jun 17, 2009 | 15:10:09
posted by: Marta Lawrence
Last year we wrote a lot about Brandon Jennings' decision to forgo college and play in Europe. Of course, college isn't for everyone, but Jennings--who averaged 5.5 points, 1.6 rebounds and 2.3 assists in 17 minutes for Lottomatica Virtus Roma--might be rethinking his decision to grab a paycheck over a year in school. "It was a humbling experience for me," Jennings told the New York Times. "If I would have went to college, I would have played 30 minutes and I would have got whatever I wanted, but I had to go earn my spot." Jennings is still projected to go high in the draft, but his star shines a bit less brightly than it did when he joined the pros in Europe. Since Jennings announced his decision to play in Italy, other promising athletes have followed suit, including Jeremy Tyler, who will miss his senior year of high school to play abroad. Learning from her male counterparts, Epiphanny Prince announced this week she would leave her Rutgers diploma behind to play ball in Europe. Perhaps most troubling, Las Vegas baseball standout Bryce Harper has elected to leave high school two years early, get his GED and play at a junior college simply to qualify a year earlier for the draft. I don't begrudge an athlete for using his or her skills to make a buck. What makes me uneasy, is the fact that these decisions are taken on with relatively little foresight. What happens when Harper's .626 batting average dips when facing tougher pitchers? What do these athletes have to fall back on if they blow their ACL? True, elite athletes like Jennings would likely be a one-and-done if they entered college, but isn't one year of school better than none? I'm also very troubled by the precedent these decisions create. Few players are as talented as Harper, Jennings, Tyler and Prince. Will these stories encourage less-talented, young athletes to follow down a path on which they can't succeed? At the end of the day, it's all about profit and the promise of millions. The problem is, payoffs are never guaranteed. 
CommentsI can’t really speculate whether this is a wise baseball move for Mr. Harper, but the fact that he is on the cover of Sports Illustrated shows me that this player is very talented. Even if he isn’t major league ready, he will have time to prepare in the minor leagues. What if he tears out his ACL? Well, first off, he would not have gone to college to play baseball. He would have gone in the draft out of high school. If he does tear his ACL, he will have millions of dollars to pay for college if he decides to do that. He can still get a good college degree with a GED. As for basketball players, the whole justification of one year of college is a joke. Yes, one and done athletes COULD get one year of college out of the way, but these athletes do not want to be at college. They are not going to take the classes they need to take and they aren’t going to have the proper focus. Aside from elite athletes, when do selective four year universities ever admit students that they know will only stay for one year much less not stay to get a degree in six years or less? The only possible answer I can think of (and it may be a reach) are military members, but how can you compare military people to people playing children's games? Yes, the athletes will get some free classes, but the USA Today had an article a couple of weeks ago ( http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2009-06-05-freshmen-cover_N.htm ) discussing how Ohio State is telling one and done athletes not to enroll in classes that they could take during their one year in college because it may hurt their APR score when they leave for the NBA. What a joke. The schools aren’t even allowing them to take the pretty much meaningless one year of classes. I do agree that some less talented athletes (and their parents/agents) may get the wrong idea and drop out of school without legitimate prospects for the major league. That would be a problem. On the other hand, Olympic/non stick & ball sport athletes and overseas athletes have left school early for years now without the hopes of getting millions even if they are on top of their sport. The U.S. education system may have lots of faults, but the one thing it does provide is plenty of opportunities. Even failed athletes can take the GED exam and enroll in many colleges. As far as following the money goes, playing sports is a job for athletes. What is the issue with getting paid for doing a job? A. G. Dube - http://www.othersidesports.com/ Elite athletes who chose to go pro directly from high school are doing themselves and the higher educatiion community a favor. Prospective student-athletes who choose to participate in intercollegiate athletics should value the opportunities afforded by a university and the experience of a college education. To begin a college career with an intention of leaving after a short stint or wodering about the money lost is a recipe for disaster. The point of a college education is to ensure oneself of gaining employment and making a living. If one can to that through a sport without college then that is a good thing. There is no precedent as few are able to directly from prom to the pros. Post a Comment |
  
As an educator, umpire/official, ex college/professional athlete, and past coach I believe it is our top job to guarentee our athletes recognize it is education first and athletic success second.
- Nancy Aiken
   
|
