Rule Changes

[HawkAssassin]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...clock-according-ncaa-rules-committee-chairman

1. Sounds like coaches are favoring reducing the shot clock to 30 now.
2. No changes are expected relating to the width of the lane or 3-point arc.
3. The restriction arc under the basket likely will be extended a foot for block/charge calls.
4. Replay will be discussed, including whether to review shot clock violations.
5. Regular timeouts taken could count as media timeouts if they are close enough.
6. Overall physical play will be addressed.

 

[eyekwah]

Addressing physical play will be difficult. I'm not sure how you do it or for that manner how you define it. My question is it the physical play by the defense that is the issue or the actions of the offense? Maybe it is both. If they want more scoring then you have to address the defensive play.

 

[RocknRollface]

Addressing physical play will be difficult. I'm not sure how you do it or for that manner how you define it. My question is it the physical play by the defense that is the issue or the actions of the offense? Maybe it is both. If they want more scoring then you have to address the defensive play.

They already "addressed" physical play two seasons ago. The referees choose to ignor it.

First they need to address the lack of infrastructure and accountability in officiating.

 

[linus19]

The 3 point arc needs to be moved to the NBA range.

 

[Linesetter]

If people think reducing the shot clock will increase scoring then they're living in fantasy land. All you'll see is more bad possessions.

Scoring won't increase until all of the holding on defense and moving screens are eliminated. The NIT used the 30-second clock and scoring increased a whopping 1-PT per game.

My answer is for officials to call the game the way the rules were written. Nothing more. That and have AAU coaches actually be required to complete a certificate of coaching in order to be able to coach AAU

 

[Thawki]

If people think reducing the shot clock will increase scoring then they're living in fantasy land. All you'll see is more bad possessions.

Scoring won't increase until all of the holding on defense and moving screens are eliminated. The NIT used the 30-second clock and scoring increased a whopping 1-PT per game.

My answer is for officials to call the game the way the rules were written. Nothing more. That and have AAU coaches actually be required to complete a certificate of coaching in order to be able to coach AAU

Along your lines, have officials review game film from the 1980s and get them to call the games the same way. There does need to be accountability by the officials, but in a different manner. They should be employed by the NCAA and not the conferences or schools. Then have the NCAA direct how they want games to be called across the board. They would be accountable to one entity. As it is now, an official is accountable to one place if he does an SEC game and another if he does a B10 game, etc. Both of these things need to be implemented for it to work. That is why it hasn't worked to date.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

I agree that shortening the shot clock isn't going to answer the scoring problems in college hoops. Although I don't have the stats in front of me, it seemed like games were higher scoring back when it was a 45 second shot clock. No, the shot clock itself is not the problem.

In addition to what was mentioned above, I would like to actually see LESS fouls called in the paint. Unless someone drives to the hoop uncontested, it seems like it's an automatic whistle every time someone drives the lane. I'd think it would be pretty hard to have many fast breaks when nearly every possession ends with free throws, allowing the opponent to get back and set up their D. Sure, call the obvious hacks, but in the paint it's impossible to avoid SOME contact. Let them play, and maybe you would have more transition opportunities. Besides, I don't want to watch a FT shooting contest.

I'd like to see full timeouts cancel the media timeout. It drives me nuts when someone calls TO with 16:01 left, they come back and play 2 seconds, and it's right back to another timeout.

 

[HawkinGoferLand]

please reduce the amount of timeouts, coaches and TV

 

[STILLBUSTER]

4. Replay will be discussed, including whether to review shot clock violations.

Replay is fine. It's the cloudy vision, lack of working brain cells and / or complete disregard for video evidence displayed in replay that needs to be "discussed". As is, simply expanding what is reviewable simply means more wrong calls after review.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

please reduce the amount of timeouts, coaches and TV

Agreed. I say 3 per half, rather than 5 per game.

Coaches tend to hoard them and have 3-4 left going into the last couples minutes. The result if it's tight late: Timeout. Timeout. Timeout. Timeout. Timeout. Timeout. Timeout. Timeout.

Ugh.

 

[UncleHawk]

Along your lines, have officials review game film from the 1980s and get them to call the games the same way. There does need to be accountability by the officials, but in a different manner. They should be employed by the NCAA and not the conferences or schools. Then have the NCAA direct how they want games to be called across the board. They would be accountable to one entity. As it is now, an official is accountable to one place if he does an SEC game and another if he does a B10 game, etc. Both of these things need to be implemented for it to work. That is why it hasn't worked to date.

I agree that the standardizing officiating would be the best improvement for the game for scoring and consistency. I also agree that putting them all under one umbrella (NCAA) would be ideal. But why hasn't that been done already?: the organization and $ that would require has probably been prohibitive so far. It would take a mass movement of fans to make it happen. That could be coming but not this year.

 

[LivermoreHawk]

The 3 point arc needs to be moved to the NBA range.

Why? Shooting in college basketball is tough enough to watch at times the way it is. Plus this doesn't help their ultimate goal of more points getting scored.

 

[LivermoreHawk]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...clock-according-ncaa-rules-committee-chairman

1. Sounds like coaches are favoring reducing the shot clock to 30 now.
2. No changes are expected relating to the width of the lane or 3-point arc.
3. The restriction arc under the basket likely will be extended a foot for block/charge calls.
4. Replay will be discussed, including whether to review shot clock violations.
5. Regular timeouts taken could count as media timeouts if they are close enough.
6. Overall physical play will be addressed.

I am all for the 30 second shot clock. I think that's the nice middle ground between what it is now and the NBA. I've seen some people say it will just increase the number of bad shots at the end of the shot clock. I disagree. It will just force teams to actually try and score 5 seconds sooner. Ultimately there will be more possessions and more points scored.

I love the idea of having a normal timeout count as a media timeout. Will it happen with the TV ad money? Who knows.

And yes, physical play needs to be addressed. But unfortunately it was addressed two years ago and we've seen nothing change.

 

[HawkAssassin]

I definitely agree that the NCAA needs to help out their officials by creating a uniform system across all conferences. There is no reason why B10 games should be officiated any differently than a game in the B12, P10, etc. The NCAA needs to commit themselves to changing their game if they want it to continue to grow their game.

I also think that officials need to be open to the press after games. It's silly that players/coaches have to give answers after an emotional loss while referees that make questionable decisions get off scotch free.

 

[tksirius]

If people think reducing the shot clock will increase scoring then they're living in fantasy land. All you'll see is more bad possessions.

Scoring won't increase until all of the holding on defense and moving screens are eliminated. The NIT used the 30-second clock and scoring increased a whopping 1-PT per game.

My answer is for officials to call the game the way the rules were written. Nothing more. That and have AAU coaches actually be required to complete a certificate of coaching in order to be able to coach AAU

 

[ArvadaHawk]

Agreed. I say 3 per half, rather than 5 per game.

Coaches tend to hoard them and have 3


one TO in the first half but no more than 4 per game no more than 3 in the 2nd half. So, you could borrow a 2nd half TO for the first half but then only have 2 for 2nd half. Or, just make it 2 TO's each half. There are already 4 tv TO's per half anyway.

 

[SteveGarvey]

If people think reducing the shot clock will increase scoring then they're living in fantasy land. All you'll see is more bad possessions.

Scoring won't increase until all of the holding on defense and moving screens are eliminated. The NIT used the 30-second clock and scoring increased a whopping 1-PT per game.

My answer is for officials to call the game the way the rules were written. Nothing more. That and have AAU coaches actually be required to complete a certificate of coaching in order to be able to coach AAU

Teams probably hadn't had enough time to adjust to the 30 second clock in the NIT. Seems to me each team will shoot it 5-10 more times a game which means there should maybe be 4-10 more points a game for each team. But yeah, not the answer to all of the problems.

 

[Mademyaccount4u]

I think there is a good chance some of this sticks. Except the less physical thing, we saw how that work out a few years ago.