Skip to comments.
Judge Rules in Favor of Clarett
Bucknuts.com ^
| 2/5/2004
| By Bucknuts.com Staff
Posted on 02/05/2004 10:11:42 AM PST by smith288
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
To: dyed_in_the_wool
For every dude on your list, there's at least 3 who shouldn't have been drafted. No there's not (unless you feel like naming them).
First, there haven't been too many players drafted out of high school into the NBA. Second, they presumably still need time to develop after being drafted which many of them do on an NBA bench instead of starting for a NCAA team. Third, drafting by a pro sports team is more of an art than a science -- with many players in all sports being draft busts regardless of whether they played only high school or completed all 4 years of college.
And every one of those players would've been even better if they had gone to school first.
And done what? Risked injury & their careers? Granted, I agree with the general premise that young players should stay in school for at least some time to gain experience.
But, if they actually are qualified - like everyone on my list is/was - why the heck would you stay in college when you could be making millions in the NBA??
I know I certainly wouldn't pass up that opportunity.
41
posted on
02/05/2004 11:02:01 AM PST
by
gdani
(Have you played Atari today?)
To: BlackRazor
Is the entire concept of having a draft even legal? Shouldn't a player have the right to sign with whatever team he wants (provided they want him), instead of having his employer dictated to him by the league? An interesting question I've thought about on occasion. As a practical matter, since the NBA went to just two rounds and the NFL cut way back on the number of rounds they have, players drafted are very likely to make the teams they are drafted by and undrafted players are free to pick teams and situations that they view as most beneficial to them.
Professional sports also enjoy some protections from the applications of anti-trust laws, but those laws really can't be used to prevent someone from making a living if they have the ability to compete at that level.
42
posted on
02/05/2004 11:03:07 AM PST
by
connectthedots
(Recognize that not all Calvinists will be Christians in glory.)
To: Enterprise
I dont think the NFL will go the way of the NBA...
NBA isnt as rough and tumble as the NFL. Lots of these little kids will get beat down to a pulp in practices long before making it on a field Sunday afternoons. Some will sneak through and become great, but most will suck and ruin their lives by being scholastically stupid and injured.
43
posted on
02/05/2004 11:04:26 AM PST
by
smith288
(If terrorist hate George W. Bush, then he has my vote!)
To: antiRepublicrat
They didn't necessarily want players with the most raw talent, but seasoned and mature players who have learned to play on a team at two separate levels. This is crucially important. Football is far more a team game than basketball is.
In Bball someone like Michael Jordan can dominate the opposing team almost by himself.
In football, Brett Favre, while being the best QB in the game ever (IMHO), is just one guy versus eleven. If he didn't have good team mates he'd get creamed. You can insert Barry Sanders or Randy Moss if you choose. Story remains the same. If you can't play as a team, you lose.
44
posted on
02/05/2004 11:05:44 AM PST
by
John O
(God Save America (Please))
To: John O
And how are his rights being violated by being denied a job that he's not qualified for? If no team wants to hire him, and there is no collusion involved, he wouldn't be qualified. In that case the NFL argument is moot. I say let the marketplace decide.
45
posted on
02/05/2004 11:07:26 AM PST
by
connectthedots
(Recognize that not all Calvinists will be Christians in glory.)
To: smith288
I pretty much agree with your post. The NFL will draft players who appear to be ready, but are not. And those players will probably get injured or ground down, as you suggest, when they might have been successful with a couple more years of college. The league loses a good potential player, then goes on to the next not-ready for the NFL player, his career ends early also, and the NFL, through time and attrition, grinds itself into total mediocrity, and eventually, becomes like the NBA. Someday we may hear the cry - BRING BACK THE XFL!
46
posted on
02/05/2004 11:17:53 AM PST
by
Enterprise
("You sit down. You had your say. Now I'm going to have my say.")
To: gdani
Having been a Sixer fan, I would argue that Darryl Dawkins, at least, was NOT ready for the NBA. A tremendous physical talent who never really learned the game of Basketball -- as witnessed by the whipping that Magic Johnson gave him in Game 6 of the NBA finals (when Kareem did not dress due to injuries). Dawkins should have rammed it down LA's throat, but instead he went into his usual big-game disappearing act. If he'd attended college, who knows?
47
posted on
02/05/2004 11:20:07 AM PST
by
Tallguy
(Does anybody really think that Saddam's captor really said "Pres. Bush sends his regards"?)
To: smith288
The guy may have talent, but I wonder if it occurred to him that he could not have possibly made himself any less attractive to the NFL in every other aspect. Sheesh.
MM
To: smith288
Judicial Activism. Impeach this judge!
Businesses has a right to estabilish their own rule. In this case not to try to lure teenagers out of high school. For once the rule is changed by the court it can be changed again by a more lenient one and finnally dropped overall.
Thus it's just another liberal judge attacking our children. Impeach them!
49
posted on
02/05/2004 11:30:48 AM PST
by
sr4402
To: Tallguy
I would argue that Darryl Dawkins, at least, was NOT ready for the NBA......Dawkins should have rammed it down LA's throat, but instead he went into his usual big-game disappearing act...... My response to that would be that Dawkins was obviously qualified to be in the NBA. The proof -- he was in the NBA for years & was a starter for many of those years.
Now, whether or not he choked against the Lakers & in other games is a different story. That would only indicate that he's a choker or that he wasn't a superstar -- but was still certainly qualified to be in the NBA.
50
posted on
02/05/2004 11:46:24 AM PST
by
gdani
(Have you played Atari today?)
To: smith288
Anything the overly subsidized, unionized NFL doesn't like sounds cool to me. Too bad for them they haven't paid congress off to get anti-trust exemptions like the PGA has.
To: smith288
Hmmm?
(putting on NFL General Manager hat and thinking)
(Scratching head)
What draft pick do I want to spend on a whiney, immature kid with an attitude problem who plays a position that has a career expectancy of 5 years who if he doesn't make it on my team will probably blame it on racism?
Um, Coach. I have a question. How are we fixed for placekick holders?
52
posted on
02/05/2004 11:55:23 AM PST
by
N. Theknow
(John Kerry is nothing more than Ted Kennedy without a dead girl in the car.)
To: dyed_in_the_wool
I don't think we can compare the NFL with the NBA. Regardless of talent, the NFL is much more physically punishing, and a kid out of high school doesn't stand a chance without years of weight training and physical conditioning at the college level. This may hasten some select college freshmen and sophomores into the NFL ranks, but when Heisman Trophy winning quarterback can typically expect to wait two to three years before taking a game snap, owners will be hard pressed to shell out big cash for undeveloped talent that will sit on the bench. Conversely, once it becomes apparent that college level seasoning is a must to have a chance at being competitive at the pro-level, we'll see retention rates similar to what we have now.
Comment #54 Removed by Moderator
To: Rutles4Ever
Some kids are physically mature at the age of 18. Others might not be physically mature until their late 20s.
I assume you have seen some very 'mature' 15 year-old women, and other's who don't really mature until their early 20s. Same happens with men even if it may not be as obvious.
55
posted on
02/05/2004 12:33:53 PM PST
by
connectthedots
(Recognize that not all Calvinists will be Christians in glory.)
To: gdani
Now, whether or not he (Darryl Dawkins) choked against the Lakers & in other games is a different story.Ordinarily I would agree with your argument, but this is a case where a 7-foot center cannot utilize his physical presence to impose his will on a smaller 6'8" point guard who is also playing out of position. Teams drill constantly to achieve a mismatch like this and here the Lakers were handing it to the Sixers on a silver platter. It's not like Dawkins had to 'recognize' the mismatch -- he knew he had it all night long.
Not ready for Pime Time.
56
posted on
02/05/2004 12:34:04 PM PST
by
Tallguy
(Does anybody really think that Saddam's captor really said "Pres. Bush sends his regards"?)
To: smith288
The anti-trust laws are intended to prevent
some of the owners from getting together and telling the other owners that they can't hire Clarett, thereby screwing Clarett. That appears to be exactly what it happening here.
Of course, the anti-trust laws do not require any of the owners to actually hire him. Theoretically, as long as each owner independently made the decision not to hire him, that would not constitute an anti-trust violation. (Of course, proving that a non-hire occurred as a result of a series of independent decisions, instead of an agreement between the owners, might well be very difficult).
To: Petronski
*cough* Lawrence Phillips *cough*
58
posted on
02/05/2004 12:52:25 PM PST
by
Maigrey
("I wasn't disengaged. I was bored as hell and my mother told me never to interrupt." -Dubya)
To: Lost Highway
I just don't understand why the NFL wants this rule.They don't!
In trying to maintain the status quo, the NFL argued that Clarett should not be eligible because its rule resulted from a collective bargaining agreement with the players.
The player's union wants the rule...less competition. I can live with this decision. Anything the unions don't like is fine with me!!!
To: sr4402
Are you serious or sarcastic?
The Judge ruled correctly that an individual can't be prevented from making a living. As the Judge noted, this was common law before the anti-trust laws existed. Businesses would make lots of anti-competive rules if they could.
BTW do you really believe the NFL made this rule for the good of children? A final note, Clarett will be 21 in October.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson