In case you haven’t noticed, this whole Derrick Rose-SAT story has taken over the Interwebs these past few weeks. It came as no surprise to many because, let’s be honest, the NBA’s ‘one-and-done’ rule has forced kids to attend college with no intention of becoming a serious student.

So on this Thursday morning, we’d like to open the floor for discussion and get your take on a couple of questions:

• Should the NBA’s rule that a prospect must be one year removed from high school before becoming eligible for the draft be changed?
• If you think the rule should be changed, what would be your recommendation? And if you’re willing to defend the rule, we’d like to hear your thoughts on that, too.

Our old friend Myles confirmed that speculation when he talked to The Dallas Morning News about the current rule and the changes he’d like to see made:

“I would like to see it at least two years. I did a CBS show with [NBA commissioner] David Stern in which we talked about this. I asked David how about two years, and he said ‘yes.’ He thought two years was better than one year, and I think two years is better than one. I think three is better than two, but I’ll take two. But of course he has to negotiate that with the NBA’s Players Union, and I think the contract is up in 2½ to three years, but he at least at that point expressed interest in exploring two years.”

This is a topic that’s only going to garner more attention now that Brandon Jennings has peaced out from Arizona and is headed east because he couldn’t enter the draft. Personally, my vote is to abolish this rule completely and let kids go straight to the NBA if they choose with one caveat: if a kid opts for college, he’s required to stay three years. This would allow the freedom of choice, but it also gives college coaches a chance to protect their programs from early entry candidates decimating their rosters.

{HT: FanNation}