The Holy Land of Hoops

College hoops headlines today include the probability that the shot clock will be reduced to 30 seconds.

The article mentions a "large public outcry from fans and media members". Me, I have no problem with the 35-second clock. I absolutely have no problem with teams averaging 55 points a game. I like defense and I like when teams have to earn points. 30 seconds is maybe acceptable. 24 like the NBA would be a disaster. The only advantage of 30 is that I can more easily figure out the minimum amount of game possessions left. 2 minutes equals at least 4 possessions.

The NBA in my opinion is a snooze-fest. I used to follow the NBA thru the 80's, but to me it's unwatchable now. Just seems like a series of 1-on-1 isolation plays... 8 players literally standing still during gameplay watching 2 guys go 1-on-1. Little defense. It's Keno-Davis-ball. Home teams win 70% of the time. Bleeccch. I would rather watch a college game of Brown vs Colgate than any NBA game.

But anyway, if there is an interest in improving the flow of the college game, I'd focus on:
The Obvious One:
1. Reducing the number of timeouts per team, from 4 timeouts in the 2nd half, to 2 timeouts in the 2nd half.
Also:
2. On offensive rebounds, the shot clock resets to only 18 seconds.
3. Push the 3-point line back a couple of feet.
4. Under 2 minutes in the game, if in the bonus, a foul by the losing team results in an additional 5 seconds off the clock. If it's the 13th team foul, then 10 seconds off.

Here's an article:
http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports. ... hot-clock/

from the article:

"There’s been a huge push to reduce the men’s basketball shot clock in college basketball from 35 to 30 seconds and it appears that the NCAA rules committee will seriously consider making that change..."

"With many college basketball games becoming low-scoring affairs during the 2014-15 season, there was a large public outcry from fans and media members to increase the pace of play by reducing the shot clock..."

They aren't going to do #1 on your obvious ones. However like was said in the Katz article from Byrd- a timeout called within 30 seconds of a media timeout becomes the media timeout. one of the biggest problems is the timeout, 20 seconds of play, tv timeout. This would help it out big time- reduce some times 3-4 timeouts.
And #4 just isn't happening. You may have a big problem with fouling on purpose, but it's part of the game and won't go away. Never.

Your #2- I think it could go to 20 seconds on a 30 second shot clock(this mimics the international game where it resets to 14 on an offensive rebound).

billyjack wrote:But anyway, if there is an interest in improving the flow of the college game, I'd focus on:
The Obvious One:
1. Reducing the number of timeouts per team, from 4 timeouts in the 2nd half, to 2 timeouts in the 2nd half.
Also:
2. On offensive rebounds, the shot clock resets to only 18 seconds.
3. Push the 3-point line back a couple of feet.
4. Under 2 minutes in the game, if in the bonus, a foul by the losing team results in an additional 5 seconds off the clock. If it's the 13th team foul, then 10 seconds off.

I think the shotclock should go to 30 seconds. I don't know if I would be opposed to 23 seconds either, i feel like 35 seconds gives the coach too much time to try and draw up the "Perfect" play rather than just let his players play.

I like 1 & 2 on your suggestions. Kids can barely make the 3 as it is, so I will disagree with that. And the 4th rule just seems unnecessary.

stever20 wrote:They aren't going to do #1 on your obvious ones. However like was said in the Katz article from Byrd- a timeout called within 30 seconds of a media timeout becomes the media timeout. one of the biggest problems is the timeout, 20 seconds of play, tv timeout. This would help it out big time- reduce some times 3-4 timeouts.
And #4 just isn't happening. You may have a big problem with fouling on purpose, but it's part of the game and won't go away. Never.

Your #2- I think it could go to 20 seconds on a 30 second shot clock(this mimics the international game where it resets to 14 on an offensive rebound).

Probably shouldn't use the words like "they aren't going to" and "never" for any rules change proposals.

#1, 2 fewer to's per team, is for if they really want to improve game flow, rather than just pay lip service. The biggest complaint for the last 40 years has been too many timeouts at the end of games. How many freakin timeouts does a team need.

#2 goes a long way towards moving the game along, whether it's 14, 18, or 20 seconds after an offensive rebound.

#3, moving the 3-pt line farther away, rewards a good inside game more, as well as making an 18 foot jumper sensible again. And for the Mark Cubans of the world, it makes the 3-pointer more similar to the NBA.

#4, ticking seconds off the clock late in games, is an attempt to eliminate games turning into free throw contests (another longtime fan complaint). Guy gets fouled, no time ticks off? Jeesh. This new rule would be similar to the NFL on late-game offensive penalties when time is automatically ticked off the clock.

The thing is- with #1- if they do the rule where within 30 seconds of a TV timeout a team timeout becomes the TV timeout- that's going to eliminate I think most all the time at least 1 total timeout per game- if not more. I think something that a lot of folks don't like is the team timeout, 20 seconds of play, tv timeout. That's like 5 minutes of dead time for 20 seconds of action.

#2 we agree with. It's 14 seconds in international play because of the 24 second shot clock. It'd be 20 for a 30 second shot clock....

#4- I'm sorry- but they want to maintain interest in games thru the entire game. Basically in your thing, a team is up 4 with 20 seconds to go, it's game over. That sound is tv sets clicking off. That's a complete non starter. It's as close to they aren't going to or never as there is.

#3- I think it's got a shot- but I don't think it's a lock by any stretch.

Make the shot clock 60 seconds. Play deliberate pattern and motion offences, aggressive man defense so as to keep the college game interesting and position it as far as possible from the NBA game which is the most labored and boring sport in the world (with the possible exception of curling and soccer.) In the last 5 or 6 minutes of the game the clock can be shortened to 30 or 35 seconds to prevent a deliberate non shooting stall game. Increase the 3 point line by at least 2 feet.

The result would be a far more exciting and complex game similar to the style of Al McGuire or Hank Iba. Of course those incapable of understanding or appreciating any thing more complex than running up and down the court and then passing the ball twice and shooting from 19 feet will neither like nor accept a game which actually requires intelligence, discipline and planning. Because they make up the greatest part of the TV audience I fear we shall be condemned to sprints and outside shooting and a 30 second clock.

No matter I will remain a Xavier fan and supporter but how I long for common sense, discipline and planning in bb. Not the playground offences which are so common in college bb today.

I think people will be surprised at how little the 30 second shot clock improves scoring on a game-by-game basis. On average teams will get another 3-4 possessions per game, as most of them don't play slow enough to consistently run into shot clock issues. Offense efficiency slightly improved in the NIT, CBI and CIT tourneys where they experimented with it, but it went from something like 1.04 PPP to 1.06 PPP, which is hardly noticeable on a game-by-game basis.

So this will create another 4-6 ppg for teams, which over the course of the season will be hailed as "saving" the game or at least a significant improvement, when in reality, it really doesn't change it a lot.

The other thing that I think we'll see this impact are upsets both during the season and in the tournament. 3-4 more possessions won't eliminate them, but typically the more possessions there are, the better it is for the team with the better talent. Won't completely eliminate them by any means, but I do think there will be fewer of them.

Irishdawg wrote:I think people will be surprised at how little the 30 second shot clock improves scoring on a game-by-game basis. On average teams will get another 3-4 possessions per game, as most of them don't play slow enough to consistently run into shot clock issues. Offense efficiency slightly improved in the NIT, CBI and CIT tourneys where they experimented with it, but it went from something like 1.04 PPP to 1.06 PPP, which is hardly noticeable on a game-by-game basis.

So this will create another 4-6 ppg for teams, which over the course of the season will be hailed as "saving" the game or at least a significant improvement, when in reality, it really doesn't change it a lot.

The other thing that I think we'll see this impact are upsets both during the season and in the tournament. 3-4 more possessions won't eliminate them, but typically the more possessions there are, the better it is for the team with the better talent. Won't completely eliminate them by any means, but I do think there will be fewer of them.

Here's the thing though. The postseason tournaments did improve their efficiency like you mentioned. The teams weren't used to running things in 30 seconds. So would bump it up even a bit more one would think.

And would say the better teams weren't in the data. It's going to help Duke/Kentucky far more than Miami/Texas A&M.

I think far more important is the way the games are called. They need to go back to how they started 2 years ago, and don't listen to the coaches complaints this time. Force teams to play actual defense with their feet instead of hand checking.

I think people who criticize the NBA don't even watch it. Count me down for a 23 second shot clock. If your team is any good you don't need half a minute of running around screens to get a good shot.

Elite PG's that can defend as well become even more important if the clock goes to 30. A little pressure in the backcourt and you are looking at 20 seconds to run your offense. PG's that can create for themselves and others are going to be worth there weight in gold.