Andy Katz: Poll results: Earlier start, shorter shot clock

Donate To GopherHole
How do people on this board feel about the wider international lane? What exactly is the thinking behind having a wider lane?
 

Next up? Don't allow a coach to call a time out during live-ball situations, or when his team is having trouble getting the ball in bounds. If the coach wants a time out, he needs to communicate it to one of his players, who then can call the time out. The players should have to think for themselves once in awhile. The players need to make decisions regarding time, score, and situation, instead of their coaches being able to bail them out all the time.

The micromanagement of the CEOs (the head coaches) is one of the few things I can't stand about college basketball. Bugs the h*ll out of me that coaches -- for example -- are allowed to bail out their players by sprinting to an official to call a time out because their players aren't smart enough (or haven't been trained) to figure it out themselves.

I also agree with OSUfan about fouls. Let's go to the NBA's 6 fouls. I want to see the best players play. I'm sick of watching a guy get 2 fouls in the first half, and then watch 99% of the the micromanaging coaches sit them on the bench for the rest of the half.
 

Katz is all sorts of confused as to the practice start date. Just doesn't understand it.

Nonetheless, on the 30 second shot clock.. for those in favor of it (seems like the majority are) what do you believe would be accomplished by changing it and what issues do you think reducing the shot clock to 30 seconds might cause?
 

Gopher Warrior said:
Katz is all sorts of confused as to the practice start date. Just doesn't understand it.

Nonetheless, on the 30 second shot clock.. for those in favor of it (seems like the majority are) what do you believe would be accomplished by changing it and what issues do you think reducing the shot clock to 30 seconds might cause?
Click to expand...

I think the basic principle of lowering it is more possesions. That said, more posessions doesn't equal more scoring. I do agree with others it will make the end of games more watchable. In the final 1:10 you could literally only have 2 possessions and teams have to start fouling with 35 seconds left as opposed to 24 as in the NBA.

I do agree a shorter shot clock will limit upsets though. Roy Williams said that the more possesions in a game, the better team should win. He compared it to golf. If I play 3 holes with Tiger Woods, there is an outside chance I could beat him. If I play 72 holes against Tiger Woods he is going to beat me, by a lot.

IMO, if I want scoring to go up in college basketball I take the defensive 3 second rule from the NBA and apply it to college. Spread the floor out. Why is Oregon so successful in football? (Besides cheating) They spread the field. Once you allow a college team to spread the floor more, which is already a smaller area with the closer three point line, they can score more. It is why shooters and guards are so important now, they are your best bet to get the ball inside (drive) and spread the floor (shooting).

All the 30 second shot clock does is give teams without a viable offense less time to beat a defense, but teams with a good offense probably didn't care much about the shot clock anyways. If you have an offense like the Gophers ran, it just means jacking up a wild shot 5 seconds earlier than you did before.
 

scher215 said:
I do agree a shorter shot clock will limit upsets though.
Click to expand...

I have a hard time seeing how the upsets will be reduced by a faster game when there are quite a few good teams year to year that play a decently slow brand of basketball(Georgetown, Wisconsin... more I'm just tired) FGCU played fast, When VCU upset Duke several years ago they played faster, when George mason had their tourney run they were playing faster than the teams they beat... 30 seconds means you only need to defend the good teams well for a shorter period of time.

Anyway, I also find it interesting that people are complaining about the zone. This isn't the NBA keep the zone D. The Big Ten plays predominantly man to man(even Michigan this year rarely played their 1-3-1, and without Carmody at NW they'll probably be back to man to man) and the scoring isn't any higher than any other conference.
 


Tim1406 said:
I have a hard time seeing how the upsets will be reduced by a faster game when there are quite a few good teams year to year that play a decently slow brand of basketball(Georgetown, Wisconsin... more I'm just tired) FGCU played fast, When VCU upset Duke several years ago they played faster, when George mason had their tourney run they were playing faster than the teams they beat... 30 seconds means you only need to defend the good teams well for a shorter period of time.

Anyway, I also find it interesting that people are complaining about the zone. This isn't the NBA keep the zone D. The Big Ten plays predominantly man to man(even Michigan this year rarely played their 1-3-1, and without Carmody at NW they'll probably be back to man to man) and the scoring isn't any higher than any other conference.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily mean zone as in a 2-3, 1-3-1, etc. I mean allowing teams to put three guys in the paint because they are "sagging off" their man. Basically, watch how Wisconsin played defense against MN at the barn. There were almost always at least 3 guys with a foot in the paint at all times. Good luck ever getting a decent post look when you are essentially triple teamed. The Gophers having 3 guys in the floor with no jump shot also hurt them. But you shouldn't need a team full of sharp shooters to win games and that is a lot of what college basketball is when teams play defense like that. Allowing teams to do this and then not calling fouls when they are hacked has essentially killed the post up game in college basketball.

I can't name a single post player or team who with a game on the line Would say, let's get a post up in the final play.
 

While I'm for anything that upsets Bo Ryan, I'm against anything that makes college basketall more like the NBA.
 

howeda7 said:
While I'm for anything that upsets Bo Ryan, I'm against anything that makes college basketall more like the NBA.
Click to expand...

People say this all the time and I do not ever understand what they mean by it.

To me, what makes college fun to watch is the tie to the school (alumni) and how unpredictable it is because these are college kids, not getting paid.

I think if you took the exact same rules as the NBA and applied them to college (except maybe the 3 point line distance) you wouldn't see anything most people love about college basketball get changed or ruined.

Not trying to speak for you specifically as I have no clue why you feel this way, but I think many college fans have such a negative perception of the NBA that they want it to have zero influence at all. I think people are turned off by the culture of the NBA ("diva" players, well paid players, officiating, etc.) and not the actual rules themselves. As long as NCAA keeps the tournament and keeps playing college kids, I don't think any rule will ruin college basketball. If anything, personally, I wish college allowed for more post ups and work in the post as the NBA does. I hate how guard driven college basketball is.

What NBA rules would make you turn off to college basketball?

Would I like anti-flopping rules in CBB? Oh yeah.
Defensive 3 seconds? Yup.
24 Second shot clock? Let's do it.

I think the NBA does a great job at responding to rules issues and correcting them.
 

I'm with ya Scher. I've never quite understood the negative stigma some people put on the NBA as basketball product. For me, the NBA provides a superior product in terms of shear basketball entertainment. These are the best players in the world, doing their thing. Yes, the NBA has some ugliness, as Scher mentioned (officiating being the biggest, IMO), but NCAA hoops has some aesthetic issues as well, the biggest being the huge dropoff in player ability/skill.

Dropping the shot clock 5 clicks won't NBA-ify the college game, but it might force some more exciting play, and lead to more intense possessions,etc. Incorporating 'illegal defense' from the NBA would open up the lane more too, and expand post play. I say let's get this in next!
 



howeda7 said:
While I'm for anything that upsets Bo Ryan, I'm against anything that makes college basketall more like the NBA.
Click to expand...

I'm with you howeda.

The NBA is too much run and gun and playground basketball. Too much one on one play and every team playing pretty much the same style. I've tried but have not ever been able to watch more than one quarter.
 

station19 said:
I'm with you howeda.

The NBA is too much run and gun and playground basketball. Too much one on one play and every team playing pretty much the same style. I've tried but have not ever been able to watch more than one quarter.
Click to expand...

Not saying I agree / disagree with you (I love the NBA) but do you think those things are created by the basketball rules the NBA has in place or just the nature of the business? IE. being professional athletes as opposed to college kids.

I guess my overall premise is, if you copy the NBA rules to college kids, how would the game change?
 

SelectionSunday said:
Next up? Don't allow a coach to call a time out during live-ball situations, or when his team having trouble getting the ball in bounds. If the coach wants a time out, he needs to communicate it to one of his players, who then can call the time out. The players should have to think for themselves once in awhile. The players need to make decisions regarding time, score, and situation, instead of their coaches being able to bail them out all the time.

The micromanagement of the CEOs (the head coaches) is one of the few things I can't stand about college basketball. Bugs the h*ll out of me that coaches -- for example -- are allowed to bail out their players by sprinting to an official to call a time out because their players aren't smart enough (or haven't been trained) to figure it out themselves.

I also agree with OSUfan about fouls. Let's go to the NBA's 6 fouls. I want to see the best players play. I'm sick of watching a guy get 2 fouls in the first half, and then watch 99% of the the micromanaging coaches sit them on the bench for the rest of the half.
Click to expand...

Agree about the coaches calling TOs, just seems cheap to me.

About the fouls, Technically the college game has the same ratio of fouls to minutes as the NBA does. NBA plays 48 minutes, you get 6 fouls, 8 mins/foul. College is 40 minutes with 5 fouls, same rate. The problem I have, is that officials in general are just really inconsistent on how they call stuff, even within a given game. One minute, you breath on a guard 40 feet from the hoop when they're sizing you up and it's a foul. Next minute, a guy gets raked across the face on a drive to the hoop and no call. This also goes in line with my beef with the charge/block call, but I'll leave it alone lol.
 

Monty519 said:
Agree about the coaches calling TOs, just seems cheap to me.

About the fouls, Technically the college game has the same ratio of fouls to minutes as the NBA does. NBA plays 48 minutes, you get 6 fouls, 8 mins/foul. College is 40 minutes with 5 fouls, same rate. The problem I have, is that officials in general are just really inconsistent on how they call stuff, even within a given game. One minute, you breath on a guard 40 feet from the hoop when they're sizing you up and it's a foul. Next minute, a guy gets raked across the face on a drive to the hoop and no call. This also goes in line with my beef with the charge/block call, but I'll leave it alone lol.
Click to expand...

Agree 110% on the inconsistency of officiating. Is absolutely brutal at times and really affects game play.
 



Not sure which article you read, but Bo Ryan has no problem with a 30 second shot clock, nor should he. He simply stated that he does not think it will increase scoring, if that is the reason they want to do it.

Ryan does not care about pace, he cares about efficiency. I know it is a tough concept for some on here to grasp, but it is that simple. If the Badgers turned the ball over 6 more times a game, it would make a huge difference in possessions and the perceived pace. Would they be playing faster? Of course not, just sloppier. Points per possession is the name of the game and 30 or 35 seconds is not going to change that. Good coaches will adjust.

It definitely will help teams that play good defense, like the Badgers. Teams will have less time to find good shots.

Also, for all the people that argue about playing at a faster pace, why don't teams just jack up shots every time with 25 seconds on the shot clock? That would speed it up. It has to be that easy, right? Amazing how that never seems to happen.

I also find it ironic that for all the people that whine about pace, they also don't want the game to be like the NBA. Which I happen to agree with. When there are so many teams and only so many good players, the most successful teams find a way to win with the talent they are able to recruit. If you want the same teams playing in the Final 4 every year and take the unpredictability out of the game like the chalk of the NBA, that would be a big mistake.

I also don't think this is the year that Gophers fans want to see the way games are officiated change. If Richard uses the same defensive theory that the old man has, that the refs can't possibly call every foul, eliminating contact would be bad news for Gophers fans.

Change the clock to 30, tell the refs to stop calling charges when the offensive player leaves his feet and the defender slides in, make it a 6 foul rule and carry on. That is all I would do. The notion that the game is broken is ridiculous. Is there less talent? Of course. Broken? No way.
 

Yeah, Bo wants his teams to play fast, that's why they're consistently one of the slowest paced teams in the country :rolleyes:

It hurts Wisconsin because the longer shot clock benefits the lesser talented teams that milk the clock to take opponents out of their game. That's Wisconsin. Wisconsin's D can be tough but they have shown that opponents who can really shoot the ball have no problem scoring against them efficiently, the scores only get held down due to the low possession UW offense.
 

OSUfan said:
Yeah, Bo wants his teams to play fast, that's why they're consistently one of the slowest paced teams in the country :rolleyes:

It hurts Wisconsin because the longer shot clock benefits the lesser talented teams that milk the clock to take opponents out of their game. That's Wisconsin. Wisconsin's D can be tough but they have shown that opponents who can really shoot the ball have no problem scoring against them efficiently, the scores only get held down due to the low possession UW offense.
Click to expand...

If the Badgers would just turn the ball over three more times a game, they could play as fast as the run and gun O$U Buckeyes. Damn, I hope the Badgers work on turning it over more next year. You must savor those three extra possessions a game.

Teams that can really shoot don't have trouble scoring against anyone, LOL. Your lack of understanding of efficiency is stunning.
 

Hey, I don't make UW one of the slowest pace teams in the country every year. Bo Ryan does that. And it costs him in recruiting every year. No player really wants to play the Wisconsin style, and no one really wants to play against it because it's not the type of basketball people prefer. Being consistently good is nice but I'd rather have my team accomplish something great than just be consistently good. Badger fans who tout efficiency must have problems coming to grips with the fact that season-long efficiency doesn't get you past the S16 at any point the past 8 years, or help you win the B1G more than once the past 9 years. But hey, go ahead and put up a banner for efficiency rankings right next to the top-4 finish banner.

You have your opinion, but my opinion is the shorter shot clock WILL hurt Wisconsin. Their strategy is to turn every game against a high quality opponent into a slow-paced grinder, which plays into the hands of UW (lacking high quality shot-makers, UW needs to work to find a good shot, and 5 less seconds makes offense even harder with less time for opposing defenses to fall asleep or break down) and that slow pace gets opponents who aren't used to playing defense so long off their game offensively, out of rhythm and taking quick shots at times out of frustration. It will be tougher for UW to score and opponents may be less thrown off by the slower tempo. The shorter shot clock will hurt teams that like to use that underdog strategy of milking the clock and causing the snowball effect of sorts that often happens when they get a lead and keep draining the clock.
 

GVBadger said:
Not sure which article you read, but Bo Ryan has no problem with a 30 second shot clock, nor should he. He simply stated that he does not think it will increase scoring, if that is the reason they want to do it.

Ryan does not care about pace, he cares about efficiency. I know it is a tough concept for some on here to grasp, but it is that simple. If the Badgers turned the ball over 6 more times a game, it would make a huge difference in possessions and the perceived pace. Would they be playing faster? Of course not, just sloppier. Points per possession is the name of the game and 30 or 35 seconds is not going to change that. Good coaches will adjust.

It definitely will help teams that play good defense, like the Badgers. Teams will have less time to find good shots.

Also, for all the people that argue about playing at a faster pace, why don't teams just jack up shots every time with 25 seconds on the shot clock? That would speed it up. It has to be that easy, right? Amazing how that never seems to happen.

I also find it ironic that for all the people that whine about pace, they also don't want the game to be like the NBA. Which I happen to agree with. When there are so many teams and only so many good players, the most successful teams find a way to win with the talent they are able to recruit. If you want the same teams playing in the Final 4 every year and take the unpredictability out of the game like the chalk of the NBA, that would be a big mistake.

I also don't think this is the year that Gophers fans want to see the way games are officiated change. If Richard uses the same defensive theory that the old man has, that the refs can't possibly call every foul, eliminating contact would be bad news for Gophers fans.

Change the clock to 30, tell the refs to stop calling charges when the offensive player leaves his feet and the defender slides in, make it a 6 foul rule and carry on. That is all I would do. The notion that the game is broken is ridiculous. Is there less talent? Of course. Broken? No way.
Click to expand...


Who are you kidding. Bo Ryan will hate the shorter time clock. Now he will have to allow more possessions for the the other team that is more athletic. This will hurt the badgers and their grandma style play.
 

QUOTE=station19;707211]I'm with you howeda.

The NBA is too much run and gun and playground basketball. Too much one on one play and every team playing pretty much the same style. I've tried but have not ever been able to watch more than one quarter.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, the 24 second clock in the NBA creates a lot of one on one play, vs more team play and offensive touches in college. Heck, in the NBA, it is very common for the PG bring it up, to yo-yo it down to 10 seconds, then throw it to a 2 or 3, who will look at the clock til 5 sec, then make a move and put it up. Much more one on one shot creation off the dribble in the NBA. Whereas college ball tends to work a set until they find a hole in the defense. I would not want to see a 24 sec clock in college.

And . . . I went to a hip-hop concert at Target a couple of weeks ago, and Wolves game broke out. It was a show 1st and basketball 2nd . . . with teenagers running around the place. I miss the NBA of the 80's when it was about basketball. Maybe that's just the Wovles, but wow.
 

LOL at the Badgers fan who's trying to persuade himself that a shorter shot clock will be ok for Wisconsin.

Hell, whoever's behind this rule proposal probably got the idea watching a Wisconsin-Northwestern game. This change can't happen fast enough.
 

Gotta love a good debate between a Badger fan and a Buckeye fan on a Gopher board.
 


Gopher Bandanna Guy said:
Personally, I've wanted a reduced shot clock for sometime, so I hope this passes the rules committee. Should allow for some more intense possessions, and I don't mind if it leads to more bad forced shots and misses. To me, the NCAA basketball product has never been about 'high quality basketball' (it's not, the NBA is a superior product IMO), but rather 'exciting basketball, despite a lot of bad/boring/ugly play around the country'.
Click to expand...

It will make the college game even more boring. Here's why. Like the NBA, college coaches will simply run isolation pick and roll plays. Motion offenses will be reduced to drive and dish offenses. The efficiency on the offensive side will be reduced and the game will be less innovative and creative. In short, you'll end up watching a less exciting brand of basketball, much like the NBA.
 

I like this guy's take on the shorter shot clock

http://college-basketball.si.com/2013/04/17/fixing-the-game-the-fallacy-of-the-shorter-shot-clock/

This, in particular, struck a chord with me:

"In addition to cleaning up contact, there should be a significant cut in the number of timeouts per game. In national TV games, you have eight media timeouts plus all of the full and 30-second timeouts available to each team. There’s no way basketball requires upwards of 20 time stoppages in a 40-minute game. That further enables in-game overcoaching, which is curious in an era where complaints about the overall talent levels in the college game (and, especially, the dearth of quality point guards) are rampant. So we want to shorten possessions, overcoach them, and assume hundreds of teams without good lead guards will be able to execute consistently against increasingly sophisticated defenses?
 

Can we please reduce the number of time outs teams have? With as many TV breaks as there are in today's game there is no reason for so many other time outs. Two or three per half should be plenty.
 


tinyarch said:
It will make the college game even more boring. Here's why. Like the NBA, college coaches will simply run isolation pick and roll plays. Motion offenses will be reduced to drive and dish offenses. The efficiency on the offensive side will be reduced and the game will be less innovative and creative. In short, you'll end up watching a less exciting brand of basketball, much like the NBA.
Click to expand...

This is exactly it, along with what Herd said. You make the shot clock too short, and it limits what you can do on offense. Right now there's enough time for off-the-ball movement and passing to set up a good shot or cut to the basket. In the NBA there's no time for that crap, so it's four guys standing around while a ball hog works his magic. Yuck. For my money, 35 or 40 seconds is just about right.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom