What is Sonny Vaccaro's agenda, and why are the NBA and NCAA so adamently against it?

These questions are frequently debated. The widely-anointed "godfather of basketball" (though I think "godfather of youth basketball's commercialization" is more accurate) encouraged Brandon Jennings to skip school and make something of himself on the courts of Europe a year ago. Recently, he advised Jeremy Tyler to make the unfathomable decision to ditch high school in favor of professional ball abroad. The guy makes no qualms about his advocacy of the commercialization of amateur basketball and his disdain for NCAA and NBA rules, to the point where he's seeking valuable Congressional time to make his case.

His massive influence on the commercial youth basketball landscape makes him one of the more compelling figures in sports. His long and important history with basketball's present and past superstars (Michael Jordan then, Kobe Bryant now) gives him instant cache. And now that he's nixed his affiliation with Reebok, the solo adviser can focus on molding more visions into the shape of his.

Though I initially strongly opposed what I deemed as the exploitation of young and hungry talents, the more I learn about Vaccaro's mission, the more I think he is right on point. His varying advice to youths interested in following in the shoes of Jennings suggests that he is considerate of whether his advisees have the factors critical to succeeding on a non-traditional path. The article I linked above reveals that Vaccaro has advised some prep stars against making the leap to European pro ball for lack of support and maturity. Additionally, Vaccaro's point that other sports (i.e. tennis, golf) allow amateurs to go pro at their discretion is an important one because it suggests that some form of prejudice is at work. This possibility deserves thorough reflection. Seriously. I mean why can't these 17 and 18 year olds go pro, especially since it's often been their goal since they understand the meaning of the word? I want to hear more on this argument from Vaccaro because there are some serious socioeconomic and cultural differences that more strongly support the long-term success of tennis and golf amateurs going pro. Consider Michelle Wie, who attended Stanford University while playing pro golf, and others like her who continue their educations simultaneous to their career pursuits. I am unaware of any high school-to-pro basketball player who can match the claim. Arguably, the NBA's draft eligibility restriction simply postpones these high school entries for a year, therefore leaving the ballers in the same position: minus college degree.

Perhaps the greater point to be taken away from these differences is that paternalism exists in sports because it exists in society. Why else would these restrictions be in place? Increased quality of the game? Shouldn't NBA teams be able to avoid that through better player selection? And can't the quality of play of many high schooler-turned-pro mature in the NBA while that player can make money the best way he knows how (see LeBron, Kobe, Dwight, Tracy, and on).

We'll definitely be following Vaccaro's moves (as well as related changes in basketball) well into the future.