8th grader commits to Kentucky...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Except you're dealing with a 13 or 14 yo kid who 4 years from now may decide he wants to go backback Alaska for a year with his gf, or join the peacecorps, or the Marine Corps, or maybe he wants to join a seminary or maybe that coach and program will hit the skids with who knows what kind of ncaa trouble, or maybe as I said earlier he'll just decide Kentucky is not a cool place to play ball afterall.

And under the "terms" of this sort of committment, all of those other options remain open.

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

You think the pressure of being that 8th grader who committed won't impact what he thinks might be *his* options?

If your goal as a parent is to make a good deal for your 13 yo to be a pro basketball player then yeah it's a win-win.

It just might give him the peace and quiet (other schools usually leave players alone who have "committed") to actually consider what he'd really like to do with out constant and persistent badgering.

I have no problem with the kid committing. I see it as only benefitting the kid. He has all the same options that he had before but has one of his options in a place where he now has more leverage (they can't drop him without looking at least a little bad).

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

OTOH if as a parent your goal is to help the kid realize that with his talents many other options exist.... I dunno Camron, you tell me what the role of a good parent should be? It's easy to say take the money and run. I guess.

I think a good parent would be one to teach their kid to not be too greedy lest a good offer disappear.

A bird in the hand...

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

and btw... do you think it's OK to tell your 13 yo he should *commit*, fully accepting that it's OK to back out of his *commitment* at any point he feels less than comfortable?

YES....if the definition of the commitment is understood. We all know the committment is more of a statement of intent (from both parties)...not a promise.

[Dan_ref]

Wow. Sad, very sad. *Commitment* has been dumbed down (at least in big time sports) to mean something you think you might do until the next better offer comes along.

Definitions of commitment on the Web:

committedness: the trait of sincere and steadfast fixity of purpose; "a man of energy and commitment"

the act of binding yourself (intellectually or emotionally) to a course of action; "his long commitment to public service"; "they felt no loyalty to a losing team"

an engagement by contract involving financial obligation; "his business commitments took him to London"

I also found another interesting link to *commitment*

We don't accept applications. Only commitments.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I think a good parent would be one to teach their kid to not be too greedy lest a good offer disappear.

A bird in the hand...

Let's assume you have a 14 year old daughter.

Playboy offers her $1M to appear in the magazine on her 18th birthday.

Pretty good offer, no? Here, use my pen to sign the contract...

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Let's assume you have a 14 year old daughter.

Playboy offers her $1M to appear in the magazine on her 18th birthday.

Pretty good offer, no? Here, use my pen to sign the contract...

What if, instead of Playboy, it was my favorite mag, "Chicks And Ammo"?

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Let's assume you have a 14 year old daughter.

Playboy offers her $1M to appear in the magazine on her 18th birthday.

Pretty good offer, no? Here, use my pen to sign the contract...

Let's assume you have a 14 year old daughter.

IBM offers her $1M to leave school on her 18th birthday.

Pretty good offer, no? Here, use my pen to sign the contract...

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Let's assume you have a 14 year old daughter.

IBM offers her $1M to leave school on her 18th birthday.

Pretty good offer, no? Here, use my pen to sign the contract...

Apples and oranges. AFAIK, NCAA D1 schools don't pay their athletes to play. Sure, the athletes get a free education, but IBM would do that too with employee educational programs. I also don't think that IBM will offer $1M to a 14 year old. They would likely say "call us in 4 years", or "keep in contact with us every 6 months". Or, they would have the 14-year old work for them immediately, and have private tutoring for her HS diploma.

[Coltdoggs]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It did say he had a grandmother that lived in Indianapolis.


Peace

I live on the far northside of Indy and this has me cracking up because the HS that Greg Oden and Mike Conley went to on the north side of Indy (Lawrence North)...they won 3 state titles in a row with Greg and Mike from 2003-2006. They also won it back in '89 with another 7' player (Eric Montross) and they had a another 7' (John Stewart) who committed to UK in the mid 90's but died of heart arithmia during a sectional or regional game....

Anyway...Their HC (Jack Keefer) has been there for like 30 years and people around here are ALWAYS throwing the recruiting card out with this program because of all the talent that they "land".

So this kid has a grandparent that lives here eh...and they are trying to find a HS for him AND he played with the Indy Elite AAU team (which has ties to former and probably current LN players!) Let me keep an eye on this one!

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Apples and oranges. AFAIK, NCAA D1 schools don't pay their athletes to play.

I might be wrong, but I think you're missing grunewar's point. He's only responding to Dan_ref's similar point. Dan seems to say that it would be terrible parenting to allow your daughter to sign a "future" contract with Playboy. But grunwar points out that it might not be terrible parenting if the "future" contract were with a more reputable, professional company like IBM.

A D1 college scholarship seems more like the IBM (reputable) offer than the Playboy offer. I think that was grunwar's point. I'm sure Dan_ref will tell you why I'm wrong.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I might be wrong, but I think you're missing grunewar's point. He's only responding to Dan_ref's similar point. Dan seems to say that it would be terrible parenting to allow your daughter to sign a "future" contract with Playboy. But grunwar points out that it might not be terrible parenting if the "future" contract were with a more reputable, professional company like IBM.

A D1 college scholarship seems more like the IBM (reputable) offer than the Playboy offer. I think that was grunwar's point. I'm sure Dan_ref will tell you why I'm wrong.

You could be correct. I decided long ago that I wasn't reading all the posts in this thread.

It's clearly the off-season here in the forum! Some of the topics are silly.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Let's assume you have a 14 year old daughter.

Playboy offers her $1M to appear in the magazine on her 18th birthday.

Pretty good offer, no? Here, use my pen to sign the contract...

See gurnewar's response.

If some 'reputable' company offers my daughter a 1-3yr/$1m contract at age 14, I'll recommend that she/we take it. The odds that ANY 14 year-old will ever do better in that small window of time are about the same as winning the lottery.