Hot Stove: UNC Basketball

[donbosco]

That’s fascinating. Obviously professional basketball just wasn’t nearly as lucrative back then. George Mikan, who was the same age as Kurland, signed the first “big” professional basketball contract. It was $60K for 5 years ($12K per year). While that was pretty good money for the time— it’s the equivalent of just under $200K today— there were a number of non-sports professions where you could make more. And obviously you cannot play professional basketball forever. Someone like Kurland may have thought, “Sure I can make decent money for the next 10-15 years, but what kind of career will be available for me after that? Who would want to hire someone in their late-30s whose only job experience is playing a game?”

Even the biggest basketball salaries back then weren’t enough to set someone up for the rest of their life by the end of their career. Nowadays some of the top prospects entering college or entering the portal can be set for life after one year if they are wise with their money and invest well.

Playing on a team that assured someone of long-term, year-round employment could cause an athlete to choose AAU or Mill League ball for sure. From what I understand that was Kurland's reasoning as to why he did not go to professional basketball. I understand that a lot of baseball players did the same in the Southeast.

 

[wmheel1287]

I don't think it's that baseball lends itself to a minor league system any better than does football or basketball, it's that by the time college sports became the enormous enterprise it is today that baseball already had an established minor league system while football/basketball did not, so the college game became the de facto minor leagues for those sports.

I'm guessing that if the baseball minor leagues had not existed before the growth of collegiate sports that college baseball would be much more popular than it is today. Or that if basketball or football had established their own minor leagues by the 1940/50s, then the college versions of those sports would not be nearly as popular as they are today.

College baseball will continue to gain on Minor League Baseball as schools pay players to stay around.

 

[Bigs23]

I don't think it's that baseball lends itself to a minor league system any better than does football or basketball, it's that by the time college sports became the enormous enterprise it is today that baseball already had an established minor league system while football/basketball did not, so the college game became the de facto minor leagues for those sports.

I'm guessing that if the baseball minor leagues had not existed before the growth of collegiate sports that college baseball would be much more popular than it is today. Or that if basketball or football had established their own minor leagues by the 1940/50s, then the college versions of those sports would not be nearly as popular as they are today.

The fact that minor league baseball is played in the spring and summer is a factor. It doesn’t compete with any college sports and is often the only game in town.

We’ll never know if minor league football and basketball would have worked had college sports not been invented. They might have.

 

[SnoopRob]

Those are excellent points. Note that I said, "I'm not sure," which I admit can be taken as a polite way of saying "not really" but it wasn't meant that way here. I was saying I really don't know. Likewise, I'm not sure football needs more development -- there are freshmen WRs who can play in the NFL for sure. But anyway, you're right that it's not a compelling explanation.

As for colleges thriving outside urban areas, that's clearly true at least in part. On the other hand, historically urban colleges have been very good at basketball. Not so much these days, but back in the 50s, 60s, and 70s, schools like CUNY, St. Johns, the five schools in Philly that Bill Raftery would bring into any commentary he could -- they were strong programs. Depaul used to be very good. But, by the same token, urban schools were either terrible at football or didn't even bother fielding a team.

You're correct that basketball did very well in cities, especially in the northeast, back in the day, largely because they had immediate access to the best recruiting areas in the country as well as being willing to desegregate much earlier than programs in other parts of the country, particularly the south.

But as college sports fully desegregated and grew in popularity, the greater resources of schools elsewhere overcame those advantages to shift the center of college basketball away from these urban areas to schools across the country, especially those who didn't have to compete with professional sports in their geographic areas.

 

[SnoopRob]

College baseball will continue to gain on Minor League Baseball as schools pay players to stay around.

I haven't really thought about it, but if NIL money starts going to college baseball in real amounts, you are probably correct.

It will be interesting to see if college baseball can pull together enough NIL funds to keep the best players out of the draft and in college.

 

[superrific]

But as college sports fully desegregated and grew in popularity, the greater resources of schools elsewhere overcame those advantages to shift the center of college basketball away from these urban areas to schools across the country, especially those who didn't have to compete with professional sports in their geographic areas.

I mean, I guess. Let's see. UCLA is in a big city. IU is not. UNC is not. Duke is not. Louisville is, more or less. Nova and G'Town are. Kentucky? I actually don't really know. Kansas not.

So I guess it's a mixed bag overall but you're right about the gradual spread outside of urban areas. It's also true that the NBA didn't really grow in popularity until the 80s

 

[Centerpiece]

Players can go pro whenever they want. The NBA restricts who can play in their league by agreement of the NBAPA and the owners, but players can go pro in other leagues. The NBA owners don't want to change the system because they don't want to waste millions on unproven players, and the existing players benefit from younger players not taking their jobs.

Sure they can "go pro" somewhere other than the NBA or the NFL. But your second sentence nails it. "The NBA restricts... " and it's to that end I call B.S. The remainder of your comment dies right there.

 

[Centerpiece]

I think the NCAA could do some things that would immediately settle and simplify things. The one thing Justin Jackson was asking for the most is a 1 or 2 transfer rule that limited how often players could switch schools on scholarship. To me, that would have a significant effect on the chaos of the current transfer portal. I don't know the NIL laws well enough to know if it would pass legal muster, but it would definitely force players and agents to take a more long term view of these transfer decisions.

Perhaps it would be OK if the NCAA could resurrect itself and do the right thing for the players. (Easter reference unintended but perhaps appropriate)

 

[Centerpiece]

Colleges as a de facto minor league is a win/win. Too much money being made for that to go away.

Baseball lends itself better to a minor league system. People will actually pay to watch it and the players make peanuts. There’s also the belief that baseball players need more time to develop.

Football players also "need more time to develop". So what. Baseball has done it the right way... after Curt Flood.
All players in all sports should be able to make the choice to attend college and/or make money for their athletic abilities. The landscape today is getting closer to that end. Maybe "the man" will finally let us play ball, make our money and study for a degree all at the same time. Or any combination of the above. Anything else sucks for us and only goes to further "the man" who oppresses.

 

[Centerpiece]

Back on topic: Need another Nate Britt in the back court...


Portal/recruiting grades:
B+ with Drake
B- without Drake
Has he signed with an agent? Can he test the waters and return for 2025/2026

Z.High is back on roster?

 

[Bigs23]

Football players also "need more time to develop". So what. Baseball has done it the right way... after Curt Flood.
All players in all sports should be able to make the choice to attend college and/or make money for their athletic abilities. The landscape today is getting closer to that end. Maybe "the man" will finally let us play ball, make our money and study for a degree all at the same time. Or any combination of the above. Anything else sucks for us and only goes to further "the man" who oppresses.

It’s probably a lawsuit away. I don’t think that change would have a huge impact on either sport at the college level.

 

[SnoopRob]

I mean, I guess. Let's see. UCLA is in a big city. IU is not. UNC is not. Duke is not. Louisville is, more or less. Nova and G'Town are. Kentucky? I actually don't really know. Kansas not.

So I guess it's a mixed bag overall but you're right about the gradual spread outside of urban areas. It's also true that the NBA didn't really grow in popularity until the 80s

UCLA is in a big city, but LA - being on the west coast - didn't have well-established pro teams (they didn't have a pro team until the Dodgers moved there in 1958). And, to a certain extent, they're a "one great coach" program that has only been largely decent since Wooden retired.

Louisville isn't a big city and isn't a traditionally large city that had professional teams. Georgetown is largely a "one good coach" team under Thompson in the 80s. Villanova is an example of the old urban NE teams that were great and then faded, except for a revival under Jay Wright.

The history of college basketball success moving from NE urban areas to places without pro sports isn't absolutely perfect, but it explains quite a bit. (And works to explain college football success quite well, as well.)