>No shit sherlock but you can act like college hoops doesn't
>have a vested interest all you want but we know that's not the
>case. College basketball is a billion dollar business you know
>that better than anyone. We know that just from the
>aftermarket ticket prices of Wednesday night's game.

I didn't say college hoops doesn't have a vested interest in money. You said, "isn't the reason they instituted the 1 year removed fom hs because the NCAA and college coaches were crying about talent going straight to the pros?" And the answer to that is, no, that isn't the reason. The reason is easily Googlable. Here's something from the top result of a Google search:

From WaPo: "The one-and-done rule began in 2005, when Silver was deputy commissioner under David Stern. It stipulated one of two age requirements a player must meet to be eligible for the draft: Either the player must turn 19 before or during the calendar year of the draft, or the player must be one year removed from high school graduation unless he met the criteria for international players.

There had been a handful of players since the 1970s to jump to the NBA directly out of high school, most notably Moses Malone and Darryl Dawkins. It became a trend beginning in 1995, when Kevin Garnett was taken fifth overall by the Minnesota Timberwolves. Three high schoolers — Kwame Brown in 2001, LeBron James in 2003 and Dwight Howard in 2004 — were selected No. 1 overall.

When eight of the top 19 picks in 2004 were high schoolers, Stern began a push to get an age requirement into the next collective bargaining agreement. Stern’s initial proposal was to require that players turn 20 before entering the draft, but he eventually settled for what became known as the “one-and-done” rule. The NBA no longer would spend its time scouting in high school gyms and would have a more physically and mentally mature group of players coming into the league every year."

That's the reason. Literally never had anything to do with the NCAA.

>>Neither RBO nor I are saying Zion *shouldn't* sit out. We're
>>saying he should do what he wants. And you continue to
>dispute
>>that stance for reasons unknown. The only logical conclusion
>>is that you think Zion's own words aren't a reflection of
>how
>>Zion feels. Which is, quite obviously, strange.
>
>That's literally what I've said all along, I have no agenda
>here, obviously you do.

Right, you're completely agenda-free, and we have the nefarious agenda of trusting a player's ability to make his own career choices. What an awful agenda to have!

Anyway. Have a good weekend, Truth.