NBAPA Lawyer: Double standard exists regarding age limit for black basketball players and white athletes in other sports

[mtron929]

There is a racial component to this issue. Especially the paternalistic 'they should get an education' opinion', when its not really about that. Guys with the talent level to not go right away will still go to college anyway.

What the NBA want is a year of free scouting and more importantly free marketing. That's what march madness is. Its so we know the names before they play in the league.

The NBPA allowed the age limit because it is not a pressing issue to most of their members (some of whom see high school kids as competition).

This statement is very clever because it draws a line in the sand at any age limit, so it puts the NBPA in the best bargaining position on this issue. It also introduces the factor of race. This can galvanize the membership and also make it a contentious issue for the owners to make a strong stand on. Thus for the NBPA to allow one year or to move to two years, they would get more in return.

The high school players are just pawns in this equation.

I personally think there should be no age limit because I hate the NCAA. But if they started to get paid in college, I might change my mind. I also think a player will develop more in the league or in a dleague. In fact for big men, they would be better playing in the Dleague from 16 from a technical POV. They would get real coaching and no restrictions on practice.

If I was advising an 18 year old with NBA talent, I'd tell them to go abroad. Its a better experience as you learn how to fit in to a pro team and a new culture. You learn about handling money, bills and so on. I find it telling that the slant in the media is that this is a bad thing. I read a ton of articles about Mudliay recently and they are split on the good idea/bad idea thing when it is basically always a better idea to take millions of dollars over one year of college. The media has an agenda and that agenda is fueled by the march madness money machine.

In any sports in which people in power want to enforce an age limit, education is a good excuse to throw out regardless of the race of its potential athletes. So I don't see how people would buy that there is a racial issue. I think there are two separate issues going on here which should be completely separate discussions.

1) is there a racial element to age limit set by the NBA?
2) should there be an age limit set by the NBA?

Reasonable people can agree/disagree on issue 2). Reasonable people can all agree that there is no evidence of racial element to the age limit.

[ChosunX]

There is a racial component to this issue. Especially the paternalistic 'they should get an education' opinion', when its not really about that. Guys with the talent level to not go right away will still go to college anyway.

What? Whitey ain't worth much unless he ''studied'' philosophy and got drunk constantly according to most people.

[42uptop]

Of course you will get the standard ignorant white guy response that it has nothing to do with race. When you're white, it's a lot easier to not see race. But this is clearly a racist policy- one that disproportionately affects black athletes and lines the NCAA's pockets.

Tell me, how does it feel to deal with white guilt on a day to day basis?

[jmomcc]

There is a racial component to this issue. Especially the paternalistic 'they should get an education' opinion', when its not really about that. Guys with the talent level to not go right away will still go to college anyway.

What the NBA want is a year of free scouting and more importantly free marketing. That's what march madness is. Its so we know the names before they play in the league.

The NBPA allowed the age limit because it is not a pressing issue to most of their members (some of whom see high school kids as competition).

This statement is very clever because it draws a line in the sand at any age limit, so it puts the NBPA in the best bargaining position on this issue. It also introduces the factor of race. This can galvanize the membership and also make it a contentious issue for the owners to make a strong stand on. Thus for the NBPA to allow one year or to move to two years, they would get more in return.

The high school players are just pawns in this equation.

I personally think there should be no age limit because I hate the NCAA. But if they started to get paid in college, I might change my mind. I also think a player will develop more in the league or in a dleague. In fact for big men, they would be better playing in the Dleague from 16 from a technical POV. They would get real coaching and no restrictions on practice.

If I was advising an 18 year old with NBA talent, I'd tell them to go abroad. Its a better experience as you learn how to fit in to a pro team and a new culture. You learn about handling money, bills and so on. I find it telling that the slant in the media is that this is a bad thing. I read a ton of articles about Mudliay recently and they are split on the good idea/bad idea thing when it is basically always a better idea to take millions of dollars over one year of college. The media has an agenda and that agenda is fueled by the march madness money machine.

In any sports in which people in power want to enforce an age limit, education is a good excuse to throw out regardless of the race of its potential athletes. So I don't see how people would buy that there is a racial issue. I think there are two separate issues going on here which should be completely separate discussions.

1) is there a racial element to age limit set by the NBA?
2) should there be an age limit set by the NBA?

Reasonable people can agree/disagree on issue 2). Reasonable people can all agree that there is no evidence of racial element to the age limit.

Well the crux of the issue is that it isn't applied to other sports. I can understand the argument in the NFL from a physicality POV. However, in my opinion in the NBA, no age limit would be better from a player development POV.

I think the main issue is money by a long shot (free marketing). However, I do believe that race plays some part. I don't think that is something that can proven either way.

The use of race in the statement is a negotiation ploy though in my opinion for the reasons I stated in my original post.

[jmomcc]

There is a racial component to this issue. Especially the paternalistic 'they should get an education' opinion', when its not really about that. Guys with the talent level to not go right away will still go to college anyway.

What? Whitey ain't worth much unless he ''studied'' philosophy and got drunk constantly according to most people.

I'm white and I did 'study' philosophy but my dad would have told me to get paid if I could at a pro sport. I am Irish though so that might be a cultural or just my family thing.

Its my impression that education is massively overvalued in America in general. If you are waiting 4 years instead of getting millions now, then you are getting bad advice.

[mtron929]

There is a racial component to this issue. Especially the paternalistic 'they should get an education' opinion', when its not really about that. Guys with the talent level to not go right away will still go to college anyway.

What the NBA want is a year of free scouting and more importantly free marketing. That's what march madness is. Its so we know the names before they play in the league.

The NBPA allowed the age limit because it is not a pressing issue to most of their members (some of whom see high school kids as competition).

This statement is very clever because it draws a line in the sand at any age limit, so it puts the NBPA in the best bargaining position on this issue. It also introduces the factor of race. This can galvanize the membership and also make it a contentious issue for the owners to make a strong stand on. Thus for the NBPA to allow one year or to move to two years, they would get more in return.

The high school players are just pawns in this equation.

I personally think there should be no age limit because I hate the NCAA. But if they started to get paid in college, I might change my mind. I also think a player will develop more in the league or in a dleague. In fact for big men, they would be better playing in the Dleague from 16 from a technical POV. They would get real coaching and no restrictions on practice.

If I was advising an 18 year old with NBA talent, I'd tell them to go abroad. Its a better experience as you learn how to fit in to a pro team and a new culture. You learn about handling money, bills and so on. I find it telling that the slant in the media is that this is a bad thing. I read a ton of articles about Mudliay recently and they are split on the good idea/bad idea thing when it is basically always a better idea to take millions of dollars over one year of college. The media has an agenda and that agenda is fueled by the march madness money machine.

In any sports in which people in power want to enforce an age limit, education is a good excuse to throw out regardless of the race of its potential athletes. So I don't see how people would buy that there is a racial issue. I think there are two separate issues going on here which should be completely separate discussions.

1) is there a racial element to age limit set by the NBA?
2) should there be an age limit set by the NBA?

Reasonable people can agree/disagree on issue 2). Reasonable people can all agree that there is no evidence of racial element to the age limit.

Well the crux of the issue is that it isn't applied to other sports. I can understand the argument in the NFL from a physicality POV. However, in my opinion in the NBA, no age limit would be better from a player development POV.

I think the main issue is money by a long shot (free marketing). However, I do believe that race plays some part. I don't think that is something that can proven either way.

The use of race in the statement is a negotiation ploy though in my opinion for the reasons I stated in my original post.

It is not something that can be proven either way and thus it is irresponsible to say that there is a racial component in something as ambiguous as this issue. Also, a phrase like "race plays some part" can mean anything. What are you exactly saying here? Your argument seems to be that age limit does not exist in other sports while it exists in basketball and given that most of the basketball players are black, there must be a racial component. Isn't this really really lazy analysis?

[brownsmith89]

where's the proof that an age limit automatically allows gm's to pick better?

if you look at old drafts from the 1980's, it was a lot more common for players to go to college for 3 to 4 years.

sam bowie was picked ahead of michael jordan. they both played college ball for 3 years.

wayman tisdale played 3 years in college and was selected 2nd in the 1985 draft ahead of charles oakley 9th and chris mullin 7th.

dennis rodman played 4 years of college ball and was drafted 27th in 1986.

in 1987 gilliam was picked 2nd ahead of reggie miller 11th and scottie pippen 5th.

gm's will still make mistakes whether players go to college or not.

[CablexDeadpool]

They can always choose to not go to college, too.

I just find it a bit rich that underprivileged people who feel like they're being treated like commodities, or only valued for their physical/athletic traits, being provided with the opportunity of a college education, and to develop some interests/qualifications outside of their sporting ability, treat it like it's some sort of punishment.

Nobody is going to value you for your intelligence and or as a person beyond being "just an athlete" if you see developing your mind and expanding your abilities/skills/knowledge as some sort of imposed burden.

See and this is the racism that people are talking about, if it was White people that wanted to go pro out of high school to play BBALL, nobody would would have a that kind of argument for it and that kind of argument is used as justification for free labor.

I actually used to think that it was good deal - free education for playing a sport - when I was younger but then I had to go college...

Who the hell cares about college in itself. You go to college to get money. You don't go to "learn" anything unless you wanna be a researcher and then yeah, you decided to be in debt the rest of your life.

I am Black and in college...why? I want money. If I could get money without being in college, I would rather spend my youth doing other crap than wasting 4 years of my life paying somebody for a piece of paper that allows me to get more money than other piece of paper I got at 18 would've allowed me. And thank god I am almost done so I can move on.

I even picked the degree that would get me the most money. It's not even what I am interested in. Do I care about the "education" no. Do I care about being perceived "intelligent"? Do I care about "developing skills" ? No no no no no no, I want money so I can take care of myself and family.

There are a lot of broke smart, well perceived people in the world.

Plus people use the idea college as a taming school for Black Americans. You go to get "educated" and "cultured" and all that other fluffy crap that is thrown at Black athletes and Black people. Like that stuff matters when you are poor. You go to college to get paid. Damn interests and hobbies. You pick the degree that yields the most money and you try to finish as fast as possible you so can start earning money. People think education = money, especially Black people who they market that crap at. when it's really about skills you obtain for jobs that pay the most. If athletes at the age of 17 got the skills to play pro, then dammit they should be able to play pro instead of wasting their life in school generating millions of dollars that they can't even get.

You see what athletes major in...communications, sociology, general studies...You don't see them majoring in accounting or finance or computer science. So what the hell is fuss about athletes getting "free education"? They getting BS degrees literally. The degrees they get couldn't even feed a family. The degree earnings are at the USA poverty line.

Perry Jones had his mother with a heart condition, he had to go college, he probably would've been the 1st pick if he came out right out of high school. He actually needed that money. He stayed in college 2 years and fell out the lottery. Perry Jones was homeless while in high school taking care of his mother. His parents was homeless while he was in college. Yeah learning about Western Civilization was sure a good thing while he had the capability of making money at 18 but had to sit around BSing in Baylor and losing money.

They even said, "Stay another year Perry! Improve your stock and get the college experience!"

The funny thing is, Dante Exum came right out of high school basically and nobody really had a problem with it. Nobody said "Stay in school and learn something." And he's of African descent. African American players wanna go pro young because they need money but they gotta go to the NCAA and get pimped out for a year or two since it's better than pulling a Brandon Jennings and being away for a year and getting paid and not playing at all and going in the late lottery.

NBA and NCAA are colluding. Both don't want minor pro leagues in the USA like in Europe where you can go pro at 16. Dennis Schroder and Giannis Antekunmpo benefited from this. Even going back, Roddy Beabouis and Serge Ibaka benefited from this.

There are countless of international players of African descent that didn't go to college and went pro before the age of 18 and the world didn't fall apart.

African American players wanna go pro..."Noooo you gotta learn stuff first while you play for free and be poor while you got million dollar talent."

---------------------------------------------------------
Basketball is not a physically demanding sport like American Football for those that got that football argument.

[jmomcc]

In any sports in which people in power want to enforce an age limit, education is a good excuse to throw out regardless of the race of its potential athletes. So I don't see how people would buy that there is a racial issue. I think there are two separate issues going on here which should be completely separate discussions.

1) is there a racial element to age limit set by the NBA?
2) should there be an age limit set by the NBA?

Reasonable people can agree/disagree on issue 2). Reasonable people can all agree that there is no evidence of racial element to the age limit.

Well the crux of the issue is that it isn't applied to other sports. I can understand the argument in the NFL from a physicality POV. However, in my opinion in the NBA, no age limit would be better from a player development POV.

I think the main issue is money by a long shot (free marketing). However, I do believe that race plays some part. I don't think that is something that can proven either way.

The use of race in the statement is a negotiation ploy though in my opinion for the reasons I stated in my original post.

It is not something that can be proven either way and thus it is irresponsible to say that there is a racial component in something as ambiguous as this issue. Also, a phrase like "race plays some part" can mean anything. What are you exactly saying here? Your argument seems to be that age limit does not exist in other sports while it exists in basketball and given that most of the basketball players are black, there must be a racial component. Isn't this really really lazy analysis?

It can't be proven because we can't see inside the minds of decision makers. It's not irresponsible to say that there is a racial component when the people affected are majority one race and the decision makers are of another race. I think it is irresponsible not to raise it as an issue especially when prejudices such as these have affected basically every institution in the country. Why would the NBA be any different? It seems extremely unlikely that there isn't some kind of racial component.

edit: and by racial component, I mean like this scenario.

NBA: It would be better for us if they play in college = free marketing.. better scouting..gms can't make dumb decisions..one more year to see a guy play before you have to max him. (MONEY!) Oh and you know what, they would be better off improving themselves in college (RACE!).

I'm not saying that the NBA is motivated by racial prejudice but I'm sure it colors things like this.

[ChosunX]

They can always choose to not go to college, too.

I just find it a bit rich that underprivileged people who feel like they're being treated like commodities, or only valued for their physical/athletic traits, being provided with the opportunity of a college education, and to develop some interests/qualifications outside of their sporting ability, treat it like it's some sort of punishment.

Nobody is going to value you for your intelligence and or as a person beyond being "just an athlete" if you see developing your mind and expanding your abilities/skills/knowledge as some sort of imposed burden.

See and this is the racism that people are talking about, if it was White people that wanted to go pro out of high school to play BBALL, nobody would would have a that kind of argument for it and that kind of argument is used as justification for free labor.

It's a class thing. If most white players would come from a poor background it would be the same. Or if in the public conciousness it would seem like they come from a poor background.

[TrueWarrior]

Anyone who graduated college in America recently knows that since the recession most entry level jobs require multiple years of experience and about 10 internships. It's insane but they understand supply and demand, and businesses demand the best candidates. Talk about being a slave though if you've interned. Swinging a paid internship is great, but the majority are unpaid. Most decent jobs require a bachelors degree or higher. That's 4 years, possibly more, and you arent getting paid yet while piling on debt. So forgive me for not crying lakes of tears because players might have to wait 2 measly damn years to make millions while being the king of the campus and getting a full scholarship in the meantime.

Like it's been said a thousand times: the NBA is a private business that wants to do what's best for the product. I see nothing wrong with that so I want to raise the age limit to 20. Just because a few great highschool players came out doesn't negate all the ones who didn't or took years on a team's bench before they started contributing. The NBA needs more ready-made rookies. Less projects with "unlimited upside". More physical and mental maturity. 1 more year isn't going to fix all these issues but it will help.

[jmomcc]

Anyone who graduated college in America recently knows that since the recession most entry level jobs require multiple years of experience and about 10 internships. It's insane but they understand supply and demand, and businesses demand the best candidates. Talk abouut being a slave though if you've interned. Swinging a paid internship is great, but the majority are unpaid. Most decent jobs require a bachelors degree or higher. That's 4 years, possibly more, and you arent getting paid yet while piling on debt. So I see nothing wrong with having to wait 2 measly damn years to make millions while being the king of the campus and getting a full scholarship in the meantime. Cry me a river.

Like it's been said a thousand times: the NBA is a private business that wants to do what's best for the product. I see nothing wrong with that so I want to raise the age limit to 20. Just because a few great highschool players came out doesn't negate all the ones who didn't or took years on a team's bench before they started contributing. The NBA needs more ready-made rookies. Less projects with "unlimited upside". More physical and mental maturity. 1 more year isn't going to fix all these issues but it will help.

I mean they are a business but the players have to agree to any terms.

I'd argue that sitting on a bench for a year prepares a player for NBA life more than playing in college.

Also, I don;t think it makes sense to say that someone shouldn't complain because someone else has it worse. Someone always has it worse.

[mtron929]

Well the crux of the issue is that it isn't applied to other sports. I can understand the argument in the NFL from a physicality POV. However, in my opinion in the NBA, no age limit would be better from a player development POV.

I think the main issue is money by a long shot (free marketing). However, I do believe that race plays some part. I don't think that is something that can proven either way.

The use of race in the statement is a negotiation ploy though in my opinion for the reasons I stated in my original post.

It is not something that can be proven either way and thus it is irresponsible to say that there is a racial component in something as ambiguous as this issue. Also, a phrase like "race plays some part" can mean anything. What are you exactly saying here? Your argument seems to be that age limit does not exist in other sports while it exists in basketball and given that most of the basketball players are black, there must be a racial component. Isn't this really really lazy analysis?

It can't be proven because we can't see inside the minds of decision makers. It's not irresponsible to say that there is a racial component when the people affected are majority one race and the decision makers are of another race. I think it is irresponsible not to raise it as an issue especially when prejudices such as these have affected basically every institution in the country. Why would the NBA be any different? It seems extremely unlikely that there isn't some kind of racial component.

edit: and by racial component, I mean like this scenario.

NBA: It would be better for us if they play in college = free marketing.. better scouting..gms can't make dumb decisions..one more year to see a guy play before you have to max him. (MONEY!) Oh and you know what, they would be better off improving themselves in college (RACE!).

I'm not saying that the NBA is motivated by racial prejudice but I'm sure it colors things like this.

Well, your definition of racial component can be so broadly applicable such that it renders the terminology meaningless. One can then state that whenever person from race A interacts with another person from B, there is a racial component. It just sounds like a passive-aggressive way to bring racism to the table without incurring any backlash.

And it seems like the biggest difference between you and I is that I feel like one should be very careful about bringing race to any conversation given that it is such a sensitive topic whereas you feel that one should bring up race as much as possible in any topic where it is applicable. My take is that there are racism and one should only fight the battles where there is much more evidence of racism while being careful about not bringing up racism when evidence is scant. But you disagree. With this fundamental philosophical difference separating us, we probably cannot come to agreement on these issues.

[wigglestrue]

African American players wanna go pro..."Noooo you gotta learn stuff first while you play for free and be poor when you got million dollar talent."

In reality, it's "Noooo you gotta be strongly encouraged to at least play a year in the NCAA because there's a mutually beneficial billion dollar system in place that would suffer if too many elite players entirely skipped the college basketball industry." It's corrupt. Is it racist? Perhaps the maturity-related excuses given by some interested parties are colored by racial bias. Perhaps. But the actual operating logic behind the rule? No. Nobody gives two turds that hundreds of immature white high school graduates turn pro in baseball for way less money and with way more risk of never cashing in. But a lot of people would, all of a sudden, if there were the college baseball equivalent of the Final Four and bowl games. The disingenuous rhetoric would probably be similar, perhaps the same exact concerns expressed about immaturity. But everyone would cynically know that the real reasons were purely economic.

The rhetoric some use to defend the rule may contain a racial double standard. Maybe. But that's just the rhetoric.

[jmomcc]

It is not something that can be proven either way and thus it is irresponsible to say that there is a racial component in something as ambiguous as this issue. Also, a phrase like "race plays some part" can mean anything. What are you exactly saying here? Your argument seems to be that age limit does not exist in other sports while it exists in basketball and given that most of the basketball players are black, there must be a racial component. Isn't this really really lazy analysis?

It can't be proven because we can't see inside the minds of decision makers. It's not irresponsible to say that there is a racial component when the people affected are majority one race and the decision makers are of another race. I think it is irresponsible not to raise it as an issue especially when prejudices such as these have affected basically every institution in the country. Why would the NBA be any different? It seems extremely unlikely that there isn't some kind of racial component.

edit: and by racial component, I mean like this scenario.

NBA: It would be better for us if they play in college = free marketing.. better scouting..gms can't make dumb decisions..one more year to see a guy play before you have to max him. (MONEY!) Oh and you know what, they would be better off improving themselves in college (RACE!).

I'm not saying that the NBA is motivated by racial prejudice but I'm sure it colors things like this.

Well, your definition of racial component can be so broadly applicable such that it renders the terminology meaningless. One can then state that whenever person from race A interacts with another person from B, there is a racial component. It just sounds like a passive-aggressive way to bring racism to the table without incurring any backlash.

And it seems like the biggest difference between you and I is that I feel like one should be very careful about bringing race to any conversation given that it is such a sensitive topic whereas you feel that one should bring up race as much as possible in any topic where it is applicable. My take is that there are racism and one should only fight the battles where there is much more evidence of racism while being careful about not bringing up racism when evidence is scant. But you disagree. With this fundamental philosophical difference separating us, we probably cannot come to agreement on these issues.

I never thought about it before really, but I do think like that. If there is a situation where one group has power over another group, then I assume discrimination to some degree. I just believe that everyone (including myself) discriminates against the out group to some extent, often without even knowing it.

When one person does interact with a person from another race, there is a racial component. There is a massive history and cultural weight on each encounter. Just like between catholics and protestants in northern ireland (my experience) or different ethnic groups. Just because it is broad and hard to tie down, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

In this case, I think the main motivation is economic and the use of race in the statement is mostly a negotiating tactic. Do you agree with that?

[TrueWarrior]

I mean they are a business but the players have to agree to any terms.

I'd argue that sitting on a bench for a year prepares a player for NBA life more than playing in college.

Also, I don;t think it makes sense to say that someone shouldn't complain because someone else has it worse. Someone always has it worse.

Sitting on a bench wastes a roster spot when that spot could go to a veteran. Thats an issue. Some raw 19 year old whose 30 pounds underweight and has little skills besides athleticism/dunking shouldn't be in the league if they can't play right now. I agree with a better minor league/D League system at the very least, but another year of scouting before the draft would reduce busts as we will see who steps up or regresses after their freshman year. That's not saving GMs from themselves. That's a business requiring a certain amount of experience to work for them, which is pretty much the same for every job.

Go on a job interview and you will be asked a million questions about all of the times you led a project, how you work with a team, how you handled a difficult boss, etc. They want to know your experience and that you're proven because they don't want to waste money on a bust hire. No different than the NBA. Let's just compare having to wait 2 years to play basketball with say having to wait 8 years (college+law school) to be a lawyer. Oh and you make much more playing basketball while waiting 1/4 of the time and not having to pay a cent for education. Think of slavery those poor souls go through.

Give the kids another year to gain some weight, work on their game, and prove themselves more. This is a man's league. No more babysittin.

[pipfan]

Interesting debate:
Questions-
Are current NBA players racist? They agreed to the age limit-so they are racist? All of them who voted for the last deal are racist then?
Obviously, it is all about $-it is not fair at all, but it helps current NBA players and helps teams, along with the NCAA. I was a walk on at a Big 10 university-I saw how corrupt the system is-really dumb players at my school-this was including urban kids, rural kids, California stoner baseball players-tons of rockheads at my top 50 school. It turned me off to all college sports.

The NBA should allow HS kids to get drafted, but they HAVE to spend a year in the DLeague-not sure on the contract. It would help the DLeague and hurt the NCAA. Now, that is bad for business, so it won't happen. But if the current players care (and are not racist) they will make this a top priority in negotiations.

[WhateverBro]

RealGM, once again, shocks me in how poorly people understand how racism works.

[brownsmith89]

That's a business requiring a certain amount of experience to work for them, which is pretty much the same for every job.

Go on a job interview and you will be asked a million questions about all of the times you led a project, how you work with a team, how you handled a difficult boss, etc. They want to know your experience and that you're proven because they don't want to waste money on a bust hire. No different than the NBA.

i don't know if that's the case where you work.. but there isn't a collective bargaining agreement that forces all companies to follow this rule.

for example, a manager may decide to hire his friend or relative.. not because of the talent.

a child prodigy may get special recognition from professors at a university. later they can give a letter of recommendation to bypass all those "job requirements".

there may be a shortage of skilled workers at a position that will allow rookies to get a fast track to bigger roles.

18-year-old basketball phenoms should be allowed the freedom to make their own choice.

[Damon_3388]

See and this is the racism that people are talking about, if it was White people that wanted to go pro out of high school to play BBALL, nobody would would have a that kind of argument for it and that kind of argument is used as justification for free labor.

I never mentioned race. My perspective and argument remains the same, regardless of a person's skin colour.

Don't want to feel limited/trapped by your own physicality, with your only real adult life skill or qualification being putting a ball into a hoop, especially if a professional basketball career doesn't work out? Don't want to feel like a "slave", like your only value is your body, and that your worth expires when your athleticism fades or you get hurt? Take full advantage of the opportunities you're given, and use the full ride you're getting to college to get a degree, expand your mind and your interests, and give yourself something else to do with your life if basketball doesn't work out, or even if it does. You've got a lot of living to do beyond your early-to-mid 30s (when most basketball careers are over).