Emmanuel Mudiay and the future of NBA talent

[moly99]

Nor would it be difficult for the NCAA to allow schools to pay stipends to players that approximate (and could exceed) what D league players are currently making.
It seems to me that players like Mudiay are the NCAA's problem, not the NBA's problem.

 
The problem right now is that there are two different kinds of players in the NCAA.
 
95+% of NCAA athletes aren't going to go pro. The current scholarship system works well for them, and changing the scholarship to a pay system would likely hurt a lot of them. Especially female athletes since they don't bring in much revenue. The NCAA could pay athletes a small stipend instead of a wage system, but the money would still be a pittance compared to what the NBA-bound players would make professionally.
 
A tiny number of male basketball and football players are being shafted by the current NCAA system. Even many of those athletes who will eventually go pro -such as WNBA players- are not going to earn enough to make it worth skipping a degree under the scholarship system.
 

If the D-league pulled all the top talent out of the NCAA, would fans watch the NBADL on TV? Or keep watching the NCAA? I'd think this uncertainty gives both NCAA and NBA a strong incentive to keep the status quo. Which is why foreign leagues are so disruptive.

 
It wouldn't be all the NCAA talent. It would be a few guys each year who would play one year in the D League instead of one year at Kentucky or Kansas.
 
Meanwhile if they ignore the issue, the next Lebron is probably going to sign to play a year in Spain or China instead of college. Pretending the problem doesn't exist is not a solution.

 

[ALiveH]

Yes, the problem is a tiny number of male basketball and football players bring in the billions of dollars in revenues that make all those scholarships possible for everyone else (plus the multi-million dollar salaries of coaches and high-six digit salaries of college administrators).  Then those players who create all that value get treated like slave labor and get shamed & treated like criminals if they ever try to take some tiny crumbs as reward.  Those elite players can go somewhere else (minor / developmental / overseas leagues) where maybe they will bring in less incremental revenue (only hundreds of millions instead of billions) but will get 100x of their current share of the pie.
 
It's a totally open question what would happen in a scenario where the top 50 or so college age basketball players are dispersed.
 
I don't see what the NCAA could do to stop it.  I don't see why the NBA would want to stop it.

 

[TheRooster]

I think the flaw in your logic is related to incremental revenue.  You've seen the attendance and TV ratings of the Orlando and Vegas summer leagues haven't you?  Without school affilation, how are you going to build a fan base for a constantly rotating cast of players?  The NBA (and NFL) "should" have dedicated minor leagues, but it would add to their costs with no tangible (i.e. financial) upside.

 

[moly99]

The D League currently averages only 4,000-5,000 fans per game. But even the best league in Europe (Spain) also only averages a hair over 6,000. With the NBA club paying the signing bonus I'm sure it could work.

 

[ALiveH]

No matter what the incremental revenue number is, i'm sure these players could make multiples of the crumbs they're making in college.  In any decent overseas leagues they'd make mid-6 digits up to 7 digits.
 
Don't understand the comment about summer league.  Vegas summer league was sold out for the first time this year.  They need to go to bigger arenas b/c capacity was only like 8000 and it sold out.  It was actually difficult to get close to the players for the first time.  TV viewership was also at all-time highs - cracked 6 digits for the first time.