Higher Age Floor, Lower Arrest Levels for NBA?

Last week in one of my posts about cheaters I touched on how very difficult universities can make academics for their athletes. This idea goes hand in hand with what some argue is the need for an older minimum age to enter the NBA; those players who have not gone to college are more likely to get in trouble with the po-po later in their careers. Apparently, a college education is supposed to smarten you up a little – maybe make you rethink hitting your girlfriend like Dennis Rodman, or getting caught with weed like Sheed? The funny thing is both Rodman and Wallace went to college. So what does that mean in terms of a link between higher education and lower arrest rates?

In a study designed to look at the validity of such a claim, researchers actually found that nearly the opposite was true. Out of 84 NBA players who had been arrested, more than half – 48 – had completed four years of college. Of the remaining 36 players, 27 had completed at least two years of college. In fact, out of every arrested NBA player studied, less than 5% had not gone to college at all.

Although NBA Commissioner David Stern has openly pushed to have the age floor raised to 20 years old, there are others like Congressman Steve Cohen who have gone as far as to call the idea “a vestige of slavery” because it constitutes “a restraint on a person’s freedoms and liberties.” I’m not saying I agree with Stern, but I think “a vestige of slavery” is a little dramatic. Let’s take it down a notch, Cohen – we’re talking about picking up high schoolers, not picking cotton. The NBA’s age floor is currently set at 19, which means unless a player has been held back a year, they are pretty much forced to attend at least a year of college before going pro. This rule will be up for reconsideration when it expires next year.

While I think we all know universities don’t exactly kill athletes with workloads or hard classes, after checking out those study results maybe they should consider raising the academic bar slightly as a possible solution in the meantime. If athletes are already getting their own “special” classes (Addition and Subtraction 111, US States 120) why not at least make them relevant to their future careers? I mean, it’s pretty obvious that their current degrees aren’t doing a whole hell of a lot to help them to stay out of trouble. I personally think Hiding Substance Use 425 or Controlling Abusive Urges 315 sound like they’d be pretty popular, and maybe a more practical solution until a verdict is reached in 2011.