Jump to content

2024 C Derik Queen Commits to Maryland


OGIUAndy

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Indykev said:

Another year of massive turnover and building a whole new team.

The NBA/NCAA adopting the baseball model for professional eligibility would be a huge start while they sort out the transfer rules mess. Wanna go pro outta high school? Fine. Wanna come to college? Ok, but you’re here for 3 years. Im all for progress and taking care of the student athletes but at some point, the product on the court has to matter. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hoosier82 said:

The NBA/NCAA adopting the baseball model for professional eligibility would be a huge start while they sort out the transfer rules mess. Wanna go pro outta high school? Fine. Wanna come to college? Ok, but you’re here for 3 years. Im all for progress and taking care of the student athletes but at some point, the product on the court has to matter. 

I think it's very unlikely we see any rule changes that restrict a person's ability to work. There's no other occupation, outside of athlete, where anything remotely like these rules are allowed by law. The trend is very much against placing further limitations on work.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, HoosierDom said:

I think it's very unlikely we see any rule changes that restrict a person's ability to work. There's no other occupation, outside of athlete, where anything remotely like these rules are allowed by law. The trend is very much against placing further limitations on work.

its not limiting the ability to work, but where you work. There are plenty of examples of jobs you can and cannot have based on age restrictions.

Edit: I say this because college you have the ability to make money now. 

Edited by ledies22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ledies22 said:

its not limiting the ability to work, but where you work. There are plenty of examples of jobs you can and cannot have based on age restrictions.

Edit: I say this because college you have the ability to make money now. 

This isn't an age restriction. The original post called for kids to be able to go pro right after high school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HoosierDom said:

I think it's very unlikely we see any rule changes that restrict a person's ability to work. There's no other occupation, outside of athlete, where anything remotely like these rules are allowed by law. The trend is very much against placing further limitations on work.

If it’s allowed in baseball, there’s no valid argument to disallow it in basketball. Especially now where foreign pro leagues are more accessible than ever and the creation of the G-League or whatever they call it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hoosier82 said:

If it’s allowed in baseball, there’s no valid argument to disallow it in basketball. Especially now where foreign pro leagues are more accessible than ever and the creation of the G-League or whatever they call it. 

The obvious response is that it is far more likely that the baseball rule will change than other sports will change to match baseball.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, DC2345 said:

There’s guys every year that leave school even though they aren’t a guaranteed first round pick. It’s not smart but it happens all the time. 

Yeah I know.  Of the list Walker is clearly done.  Ware is likely and I think Mgbako is quite a bit less than the 100 or 99.99% that people are saying because I think he is going to get feedback to stay.  He doesn't even have a guarantee to get drafted.  Unless things change with how he us viewed between now and then, it would be astronomically dumb to hop into the draft this year.

I don't think he and family are dumb.  Take your NIL and see what another year does for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hoosier82 said:

The NBA/NCAA adopting the baseball model for professional eligibility would be a huge start while they sort out the transfer rules mess. Wanna go pro outta high school? Fine. Wanna come to college? Ok, but you’re here for 3 years. Im all for progress and taking care of the student athletes but at some point, the product on the court has to matter. 

Totally agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HoosierDom said:

I think it's very unlikely we see any rule changes that restrict a person's ability to work. There's no other occupation, outside of athlete, where anything remotely like these rules are allowed by law. The trend is very much against placing further limitations on work.

Doctor, Lawyer, military ( have to spend 3 years in service 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

Yeah I know.  Of the list Walker is clearly done.  Ware is likely and I think Mgbako is quite a bit less than the 100 or 99.99% that people are saying because I think he is going to get feedback to stay.  He doesn't even have a guarantee to get drafted.  Unless things change with how he us viewed between now and then, it would be astronomically dumb to hop into the draft this year.

I don't think he and family are dumb.  Take your NIL and see what another year does for him.

Do you think there would be hesitation to come back because doesn’t him and Liam play same position? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HoosierDom said:

The obvious response is that it is far more likely that the baseball rule will change than other sports will change to match baseball.

The other o viola response is if I’m able to join military at 18 and fight for my country then why can’t I go play pro basketball if I want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Doctor, Lawyer, military ( have to spend 3 years in service 

C'mon, there's no comparison here.

Doctors and lawyers require training to be able to serve the public. There is no comparable training nor danger to the public. As most readily seen by the idea of allowing kids to go straight to the pros from high school if they so desire. But, even without that provision, the lack of a comparable training period is plain. As is the lack of public risk. The argument quickly devolves into one of anti-trust. If the Pacers decide they won't take a kid who hasn't played 3 years of college ball, they're welcome to do so, but the Bulls will not make a similarly self-destructive decision. So, the only way the Pacers can have such a policy is if some outside entity (the NBA) forces the Bulls to do so as well. That's the sort of thing that public policy is increasingly turning against.

A military enlistment is a contract, so you could argue for a term of service contract for colleges, but, again, the analogy is greatly strained and clearly fails as both an analogy and a matter or practicality. The uniqueness of a military contract is criminal enforcement for breaking it. That exists because it's a matter of national security. Any other contract in life is a civil matter and is really just an agreement for money with monetary penalties if contracts aren't fulfilled. We would quickly get into things like liquidated damages and the like, but it's much simpler to just realize that IU is never going to try to sign a kid to a 3 year contract, because if they do, Kentucky won't and Kentucky will get the player. The only way IU could enact such a policy is if some outside entity forces Kentucky to do so as well, which, just as above, is against the strong trend we are seeing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, IUfaninIllinois said:

Do you think there would be hesitation to come back because doesn’t him and Liam play same position? 

Maybe. But, if I'm coach, I would be drooling at the possibility of playing them at the 3 and 4. With Woodson's penchant for big lineups, he might even want to have them at the 2 and 3. Which I wouldn't hate either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, HoosierDom said:

C'mon, there's no comparison here.

Doctors and lawyers require training to be able to serve the public. There is no comparable training nor danger to the public. As most readily seen by the idea of allowing kids to go straight to the pros from high school if they so desire. But, even without that provision, the lack of a comparable training period is plain. As is the lack of public risk. The argument quickly devolves into one of anti-trust. If the Pacers decide they won't take a kid who hasn't played 3 years of college ball, they're welcome to do so, but the Bulls will not make a similarly self-destructive decision. So, the only way the Pacers can have such a policy is if some outside entity (the NBA) forces the Bulls to do so as well. That's the sort of thing that public policy is increasingly turning against.

A military enlistment is a contract, so you could argue for a term of service contract for colleges, but, again, the analogy is greatly strained and clearly fails as both an analogy and a matter or practicality. The uniqueness of a military contract is criminal enforcement for breaking it. That exists because it's a matter of national security. Any other contract in life is a civil matter and is really just an agreement for money with monetary penalties if contracts aren't fulfilled. We would quickly get into things like liquidated damages and the like, but it's much simpler to just realize that IU is never going to try to sign a kid to a 3 year contract, because if they do, Kentucky won't and Kentucky will get the player. The only way IU could enact such a policy is if some outside entity forces Kentucky to do so as well, which, just as above, is against the strong trend we are seeing.

 

You do realuze who makes these rules don't you? It isn't the NCAA

Edited by IU Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2024 at 6:12 PM, IUJoe said:

I remember hearing that year after year about TJD.  Nobody knew then; nobody knows now.

Especially with NIL money involved now. Staying at IU for a significant payday or go semi-pro for less money…it isn’t a certainty anymore for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, HoosierDom said:

Maybe. But, if I'm coach, I would be drooling at the possibility of playing them at the 3 and 4. With Woodson's penchant for big lineups, he might even want to have them at the 2 and 3. Which I wouldn't hate either.

Either our on ball defense will be destroyed playing them significantly at the two and three or our rebounding will at the 3/4. We struggle mightily already at both those. I guess the 2/3 but then where does Galloway play?? If 3/4 then that would assume Queen isn’t coming and with Reneau at 5…yikes that’s a poor rebounding front line. I wonder if Mgbako comes back if Liam would back out…be hard to see him making the starting lineup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...