Zion Williamson’s Duke-UNC injury doesn’t mean college basketball needs an overhaul

When the plot twist unfolded in the opening minute of last week’s highly anticipated episode in the Carolina-Duke mini-series, it did more than assure victory for a worthy Tar Heel squad, discombobulate the Blue Devils, and confound the expectations of an eagerly watching nation. Like any good drama, the unexpected turn of events – namely Zion Williamson’s sprained right knee – raised several larger issues and reaffirmed an enduring basketball truth.

The twist also guaranteed a ratings surge for the upcoming March 9 episode of the show, assuming Williamson is on the court. The game is sure to be hyped to the heavens for what’s already ESPN’s highest-rated regular-season basketball programming. Host UNC can’t call on another former president with Barack Obama’s star power to goose pre-game excitement, but Nike could make publicity amends in part by sending spokesman Colin Kaepernick to the Smith Center instead.

Carolina-Duke automatically promises excellence and competitive drama, even without mishaps or courtside celebrities. When the Devils and Heels meet again to conclude the regular season they’ll figure prominently in conversations about contenders for the NCAA title and doubtless remain in the AP top 10.

They’ve been good so long, few remember the last time the neighbors played when neither team was ranked. That was February 1960. Significantly, nine of 10 starters from the Feb. 20, 2019 game could not have participated because the segregated ACC excluded blacks.

Racial equity remains a persistent concern nearly six decades later, to the point some observers – like ESPN commentator Jalen Rose, who referred sagely to “The University of Duke” -- immediately seized on Williamson’s injury as a manifestation of an exploitative system in which African-American athletes take the risks and schools reap the rewards.

The claim has a superficially persuasive quality given that a preponderance of basketball and football players in the college and pros are black, and exploitation routinely starts with victimizing less-powerful segments of society. Unfortunately, the argument ignores the fact the highly visible unfairness and hypocrisy baked into the NCAA’s structure long predates the inclusion of minorities, particularly women and African-Americans.

Injury sparks debate

In fact, it’s a testament to Williamson’s celebrity, as well as the arresting suddenness of his sneaker breakdown, that the mishap sparked all sorts of debates over the most glaring flaws in how college athletics is structured.

The most heated ongoing argument, with the NCAA’s position less defensible by the day, regards the right of athletes like Williamson to share in the great wealth they help to generate. Yes, he’s insured against serious injury through an NCAA system of coverage, but not enough for a talent touted on USA Today’s front page with a tease: “NBA teams want Williamson, even with a bum knee.”

Williamson’s apparently minor knee sprain (minor to others, anyway) rekindled the simmering debate over whether the risk and sacrifice of freedoms are worth the rewards of college play. The subject arose in muted form the past few years as football players chose to sit out their teams’ post-season bowl games rather than chance an injury that might jeopardize future earnings.

Those individual decisions echoed examples at the most visible levels of public and private life affirming that financial self-interest trumps other considerations. For a corporate example consider Amazon, owned by Jeff Bezos, the world’s wealthiest man. The company paid no federal income taxes last year on $11.2 billion in profits and offers many workers salaries that leave them struggling to make ends meet. Perfectly acceptable business practice by some measures, sad selfishness by others.

But those who argue for Williamson seizing the reins of self-interest miss a key point as they presume to tell him what to do.

Fiscal matters

The me-first standard doesn’t readily apply to those proudly part of an effective team, in this case members of a small, elite band of athletes who sacrifice for the common good and, however innocently, call their mutual bond a “brotherhood.”. Anyone who’s belonged to a group similarly united by a common, challenging goal – even something far less enduring than winning a national title -- understands membership can have a compelling value that defies monetary considerations.

All this fuss over fiscal matters pains college fans, who smart over the ephemeral nature of loyalties in this one-and-done era. Yet the tide of opinion is now toward opening the gates and allowing players to proceed straight from high school to the pros. It’s increasingly clear that’s better, or at least fairer, than dangling in limbo within the current paternalistic system engineered by the NBA, NCAA and player-agents.

An arrangement that encourages those who want to attend college to stay in college seems preferable. Surely it would reinforce the basketball truth that emerged when UNC went to Duke and conquered a home squad unsettled in the wake of a disintegrated sneaker.

While you can’t game-plan for the unpredictable, experience allows a player and a team to more quickly take the unexpected in stride. That seasoning is a quality most top teams have in abundance, evidenced by the steady leadership of Carolina seniors Luke Maye and Kenny Williams and grad student Cam Johnson.

It’s also a characteristic Duke lacks. For all the Blue Devils’ gaudy talent and striking cohesion, and Mike Krzyzewski’s occasional talk of manufacturing experience, that stabilizing quality can only be realized with the uncontrollable passage of time. And by enduring challenges like losing your best player 36 seconds into a game against your archrival.