Fun article from the AP via MSN while we all keep refreshing waiting on Mitchell to commit. 

Silver expects the rule to be changed but it seems the owners/ incoming players want it how it was ten years ago while the coaches, ADs and universities want a two year/ 20 yrs old requirement.  Going a little deeper the impact this could possibly have on recruiting as rosters would not have the turn over which currently occurs.  Could a change possibly diffuse more of the talent across the NCAA? 

The article also mentions that of the 10 rookies which played in the league this year only those aged 20+ averaged more than 10 pts a game.  Could be argued this is just the class that came in not being ready but what would that extra year have done? 

"My sense is it's not working for anyone," Silver said Thursday night before Game 1 of the NBA Finals. "It's not working for the college coaches and athletic directors I hear from. They're not happy with the current system. And I know our teams aren't happy either, in part because they don't necessarily think the players who are coming into the league are getting the kind of training that they would expect to see."

There are arguments for raising the minimum age to 20, there are arguments for getting rid of the rule altogether.

"I think we all agree that we need to make a change," Silver said. "As I've said before, our position, at least our formal position, going into bargaining was that we wanted to raise the minimum age from 19 to 20, and of course their formal position was they want to lower the age from 19 to 18.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nba/changes-coming-nba-commissioner-want...