The lack of fundamental basketball skills and knowledge makes college basketball practically unwatchable. I don't know if it's the result of AAU ball or poor high school coaching but it's very noticeable. Even though the athletes of today are better, their understanding of the game is in marked decline. I understand why Bill Walton implodes every time he broadcasts a game. It must drive him crazy.

For the first time EVER I completely agree with snotty.

Does it drive anyone else completely crazy to watch Major college basketball players (not just Oregon) set pick and rolls and then see them roll the wrong way so their back is turned to ever having a chance of getting a pass? Do jr. high hoop coaches just simply ignore teaching basic fundamental basketball anymore?

Most big men anymore would never be able to take advantage of the passing skills from players like John Stockton because they would have their backs turned to the ball


---------------------------------------------
--- snotty69 wrote:

The lack of fundamental basketball skills and knowledge makes college basketball practically unwatchable. I don't know if it's the result of AAU ball or poor high school coaching but it's very noticeable. Even though the athletes of today are better, their understanding of the game is in marked decline. I understand why Bill Walton implodes every time he broadcasts a game. It must drive him crazy.

---------------------------------------------

True, it does decrease the game's appeal to me as a fan, but that's not it entirely. As a citizen, I still think it'd be a net benefit to "incentivize" more of these kids to give greater weight to the educational opportunity. We tend to keep speaking of the hypothetical Kobes and LeBrons but the reality is that most NBA prospects will wash out of the league pretty quickly and an extra year or two of school/maturation ought to add value to their lives when that time comes.

I realize D-1 ball is big business, but the whole 1 & done trend really makes a mockery of the school's educational mission in addition to watering down fundamentals & teamwork on the court. I'd agree with the prior point about 'charging' a player's schollie for at least 2-3 years even if they leave early; it still allows a player the opportunity to pursue a career opportunity elsewhere if they feel they can make it, but it returns some academic consideration to recruiting in the type of players coaches will pursue with the expectation of them needing to stick around longer.


---------------------------------------------
--- laxduck wrote:


Just because you have no athletic ability and had to go to college doesn't mean everyone else has to.

There are plenty of kids who don't care about athletes one way or the other. The role models thing is totally weak

Baseball players have never gone to college. Ever.

The only reason people care about football and basketball players getting degrees is because it affects their enjoyment of the sport.

---------------------------------------------

How many of these basketball players enter college in a position to take full advantage of the educational opportunities offered?

Its not a particularly well-hidden fact that athletes at big sports schools are put on a track designed to make sure they can't fail and become ineligible more than to challenge them to take full advantage of an institution's academic offerings.

Education is great, but the solution IMO lies in getting more kids to a point where they are in a position to fully take advantage of the university's offerings, not expecting them to stick around and have tutors do the coursework for them through an academic track created for athletes.

This is a bit off-subject but it really bothers me when people cite the value of a college scholarship when suggesting athletes shouldn't get paid. How much is a full-ride to a university really worth to someone who is struggling to reach the minimum academic requirements for an athlete?