With the NBA's new age limit in place, there are those in and out of the sport who think these poor kids are being deprived of following their dream and earning a living, while the teams themselves are losing out on the "real" talent.

Could guys like LeBron or Amare or Kobe or KG have been any better by wasting away in college for a whole year?

The answer that you would get from most people is a resounding NO. These guys, and many others in the league, are at the top of their profession and definitive all-stars without ever setting foot on a college campus. So why would anyone think differently?

My answer to that there are many reasons. First and foremost, I think this rule is not in place with these types of players in mind. It is not for the athletes who are, seemingly, "can’t miss" prospects, who are guaranteed lottery picks and the millions that go along with being a lottery pick.

The rule's major beneficiaries, in terms of being saved from a career in the D-League or oversees or out of basketball entirely, are the kids who somehow overstate their own talent or are talked into believing they are a first round lock, when in reality, they are more likely destined for the second round and no guarantees at all. Kids who think that being a highly ranked, Parade or McDonald's All-American high school star, are the only springboards needed to achieve the fame and fortune of being an NBA player.

The argument against this fact is that at least these kids would probably be drafted based on potential out of high school, whereas, if they went to college, their games might be exposed or they might suffer an injury and end up with nothing. The injury makes some sense even though there haven't really been any instances where a kid passed up the pros out of high school, got hurt, and ruined their chance to go pro. At least, none that I can recall.

The one that strikes me is the argument that the kids' weaknesses might be exposed and their draft value will drop as a consequence. There are tales of kids who peaked at a young age and wasted their talent playing college ball and slipped in the draft with each passing year. Is it me or is this the worst cop out a person can use as an excuse why a kid should declare for the draft?

So these kids were ready for the NBA and ready to compete at the highest possible level, but could not raise their game or improve on their game enough to become college standouts and actually earn their spot in the NBA by leading a team and showing what they can do on the court. I guess so. That makes perfect sense.

There just doesn't seem to be as much pride in one's game anymore. The idea that a player wants to enter the league with the opportunity to add value to a team and get some playing time rather than being the 14th guy who looks good in a suit sitting behind the bench. Success these days is judged more by the fact that a kid has become an NBA player with a guaranteed contract, at least for the first few years, and it doesn't matter at all if they play or not.

Even King James, possibly the most talented basketball player in the world, most likely would not have been "harmed" by spending a year in college. Who knows? Maybe he would have led a team to a National Championship by learning how to be a true leader of a team. They type of player who could take over a game when needed, while still understanding the need and a way to keep others involved and helping to make them better.

These are things that he does now, but maybe he would have led the Cleveland Cavaliers to a playoff berth in his first year and now they would be going into the 2006-2007 season off of two straight playoff appearances. I am sure he would still be rich and famous and a member of the USA Basketball Team.

It seems to me that all in the world of King James would still be relatively the same. The whole situation doesn't sound too bad to me.