If two red jerseys are involved the call goes in favor of the jersey featuring white/silver as the secondary color.
Thoughts on Dickie V's suggestion during last nights game
- Thread starter ISU_Clone_28
- Start date
If two red jerseys are involved the call goes in favor of the jersey featuring white/silver as the secondary color.
NBA is a whole different animal when it comes to officiating although I almost prefer it to the NCAA. Even the NBA this year is cracking down on hand checking and traveling (can you believe that !) The NBA players are the elite athletic guys on the planet and they don't foul out as much because IMO they allow for much more physical play, and guys get away with so much s*it it's unreal, especially your superstars who get the calls. Last nights college games in Chicago with Michigan St. Kentucky, Duke and Kansas was awesome to watch, these are your top 5% Elite programs in college basketball basketball. The flow of the games were just right with not allot of fouls. I thought it was March Madness a few times. What incredible talent. What happens when a Kentucky plays a "popcorn state" you'll see the fouling because they just can't play at that level.
One must also keep in mind that with a 45 second shot clock a team could sit on the ball and run down the shot clock eating up a lot of time. To combat that and create more possessions for your team I am sure there were plenty of coaches that had their teams play fast. By taking the shot clock down to 35 seconds the need to play fast to create more possessions wasn't as great.
More possessions don't mean more points. It means teams will just take more bad shots. Scoring went down after the clock went from 45 to 35.
Your team may take more bad shots if your team sucks at shooting or is used to playing Wisconsin type of bball. But for teams like ISU that play faster, it would help. Lowering the clock to 30 wouldn't have a big impact on ISU, but it would negatively affect teams that like to slow the pace.
I'm not trying to make it seem black and white at all, I'm saying that lowering the shot clock won't necessarily increase possesions per game or points scored, and that's already been proven.
Even a team like ISU that plays faster is affected and sped up. Right now teams, ISU included, go into borderline panic mode to make sure they get a shot up as soon as the shot clock hits 10. Now that happens five seconds earlier. It will lead to more bad shots for everybody.
Think fouls should stay at 5, but without disqualification for getting number 5. Rather if a player fouls after he has already picked up his fifth, treat it like a two shot technical where the other team gets two free throws and the ball back. As a fan, I hate it when one team's strategy is to put the other team's best player on the bench. It may be considered "smart basketball", but I hate the tactic as much as I hate how trying to take charges has become a substituite for making a defensive play.
I'd also like the shot clock reduced. It cannot be more than in the women's game. To me, that's just illogical
I'd also like the shot clock reduced. It cannot be more than in the women's game. To me, that's just illogical
Good, I love a fast paced game. Speed it up more and turn it into a damn track meet.
An intriguing alternative. Here's a question regarding your plan: Does a team have a choice to either (1) DQ the player (permanently) or (2) allow him to remain the game and risk the personal/technical? And can a coach choose Option 2, but also select a permanent DQ at any point thereafter?
Uh, if you don't want to risk the technical on fouls after 5, sit them after 5.
The disqualification rules are fine as far as I am concerned.
I have the definitive answer on whether the 30 second shot clock will reduce or increase scoring. Currently in the NCAA men use the 35 second clock and women use the 30 second clock. In 2011 the men's average was 67.9 points per game. The women's average was 60.9 points per game. Ergo, use of the 30 second shot clock will reduce scoring.
**** is afraid that if a starter on Louisville, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, Kentucky or Syracuse fouls out he will have to learn the name of another player. I suspect those are the only 30 players he knows anything about because those will be the only ones he talks about the next 5 months.
I would love to see
a) Shot clock brought down from 35 seconds to 20 seconds TAMCC yesterday had the ball far too many seconds on offense, made the game extremely boring.
b) 4 quarter game, 15 minutes per quarter
c) Less ticky tacky fouls, let the guys play rough
d) ability for coaches to challenge fouls/officials to review plays
a) Shot clock brought down from 35 seconds to 20 seconds TAMCC yesterday had the ball far too many seconds on offense, made the game extremely boring.
b) 4 quarter game, 15 minutes per quarter
c) Less ticky tacky fouls, let the guys play rough
d) ability for coaches to challenge fouls/officials to review plays
A shorter shot clock would just mean every team would recruit and try to play faster. I prefer the current clock wher you can't sit on a 4 point lead like Indiana used to do in the 80's but you can also choose to run an offense. It's to our advantage to bring a fast pace game to teams like the big 10 teams that are't used to it.
Definitely don't want to change the rules back. That mauling from the Ohio State defense that we got last year will never happen again under the new hand checking rules.
You know, I remember CFH stating that these new rules would take time for players to adjust, and that there will be ugly, boring FT shooting contests as this season starts. He said a similar scenario played out in the NBA. We need to be patient as things settle in, then we'll better play as a result. I'm all for backing down the physicality of MBB to a reasonable level. The "physical game" was getting out of control and needed to be reeled in. BB is a game of athletic ability and grace to score, and win games as a result, not relying strength and physical play to overpower the opposition -- that's simply hardwood football.
I wouldn't want to mess with the time of the game, I would like to keep statistics and records intact. I don't really see any advantage to quarters either.
With the new rules I could see going to 6 fouls. Not in love with it but not opposed.
As Larry Eaustacy said, "the fans pay to watch the players, not the refs". In other words it is better for the game for the stars to be on the floor. He said that in reference to ticky tacky touch fouls.
