This past Saturday, five-star recruit Zion Williamson stunned many when he verbally committed to continuing his academic and basketball career at Duke University rather than sticking with his hometown Clemson Tigers, whom many had thought was the favorite to land him. Also in the mix were North Carolina, South Carolina, Kansas and Kentucky.
John Calipari, Kentucky’s head coach, exhibited his frustration with losing out to Duke once again — Williamson is just the latest recruit to spurn the Wildcats for a different shade of blue, following stars likes Brandon Ingram, Jason Tatum and Marvin Bagley. At a press conference on Monday, he accused Duke of following unfair recruiting practices.
His complaint is that whereas Kentucky’s recruiting pitch focuses solely on the program’s ability to prepare players for NBA success, Duke woos high schoolers by claiming that the university and its fans will “take care of [them] for the rest of [their] lives.” Calipari even went on to compare Duke’s treatment of players to socialism.
Calipari might be a great basketball coach, but he’s certainly no economist; he’d do well to crack open one of his player’s never-used economics textbooks and brush up on the definition of socialism. Is there anything socialist about Duke promising players that the university will show gratitude for their service to the basketball program? Is it wrong to promise that fans of the basketball program will adore them long after they’ve finished their time in Durham? Of course not. After all, those things are part of what makes being a stud athlete at a dominant program so great. And in Duke’s case, these are not empty promises. As a North Carolina native who’s closely followed the Duke program for over a decade, I know just how intensely loyal and grateful the fanbase can be, and just how well the university takes care of its former players.
Since Calipari seems intent on making economics a central theme of his complaints — he also remarked at his press conference that Kentucky players have gone on to earn more than a billion dollars — we ought to consider that Duke might have the upper hand over Kentucky due to the value of its degree. Like Stanford, Duke is one of the best schools in the world, with strong academic programs across the board. If you’re lucky enough to get in and work hard once you’re there, you will likely graduate with a degree respected around the world. That’s not a knock against Kentucky, which is a solid school in its own right, but there’s a discernible difference between the academic quality between the two schools.
Concerns like these might not be at the forefront of Zion Williamson’s mind because, barring catastrophic injury or terrible luck, he’ll likely be a top pick in the 2019 NBA Draft. Still, most college athletes understand that they will “go pro in something other than sports,” and many make their college decisions with this fact in mind, often choosing academic quality over athletic strength.
I think most people would conclude that if the basketball programs are close to a wash (as one could argue Duke and Kentucky are), it makes economic sense to attend Duke over Kentucky if given a full athletic scholarship to both. Young players leveraging their skills to maximize their future earning potential? Doesn’t sound like socialism to me. Calipari, in addition to sounding petty and childish, is just dead wrong. If I were him, I’d spend less time worrying about Coach K’s recruiting tactics down in Durham and more time figuring out how to turn around his team’s recently abysmal play.
Contact Andrew Ziperski at ajzip ‘at’ stanford.edu.