Michael Rosenberg of SI posted a story today entitled "Forcing top players to play college ball isn't just silly, it's un-American" in which he rehashes the old argument that it's unfair to make players who want to go to the NBA go to college first.
The problem with Rosenberg's article is not that it provides nothing new to the debate (it's an annual column written by someone somewhere thus the outrage is manufactured at best); it's that he takes Stern to task for protecting his league. Which is kind of his job.
Yeah, I get it: not every player benefits from spending time in college. There are certain exceptions - like LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, and Kobe Bryant - who made their teams and the league better almost instantly. And then there's everyone else. And all of those players should go to college and they should stay for 2-3 years.
Yeah, they'd be making a few million dollars based solely on their rookie contract, but their lack of development by sitting on the end of an NBA bench will mean they won't get that all-important lucrative second contract. That's what Rosenberg doesn't understand: John Wall sitting on a bench this year would be far worse for him than playing every single day for Kentucky. In fact, he should have to stay for 3 years. Look at Ty Lawson: he stayed for 4 years at UNC and he's going to contribute for Denver this year.
And then, there's the hammer blow: the NFL says that players are only eligible to be drafted three years after he graduates from high school. Three years! And yet Rosenberg doesn't say that the NFL is un-American.
Face it: the argument that it's unfair is fallacious at best and disingenous at worst. Every job has qualifications. And if you don't meet those qualifications, you don't get the job. The qualification to play in the NBA is being at least 19 and one year out of high school. Accept it and move on.