Steve Cohen: Leave Age Limit Out of Next CBA

He is a congressman from Tennessee

"I am writing to express my deep concern over the policy of the National Basketball Association [NBA] to bar athletes from playing in the league on the basis of their age," Cohen's letter to Stern begins. "The '19 plus 1' policy, which requires American players to be at least 19 years of age and one year removed from their high school graduating class, is unfair restriction on the rights of these young men to pursue their intended career. I also believe that it has played an important role in several recent scandals involving college students who were prevented from entering the NBA upon high school graduation. I ask that this policy be repealed when the NBA completes its new collective bargaining agreement with the NBA Players Association."

Cohen expanded on his thoughts in an afternoon interview with CBSSports.com. He said though he represents a district that includes Memphis, the timing of his letter is unrelated to recent news that the University of Memphis men's basketball program has been charged with major violations by the NCAA. Rather, the timing is connected to Thursday's start of the NBA Finals, and Cohen said he has long planned to send his letter this week because he expected two stars who never attended college to be participating on the sports' biggest stage.

"We've been looking at the issue since April, to be honest," Cohen said by phone. "We were expecting a Kobe-LeBron Finals, but we got a Kobe-Dwight Finals, which is just as fine because we've got two players who went straight from high school to the NBA [in the Finals], and it didn't seem to hurt them at all in their development as players."

Click to expand...

"It's a restrain of trade on these kids, and you see it in the NFL and NBA," Cohen said. "You don't see it in Major League Baseball. I was watching the [Memphis] Redbirds play ... and I was looking at the field and there wasn't an African-American player on the field when the Iowa Cubs played the Redbirds [in a Triple-A baseball game]. I didn't see one on either team, and I thought, 'This is a white sport. And tennis is a white sport. And golf is a white sport. And swimming is a white sport. And hockey is a white sport. And they don't have these restrictions. But basketball and football are predominantly African-American sports, and that's where they have the rule that forces players into college [instead of] going straight to the pros. Something here doesn't compute."

Click to expand...

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/11816994

??? ?????? wrote:

"It's a restrain of trade on these kids, and you see it in the NFL and NBA," Cohen said. "You don't see it in Major League Baseball. I was watching the [Memphis] Redbirds play ... and I was looking at the field and there wasn't an African-American player on the field when the Iowa Cubs played the Redbirds [in a Triple-A baseball game]. I didn't see one on either team, and I thought, 'This is a white sport. And tennis is a white sport. And golf is a white sport. And swimming is a white sport. And hockey is a white sport. And they don't have these restrictions. But basketball and football are predominantly African-American sports, and that's where they have the rule that forces players into college [instead of] going straight to the pros. Something here doesn't compute."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I agree 100%. No one ever seems to care about the education of tennis, hockey or soccer players. Not to mention the athletes that compete in the Olympics, which leads to endorsement money.

But when it comes to basketball it seems to be an issue and everyone cares about their education.

I agree with everything he says. I really hope that they do away with it, though i'm not sure he has enough clout to get it done. maybe if this thing gets enough momentum behind it.

You think anyone cares about the education of football or basketball players?

I think the age limit in football is a good thing, because there is a level of physicality that requires age, and there exists no minor league system.

There's no need for an age limit in baseball because they have such an awesome minor league system. Something which simply doesn't exist in basketball where the minor leagues basically suck for player development.

I have no idea how things work in hockey in that regard as to whether there are good development outlets for players if the crash and burn in the pros.

Golf and Tennis are individual sports. There really is no development for a particular role except to go out and play people. It's not like a team sport where if you aren't good enough to start you don't get minutes or develop.

Basketball doesn't really need an age limit though. While some players come out early and potentially make some mistakes and could have done better in college, it's just as likely that they would have just proven that they weren't draft worthy by going to college or proven that they were 2nd round talent.

However, getting beyond that, the purpose of age limit has nothing to do with education or protecting the players. It has everything to do with protecting owners and adding revenue to the NBA. Getting free big time marketing from the NCAA is what it's all about and forcing the players to have one more higher level development year so that the NBA GMs can evaluate them better.

However, on top of that the notion that these recent scandals are due to the age limit is ludicrous. It implies these guys weren't already being paid under the table. Illegal payment scandals date back to the widespread belief that John Wooden's UCLA players were all paid off and probably before that. It has nothing to do with the NBA.

The scandals don't exist because the players want to go to the NBA. The scandals exist because NCAA basketball makes billions in revenue per year, and these schools benefit massively financially by cheating. If your school can generate 20 million bucks by getting a superstar college player on it then how much incentive is there to pay that guy? How much is he worth paying illegally? College basketball is big business and blaming the NBA for it's problems is moronic.

What if there was no NBA for them to go to afterwards? Would it make the scandals go away? Hell no.

fola wrote:

I agree with everything he says. I really hope that they do away with it, though i'm not sure he has enough clout to get it done. maybe if this thing gets enough momentum behind it.

Click to expand...

From a fairness perspective, I agree entirely. From a selfish perspective, I'd make the age limit three years to make the draft process less of a crap shoot and to make the players come into the league more developed.

I agree with many of your points doug, but still, it should be up to the athlete. If GM's aren't adept enough to find the gems, thats on them. I dont care what it does to the college game. I dont care about the scandals. I just think its wrong. Why not just develop a real minor league? Or better yet, have the DL play some euro powerhouses during the summer months when theres no nba. Something. Anything. There are many players for which their 'windows' are incredibly small. They should have the opportunity the strike while the proverbial iron is hot. I could go on and on. If the GM's have trouble evaluating them... i guess it just means that they would have to , ya know, get better at it. Alright...FHEJf#I(PI()!!!!


*steps off soap box

dougthonus wrote:

You think anyone cares about the education of football or basketball players?

Click to expand...

Yes. I've heard people say that all the time. But only for basketball, not any other sports where a 16 year old can start their career.

You have to remember, I produced a sports talk show for 5 years. I've heard endless hours of sports radio and sports talk. Not to mention all the calls I've had to screen in my day. There are lots of people that have that opinion.

They shouldn't be allowed to go pro unless they finish college. My argument has been that you wouldn't care about the kid that drops out and goes to work at the burger joint down the street. So why do you care about an basketball player?

Kush77 wrote:

My argument has been that you wouldn't care about the kid that drops out and goes to work at the burger joint down the street. So why do you care about an basketball player?

Click to expand...

Or to ,ya know, go fight in one of our wars.

Kush77 wrote:

dougthonus wrote:

You think anyone cares about the education of football or basketball players?

Click to expand...

Yes. I've heard people say that all the time. But only for basketball, not any other sports where a 16 year old can start their career.

You have to remember, I produced a sports talk show for 5 years. I've heard endless hours of sports radio and sports talk. Not to mention all the calls I've had to screen in my day. There are lots of people that have that opinion.

They shouldn't be allowed to go pro unless they finish college. My argument has been that you wouldn't care about the kid that drops out and goes to work at the burger joint down the street. So why do you care about an basketball player?

Click to expand...

Or to take this in another direction, lets look at Taylor Swift.

She's a few months younger than I am. She has sold 7.5 million albums. She had the most popular music tour as well. From her musical success, she has been able to sell merchandise and get sponsorships. I am going to assume that she is a very rich woman right now. She signed a record deal when she was 15 years old.

She graduated from high school in July 2008.

So here's an idea. Let's take away the last 3-4 years of her life music wise. She should be sitting in a classroom. She should not be allowed to do anything professionally. Until this July, when she will be one year removed from graduating high school, she can only perform in talent shows, without cash awards for the winners, and can only distribute her music for free.

Sounds fair, right? Girls gotta get her education to do her job.

fola wrote:

I agree with many of your points doug, but still, it should be up to the athlete. If GM's aren't adept enough to find the gems, thats on them. I dont care what it does to the college game. I dont care about the scandals. I just think its wrong. Why not just develop a real minor league? Or better yet, have the DL play some euro powerhouses during the summer months when theres no nba. Something. Anything. There are many players for which their 'windows' are incredibly small. They should have the opportunity the strike while the proverbial iron is hot. I could go on and on. If the GM's have trouble evaluating them... i guess it just means that they would have to , ya know, get better at it. Alright...FHEJf#I(PI()!!!!


*steps off soap box

Click to expand...

I agree with you. As I said the rule is horribly unfair and entirely self-serving for the NBA. It doesn't help the athlete at all. The NBA loves getting more polished products into the game right away and guys who have better marketing built in from NCAA tourney runs I'm sure though.

Does the league have the right to make a rule that improves it's product at the expense of the athlete? I think that's an interesting question, because I clearly think the rule, especially if extended to three years would increase profitability for the NBA.

dougthonus wrote:

fola wrote:

I agree with many of your points doug, but still, it should be up to the athlete. If GM's aren't adept enough to find the gems, thats on them. I dont care what it does to the college game. I dont care about the scandals. I just think its wrong. Why not just develop a real minor league? Or better yet, have the DL play some euro powerhouses during the summer months when theres no nba. Something. Anything. There are many players for which their 'windows' are incredibly small. They should have the opportunity the strike while the proverbial iron is hot. I could go on and on. If the GM's have trouble evaluating them... i guess it just means that they would have to , ya know, get better at it. Alright...FHEJf#I(PI()!!!!


*steps off soap box

Click to expand...

I agree with you. As I said the rule is horribly unfair and entirely self-serving for the NBA. It doesn't help the athlete at all. The NBA loves getting more polished products into the game right away and guys who have better marketing built in from NCAA tourney runs I'm sure though.

Does the league have the right to make a rule that improves it's product at the expense of the athlete? I think that's an interesting question, because I clearly think the rule, especially if extended to three years would increase profitability for the NBA.

Click to expand...

Which is a point I tend to make over and over again when discussing this topic, though probably not as eloquently as you have. This is entirely self serving, and not "fair" to the athletes (whatever that means), but should that prevent the league from doing it? The NBA is an employer offering extremely desirable positions. Is it not within the right of an employer to ask certain requirements of their potential employees, if they feel it will ultimately help their business?

I love when the Government brings ups things like this, great to see they are really working hard on the economy and closing the damn border.

dougthonus wrote:

fola wrote:

I agree with everything he says. I really hope that they do away with it, though i'm not sure he has enough clout to get it done. maybe if this thing gets enough momentum behind it.

Click to expand...

From a fairness perspective, I agree entirely. From a selfish perspective, I'd make the age limit three years to make the draft process less of a crap shoot and to make the players come into the league more developed.

Click to expand...

Indeed. Your prior quote was dead on as well.

Doug is dead on. People need to think for themselves and not believe everything said in the news. The age limit is money based and only makes sense from a financial perspective. If I were a team owner I would never agree on the next CBA without an age limit. Unless the minor league system gets drastically improved and gains a lot more popularity which is not likely to happen in such a short period of time.

Kush77 wrote:

dougthonus wrote:

You think anyone cares about the education of football or basketball players?

Click to expand...

Yes. I've heard people say that all the time. But only for basketball, not any other sports where a 16 year old can start their career.

You have to remember, I produced a sports talk show for 5 years. I've heard endless hours of sports radio and sports talk. Not to mention all the calls I've had to screen in my day. There are lots of people that have that opinion.

They shouldn't be allowed to go pro unless they finish college. My argument has been that you wouldn't care about the kid that drops out and goes to work at the burger joint down the street. So why do you care about an basketball player?

Click to expand...

I should say, do you think anyone involved in the decision making process cares about the education of football/basketball players. Ie, the teams, the NCAA, the AAU coaches etc..

badboy wrote:

Doug is dead on. People need to think for themselves and not believe everything said in the news. The age limit is money based and only makes sense from a financial perspective. If I were a team owner I would never agree on the next CBA without an age limit. Unless the minor league system gets drastically improved and gains a lot more popularity which is not likely to happen in such a short period of time.

Click to expand...

I agree, the NBA were tired of wasting money on bust, NCAA at least wanted to see the D.Rose's, Micheal Beasley, Blake Griffin's or any high school super to play at least one year so they could continue to sale the product, looking at the landscape of sports, people are following players instead of teams

Some pretty great comments by David Stern in response to Rep. Cohen's letter.

In addition to fielding questions on his about-face on LeBron, after initially saying he didn't intend to fine him, Stern was asked Thursday night why he hasn't delivered more transparency in the wake of L'Affaire Donaghy, ongoing perceptions of fixed games in the playoffs and the Tennessee congressman who this week likened the NBA's minimum age of 19 to a "vestige of slavery."

All those questions, though, came largely without the tension and suspicion that never stopped wafting through the Staples Center during the 2008 Finals, with Stern saving his sharpest response for the "slavery" parallel drawn by Rep. Steve Cohen.

"That would be like you saying that the talented people of the NBA -- college graduates some -- and talented graduates of many universities are not eligible to be congressmen because they have an age limitation of 25," Stern said.

"What the Congressman didn't understand -- and we'll be happy to share our view with him -- [is] this is not about the NCAA. This is not an enforcement of some social program. This is a business decision by the NBA, which is [that] we like to see our players in competition after high school. I don't know why our [nation's] founders decided that age 25 was good for Congress, but I guess they thought that was about maturity. And for us it's different. It's a kind of basketball maturity."

Indeed. You can (and should) question the NBA's policies on a variety of fronts, which is something Stern swears he welcomes.

"We wake up every morning," Stern says, "and ask, 'What are we doing wrong?'"

Yet the suggestion that the 19-and-over rule is either racially motivated or that it forces players to attend college is way, way off. As Stern points out, players who don't want to attend college have the right to play overseas or in the NBA Developmental League until they are 19. This is purely a maturity thing ... as well as a rule that the NBA Players Association had a say in.

Another comparison Stern loves to make is that it doesn't matter if you know how to drive at 13 or 14. You have to wait until you're 16 to get your driver's license, which is the same principle that the NBA is employing.

Click to expand...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&page=Stern-090604

Stern's response was pretty up front and honest. It's hard to argue with him unless you're suggesting the league isn't allowed to set an age limit for it's business. However, I think it's undeniable that the age limit is good for the league.

dougthonus wrote:

It's hard to argue with him unless you're suggesting the league isn't allowed to set an age limit for it's business.

Click to expand...

I'd argue exactly that, the league should have no more right to restrict the league to a certain age than they do a certain race. I don't care whether it makes the league better, it's unfair discrimination over an aspect of their life (birth date) that players have no control over.

With that type of thinking Shakes I think I need to bring up what Stern said again. I could drive from I was twelve. Would have liked to see me or anyone else driving a car on the streets at that age? Would you argue the rule in congress for their age limit the same way? If I am an owner of an NBA team and I see kids coming into the NBA sitting on benches to eventually dropping out but sat their for years getting money they didn't earn holding my product as well as others and dropping ratings and value in my team should I still allow them to continue to cause me to lose money(lower my profits)?