I enjoyed reading some of the comments to the article – nothing gets people fired up like exposing the subtle racism shaping many of their opinions. You can almost predict the responses before you read them.

The MLB has a farm system in place, whereas the NBA doesn’t. THAT’S the difference. The NCAA ACTS like a farm system, but adds universal education and limitations on the players trade, which is sad. But that’s how it is. Until the NBDL becomes a TRUE farm system for the NBA, this is how it is, and it IS better for the NBA to have 19 and 20 y/o’s in the draft rather than 18 year olds. That extra year or two of evaluation with BETTER competition, DOES allow teams to get a more accurate read on players real worth.

Is this a stashed-away SacBee article??? Ailene?

So the two major sports that don’t have a farm system are the two that want their prospects to stay in school longer? Duh.

Joe Public doesn’t have a say in this. It isn’t decided by popular vote. The article offers no evidence whatsoever to support the idea that the processes set in place by professional football and basketball are race related in any way. The best he does is suggest that Sport A requires a year of college before allowing players to turn pro, Sport A has more of Race B, therefore Sport A requires this year of college out of a misguided sense of racial paternalism for Race B. It’s simplistic to the point of absurdity.

I’m sure there are some jackasses out there who see this rule in place and think to themselves, oh good those young black men could use some direction in their lives. But the reality is it’s boardrooms and businesses that are making these decisions. And boardrooms and businesses as entities don’t see race – they see money. With the level of scouting occurring at the high school level now (and even earlier), the NCAA would be doomed in relatively short order if they had no means to take advantage of top tier talent before it flees for the NBA.

It isn’t right. Players should be allowed to make the decisions that are best for themselves and their families. If there’s a professional team willing to pay and eighteen year old kid millions of dollars to play ball, they should have to spend a year of their life in uninsured, indentured servitude to the NCAA. But like it or not, all of that still does not make this about race.

Just follow the money.

’Nuff said.

No doubt race is a part of it, but no one really gives a crap about the 25,000 (or so it seems) people drafted out of high school each year in the baseball draft simply because there are so many of them. These are just faceless people. There’s not really a human element to it. You don’t think, “Oh wow, I remember such and such guy, he busted, I wonder what happened to him.”

But meanwhile, there are so fewer NBA players and they’re so much more visible and the busts are more memorable. Korleone Young, Ndudi Ebi, etc. etc.

At the same time, it’s hard to ignore that mainstream America tends to think basketball players are thugs and deadbeats whereas baseball and soccer players are just all-American boys. That has to play a role.

This article, while provocative, is both intellectually vacuous and sophomoric. Rather than looking at the issue from the more logical viewpoint of economics and organizational structure of the relevant entities, the author superimposes race and, as a result, tells us more about his own thinking than about that of the participants and/or fans of the current structures. And while I suspect this fellow thinks himself a fine specimen of "liberal" thinking, he proves himself to be, like many of his brethren, as racial in his thinking as those as he accuses. I find it ironic that those who see themselves as the guardians of civil liberties are often the most likely to see almost every social dynamic through the racial lens.

Yet, despite its obvious logical shortcomings, the article allows us to discuss something that really bothers me and that is the fact that an 18 year adult is not allowed to make a living in his chosen profession EVEN WHEN FULLY QUALIFIED. So, though I may come at it from different perspective than the author, in the end, I agree with at least part of his thesis. For me, it’s about individual freedom and the ability to utilize one’s skills and attributes to the best of one’s ability to earn as much as possible. What could possibly be more American? All the silly nonsense about "education" is the NCAA keeping its monopoly and earning millions and millions off the backs of its "student-athletes." The current system – especially as it relates to college football and basketball – is hypocritical and discriminatory.

Treat the NBA like any other employer. Let the NBA draft kids out of high school, and at that point the team owns the rights to the player. He can still go to college for a year or two, or can come directly to the NBA. Maybe if the player is drafted, the NBA team covers the scholarship costs and pays for an insurance policy that protects both the player and NBA team. The player could attend NBA camps and summer leagus, but once he plays regular season, his college eligibility is over. And let the kid have an agent. He should be allowed to protect his interests and finances.

If you think that high schoolers ruined the NBA, blame the owners who got too caught up in the potential of completely unproven kids. Remember, though, that plenty of great players never went to college.

Leave the players alone and build a farm system for owners!

Several guys drafted early, if they don’t make it to the majors get their education paid for by the team that drafted them. So if you’re a success in baseball, chances are you don’t have a degree, but the fallout option is going back to college at age 24 or whatever (assuming you were drafted in high school).
A bit unfair? Sure, but it’s a different sport. I don’t think the one year of college basketball is killing anyone anyways.

Not sure I’d stop where he did, but I don’t write for AOL Fanhouse either.