By the pricking of my thumbs...
Only in Westwood would losing two of the top freshman anywhere in the land register on the scale of "wicked", but I'm sitting here wrapping up the week's work bracing myself for the inevitability of a certain press conference that is sure to leave me shaking my head in just under an hour.
No quotes, citations or references in this post. Just one, long time member of the Bruin family wondering, "If Kevin Love, bolts after one partially successful (by Bruin standards) season, then there is simply no hope or future for building college basketball programs anywhere in the nation."
Now granted, like the short debate I just got into with a family member about a bunch of underachieving scholarship football players ditching class, I speak from a position of relative ignorance. I didn't rush, I didn't walk-on, I didn't run for student government. In fact, as social a creature as I was (and am), I didn't hang out much on campus. I didn't have time. For me, it was pretty much all business: I transferred in, took the 560 to and from the Valley, worked my ass off and did what the f*** I had to do (both then and now) to get the job done and uphold what's become family rite: Being a Bruin.
My campus experience was truncated and evidently much less cathartic than most. I grew up never more than 20-miles removed and a couple weeks between visits to UCLA. Thanks to my dad and bro, I always considered being on campus as being home. Years later, I take my little ones there so they can develop that same excited connection to Campus as was ingrained in me.
I mention all this because as I sit here waiting to hear our boy Kevin Love say he wants what's behind curtain #2, I can't help but wonder WHY. WHY??? Then of course, right afterward, I feel more than a little silly -- like a kid talking about life in America before he was even born:
I ain't 19 and I ain't 6'8" staring $6.5M in the face. I know all that.
But what I don't know is, past the great regular season, the conference championship and a third run to the Final Four, what the hell did we just get out of hosting this (and the other) freshman's' time at the school? And, if a kid who (1) doesn't "need" the money, (2) comes from a smart, stable background (3) didn't do what most every every athlete at UCLA strives for (win a NC) and (4) whose stock WILL ONLY RISE next season with the incoming class doesn't stay.. then why would ANY athlete who comes to this or any other university EVER stay past his/her freshman year once he/she gets the benefit of a few dozen press write ups and awards?
The answer is NONE unless somebody does something to up the ante for incoming athletes and their parents (like say a 2-year commitment or a new NBA age limit), because as college basketball fans, it has become painfully evident that we truly have nothing sustainable to look forward to year in and year out with regard to our schools, their teams and the insatiable and destructive draw that professional organizations like the NBA now represent. Hell, you'd think with all the recent flops of underdeveloped talent guys like Stern have seen and written off (in the $100's of M), they'd WANT recruits with a bit more seasoning than 2-3 years of towering over kids who weren't going any further themselves?!?
In short, something has to change before the heart of the sport is totally ripped out of it. And while I've never been one to even think of lobbying the immovable blue bloods of the NCAA for anything beyond mandating their athletes get a decent shot at an education, I believe in my heart that this whole thing needs to change.
At some point, an element of stability must be introduced into the system so that the department, the program, the roster and most importantly the instructor (coach) maintains the ability to impart the knowledge, training and experience he/she's been chartered to impart to his/her students... and we just won't get there like this.
I for one am totally against Love (and RW and the others) leaving this early, especially when his (their) risks/returns next season and beyond are all to the upside. But like I said, I didn't get that full ride; My mom wrote checks. I didn't get to ride on the team plane; I took the bus. So obviously, my views are tainted (if not a tad morbid) and I may not have the slightest clue what these kids and their families are dealing with.
Either way, Nestor, by the time today's done, I will undoubtedly owe you that drink we talked about. Alas, I prayed and figured against all hope and logic that it wouldn't come to this.
But it has.
Anyway, we'll always love you guys (Kevin, RW, et. al.).
Respect,
0 recs |
22
comments
Comments
The one-and-done rule
For colleges, the recruitment of excellent players, normally a good thing, ensures that their players will not stay for long. So, short of deliberately recruiting average players, their teams will constantly be in upheaval.
Recent NCAAs, I think, are prime examples, wherein an upstart with several well-coached 3rd and 4th-year players, such as Butler, George Mason, or Davidson, can (for one game, anyway) overcome a team with young superstars.
For NBA teams, the fear of missing out on the next LeBron or Kobe will continue to drive teams to raid the university cupboards. Some of these youngsters will make the leap; some not so much; some, will languish on the bench.
Those that make it will have received less coaching than had they stayed in college longer. There will be no shortage of ESPN highlights. But, the skill level and the team play of the league, overall, will be diluted.
In college football, you can't bolt until after your Junior season. I'd like to see the same rule applied to college basketball. As is, colleges are merely the unsupported farm system for the NBA.
I don't blame KL, RW, or anybody who leaves early. They're only playing the hand that they've been dealt. The rigged game is the problem, not the players.
by Bruinut on Apr 17, 2008 3:57 PM PDT 0 recs
Points made..
A second point is that, in a perverse way, UCLA might actually benefit from the one-and-done scenario based on Love's, RW's, and DC's making it in the pros. I know this is a stretch, but people will see how RW and DC were developed at UCLA and how KL refined his formidable skills under CBH and they might be more apt to come here than some fly-by-night franchise where "one-and-done" means that their one appearance in the final four is the only one for the decade.
I realize the two points above are a stretch (and somewhat contradictory) but work with me here; I never won a lot of debating contests but have sold a lot of software users on "features" that were really "bugs". Hey, it's a living.
Finally, there's a lot of mumbling around the internet that the NBA is not happy with the one-and-done. Again, take that with whatever grain of salt you might have lying around. This, supposedly, for several reasons, chief among them that they kids really aren't that mature (they would like two years in college) and that -- get this -- raiding the colleges for talent that has only one year of longevity actually trivializes then fan interest. The Euros (players not currency) and young kids do not bring a fan base with them hence they speculate declining fan interest. Think back to when Alcindor and Walton came out, when Magic and Bird and Jordan joined the league. All had more than one year and had tremendous fan appeal. Of course, these are reducto ad absurdum examples but similar cases could be made on a smaller scale for two- and three-year players.
I also hear that the current players are not excited about the flood of fresh competition here either.
Maybe I am grasping at straws here and maybe things will change; yeah, and maybe pigs will start flying out of my Southern orifice, too..
..but we are a lot better off than other schools. While we might be losing three very talented basketball players, we can expect a steady stream of new ones and some exciting round ball in '09 and '10 and '11 and..
by whp68 on
Apr 17, 2008 5:39 PM PDT
up
0 recs
If you're grasping at straws,
- Freshmen ineligible. Real students. Real college. And, it made for a great double-header with the varsity.
- Baseball, when it was competition between farm systems and player development, not bank accounts and market share.
- Stadiums were named Dodger Stadium or Wrigley Field, and not Co-BankAmerica Exxon AT&T Budweiser Doritos Park.
- Attending an NBA game was the thrill of watching Jerry West and Elgin Baylor and Dick Barnett, while listening to Chick Hearn on a transistor radio, and not a total assault on the eyes and ears. NBA games today, if I can generalize from my most recent trip to see the Warriors, employ arena-encircling, god-awful flashing video with nonstop ear-splitting "music" and contrived fan boosting. Sheesz. I get a headache thinking about it.
by Bruinut on
Apr 17, 2008 6:37 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I'm in Nut's century
I liked the absence of contrived playoffs in all the major sports. (It seems that more teams make the playoffs in various sports than miss them.)
I liked a 16 team field in the NCAA's, and no conference tournaments. (Did we really need Mississippi Valley State in the NCAA playoffs?)
I liked the old uniforms - high cut socks look better to me than baggy pants
I liked it when my most urgent medical issues took me to a dermatologist rather than a proctologist.
Now that is really a geezer rant.
by Fox 71 on
Apr 17, 2008 7:48 PM PDT
up
0 recs
exempting the short shorts
You don't need to be a geezer to want for less entertainment and more competition in American sports.
by theREAL_LOGAN5 on
Apr 18, 2008 12:14 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Add an adjective,
The game is the entertainment. The contest is the drama. Everything else is noise. It's why three clowns in a broadcast booth are less than the sum of one good announcer. The game. The game. It's the game, stupid (them, not you).
I'm still shaking my head over the 360-degree video screen I saw at a recent Warriors game. A continuous band of huge flat panels, encircling the entire arena between levels. Constantly flashing, incredibly annoying, continuously trying to draw my eyeballs its way, this monstrosity did everything in its power to distract me from the game.
It's one thing to have to find the game stats among the commecial clutter in the scoreboard. It's another to have to look through a ring of fire to see the damn game.
I presume that this is not the only arena so equipped. I don't need to be "entertained" during time-outs or even during half time. I can examine the stats. I'm happy to watch the teams huddle or, when I can get away with it, the song girls.
If they had let me in for free and charged retail prices for beer, then I could accept that this commercial assault was the price I had to pay. But, on top of NBA tickets and grotesquely inflated concession prices, it's more than a customer should have to bear.
by Bruinut on
Apr 18, 2008 2:23 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Re: whp68 - What you said MADE SENSE !
No matter how we analysed the situation, one and done rule is here to stay unless NCAA revokes it. Until then, we can perhaps enjoy the flip side of the rule's unintended effect, especially for UCLA. There will likely be a steady stream of high profile, exciting recruits arriving for Pauley's enjoyments, albeit on an individual, yearly basis.
Because of Lavin's ineptitude before Howland, UNC, Duke perennially witnessed their star players come and go on a short, one or maximum two year notice even before the one and done rule existed.
So, cheer on. Now we're on the same par as these two darling teams of the media. Billy Packer, Dick Vitale & company will now need to portioning out their swoonings, fawnings, droolings and what other salivating skills they can muster among UNC, Duke and UCLA equally now.
by Htse005 on
Apr 18, 2008 2:16 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I like baseball's rule
by ryebreadraz on Apr 17, 2008 4:03 PM PDT 0 recs
and we might even
by Dante on
Apr 17, 2008 6:40 PM PDT
up
0 recs
It's a good rule
Of course, with Howland, that rule would be fantastic for us.
by jaffa on
Apr 17, 2008 9:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Let's use European and South American
by pocho on
Apr 17, 2008 10:55 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Then the only relevant college sports
by Ollie on
Apr 18, 2008 12:40 AM PDT
up
0 recs
YEP
by theREAL_LOGAN5 on
Apr 18, 2008 12:18 PM PDT
up
0 recs
agreed
by insomniacslounge on Apr 17, 2008 5:46 PM PDT 0 recs
"partially successful season"?
Don't insult our team's accomplishment from this past season by calling it "partially succesful."
By this Bruin's standards we had a great year. An awesome year. I enjoyed every moment of it. And we established after it was over why we thought it was a great season by the standards here at BN.
If you are going to diminish or dismiss what these kids accomplished this past season, you are going to have to do somewhere else. Not here on BN.
by Nestor on Apr 17, 2008 6:43 PM PDT 0 recs
NP
I struggle for the proper part of speech to position another fantastically-successful-UCLA-basketball-season-that-just-happened-to-conclude-two-wins-short-of -the-stated-goal with.
by theREAL_LOGAN5 on Apr 18, 2008 12:27 PM PDT 0 recs
no worries
by Nestor on
Apr 18, 2008 3:33 PM PDT
up
0 recs
ahhight then N.
by theREAL_LOGAN5 on
Apr 18, 2008 4:22 PM PDT
up
0 recs
How about
That's a lot of words, I know. Trouble is, it's hard to throw a qualifying word, such as "partially," before "successful" and not have it come off as a slight or a slam.
If you want to keep it short, you could qualify the ultimate, rather than the general "successful." For example, you could refer to an "almost supremely successful" or a "near-championship" season.
Either way is awkward, though. For me, I'm just going to continue referring to it as an extremely successful season, and let it go at that.
by Bruinut on
Apr 18, 2008 4:37 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Or how about
by Fox 71 on
Apr 18, 2008 7:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I'm thinkin'
That says, "better-than-99.5%-of-college-teams-this-decade-period-end-of-f**n-story" better than any 20-words I can fathom.
Came up with that up on Mulholland last night.
by theREAL_LOGAN5 on
Apr 19, 2008 6:15 PM PDT
up
0 recs















