---

There have been too many excuses, explaining America’s lackluster showing in the Athens Olympics and 2002 World Basketball Championships. Among the most common are: the American don’t care enough, the best NBA players aren’t representing the country and that NBA stars are unfamilar with zone defenses and international rules.

The real reason is that American basketball is simply no longer good enough to dominate. The rest of the world may be catching up to America, but the level of basketball in the U.S. is definitely deteriorating as well. If the U. S. and particularly the N.B.A. are still considered the gold standard of basketball, these days it’s beginning to look a lot like fool’s gold.

The preference for style over substance has often been blamed as the biggest culprit for America’s fading level of basketball. In my mind, nothing has effected American basketball more adversely then the massive premature exit from college ball, Agreeing on an age minimum for the NBA, wouldn’t solve all of the sport’s problem but it would be a very significant move in the right direction.

Nineteen year olds, whether straight from high school or after a year of college, shouldn’t be learning fundamentals in the NBA. The success of players like Lebron James or Kevin Garnett should be recognized for what it really is, as exceptions that prove the rule. The real damage is the influence it has on the 40-50 other guys who annually bypass college completely or leave far too soon.

Over the past few years, we’ve seen a trickle-down effect that has basically gutted college basketball. In essence, the traditional training system for high-level American basketball is being destroyed and nothing is taking its place.

College basketball is so watered down today that three years ago the Lithuanian Basketball Federation decided to disallow their top young prospects from playing NCAA ball, after noting that it retarded their development. How is that for a damning indictment of American basketball?

Seven or eight high-schoolers were drafted in the first round this year, not because the NBA actually prefers it that way, but because basically the cupboard is empty . A few months ago, an NBA scout told me that even if an age minimum went into effect, it would take 3-4 years to restock the draft, to where it actually should be.

Both NBA officials and the Players Union should shoulder blame for the greed that’s resulted in lack of movement towards an age minimum or some other plan that would allow players to continue developing skills before the NBA. The league has always claimed that the union is intransigent on this subject. However the union has occasionally hinted it could change its stand in return for concessions such as lowering the period of control that a team has over drafted players from five years to four. The NBA should seriously consider whether some added short-term expense isn’t worth the long term quality of it’s product and the health of its industry.

The NFL has a policy in place that prevents freshmen from being drafted. MLB also has some safeguards in its policy. The agrument that the courts would automatically declare an NBA age limit unconstitutional is questionable. Industries and companies have a right to declare age limits for their employees. The judges trying such a case might even look at the constitution and be reminded that even the country’s president has to be at least 35.