Your strategies to improve game-flow

HFCS

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2010
75,494
65,728
113
LA LA Land
The NBA has better flow because every team is full of elite offensive players.

College basketball will never be the NBA.

That is partially true, but officiating and 11 seconds slower on each clock has its impacts. One and one free throws often rewarding fouling is another reason.

Every major level of basketball including womens ball has a faster shot clock than 35 seconds. If it's so great we should be arguing to extend the shot clock to 45 seconds and get these other leagues up to at least 35.

If you're a fan of a team that is winning by grinding lots of clock you enjoy it. That's a small % of college basketball viewership though.
 

heitclone

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2009
16,615
14,396
113
45
Way up there
Fouls aren't a desired part of basketball. That's why they are penalized in the first place. Dribbling and shooting are desired aspects of the game. Strategy that utilizes an undesirable action shouldn't be rewarded, and if the rules allow such strategies to be successful, then the rules need to changed so that said strategies don't work.

If a team can't win the game by using the desired action of the game (i.e. shooting, dribbling, passing, and playing legal defense), then too bad; they deserve to lose because they weren't as good at the fundamentals of the game as their opponent was. They shouldn't be afforded additional opportunities to win by breaking the rules of the game (i.e. committing fouls).

they would win or lose based on how well they shoot free throws....that's a skill. the foul isn't winning the game, either way it still comes down to shooting the ball. What your asking for takes so much away from the game, it wouldn't be worth it. We'd see an even more bland version of the game...a la the NBA. We would only see the same few teams win every game. If all things were even with talent, then what you're saying would be just fine. It's not, there are a lot of ways a team makes up for being less talented. Taking away the advantages those teams have would take away a lot of what is great about college basketball.
 

heitclone

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2009
16,615
14,396
113
45
Way up there
The NBA has better flow because every team is full of elite offensive players.

College basketball will never be the NBA.

And bc coaching defense is very rare these days, its getting really bad in college bball as well. AAU ball has dumbed down players so much that they only touch on the basics....mainly because there are very unqualified coaches leading these AAU programs.
 

jbhtexas

Well-Known Member
Oct 20, 2006
14,321
4,370
113
Arlington, TX
they would win or lose based on how well they shoot free throws....that's a skill. the foul isn't winning the game, either way it still comes down to shooting the ball. What your asking for takes so much away from the game, it wouldn't be worth it. We'd see an even more bland version of the game...a la the NBA. We would only see the same few teams win every game. If all things were even with talent, then what you're saying would be just fine. It's not, there are a lot of ways a team makes up for being less talented. Taking away the advantages those teams have would take away a lot of what is great about college basketball.

First, I disagree with your "the game would be ruined" assertions. Secondly, I guess it comes down to philosophical views regarding competition, and how victory in a competition is awarded. To me, it seems that victory should be a measure of who is best at the desired aspects of the game, not who is best at coping with the ramifications of intentionally breaking the rules of the game (i.e. a Rick Barnes style foul-a-thon for the last four minutes of a game). If it wouldn't be for broken rules, there probably wouldn't be free throws in basketball.
 
Last edited:

SeaClone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 12, 2013
604
351
63
Minneapolis, MN
Generally the refs are too big a part of the game because teams refuse to play defense without fouling. Everyone pushes the envelope with hand checking, moving under to take a charge, bodying up in the post, palming the ball, moving screens, drag steps when driving, etc. If you push the rules enough, you have to expect you are going to get a whistle at some point. If refs are told to back off teams will just push the rules further. IN my opinion it has already gotten out of hand. There are tons of teams in the Big 12 alone who make a living out of setting moving screens and are all upset when one is actually called.

I agree. The best thing they could ever do is start calling fouls for all of the cheap contact that has become commonplace in the game. Eliminating most of the grabbing, bumping, hand checking, forearms, etc., levied against cutters and drivers would definitely improve offensive flow. The first couple of weeks would be ugly, but it would hopefully iron itself out.
 

Rural

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2010
42,963
36,187
113
I remember Tim Floyd using that 1 and 1 gap to his advantage. In one game his dedicated fouler came in and played less than a minute and accumulated 3 fouls. If I remember correctly it worked, too. On those three possessions they only gave up a point or maybe two. That's not to mention how frustrated their poor foul shooting big was getting.



It was like Spurs-Clippers in the first two games in LA.

I suppose Hack-A-Jordan was a "smart" move but it also had a bush league feel to it.
 

DeereClone

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2009
8,281
9,648
113
It's all on the timeouts for me. I freaking hate all the timeouts - 5 for each team, plus 8 for tv = 18 timeouts in a 40 minute game. Total insanity.

Tv timeout under 12 and 6 in each half. 4 timeouts for each team, with 1 being use it or lose it.

I know now it's all about $ and ad space but it is just ridiculous. Just up the cost of the add space to compensate for there being less of it. Supply and demand.
 

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
9,123
7,727
113
Dubuque
More Skilled Players

If people want improved flow, one change would be improved fundamentals. Too many elite HS prospects get by playing HS and AAU ball on their athleticism alone. Post skills are a lost skill. Niangs skillset around the basket is the exception today, it used to be the rule.

To speed up play I would reduce the number of coaches timeouts from 5 to 4. I would also make fouls 7-9 in the last two minutes automatic 2 shot fouls. After foul ten I would give the fouled team 1 free throw and the ball out of bounds. Would also make any foul comitted before the clock starts an intential foul- 2 free throws and the ball.

Overall, I think the college game is superior to the NBA, so I would hate to see too many changes. Stifling defense is just as important part of the game as high scoring offense.
 

cyclones500

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2010
38,753
26,756
113
Michigan
basslakebeacon.com
It's all on the timeouts for me. I freaking hate all the timeouts - 5 for each team, plus 8 for tv = 18 timeouts in a 40 minute game. Total insanity.

Tv timeout under 12 and 6 in each half. 4 timeouts for each team, with 1 being use it or lose it.

I know now it's all about $ and ad space but it is just ridiculous. Just up the cost of the add space to compensate for there being less of it. Supply and demand.

I agree, timeouts are worse than the fouls/free throws, and simpler to change for improvements.

It's too bad ad $ is such a priority -- once TV timeouts were made commonplace (can't even recall when that happened at this point), it removed a strategic advantage for home teams; visitors having to call timeouts to squelch runs. Now they often can just "ride it out" until the next commercial break. Like you said, if they could ad least find a balance...

I think there could be some adjustments with some of the foul-to-rally situation, but it's possible to go overboard or over-complicating matters.
 

Gunnerclone

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2010
75,452
79,549
113
DSM
While we're changing things the flopping, especially on 3 point shots, is just an enjoyment killer and needs to end. I'd also like to see way more no-calls on block/charge situations. If the ref doesn't know, then the ref shouldn't blow. I think everyone could live with that and it would even out over a season. Having a good flopper on your team is about as important as having a good shot blocker in the game today.
 

Chitowncy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
Jan 14, 2009
2,291
1,570
113
Ames
Good thread.

To answer the OP's main question: I would limit referee review of calls to three replays; I would also like to see each side granted less timeouts for the whole game. Thus, in the end of game situation, the better prepared team / more astute players would seem to have the advantage if there are no time outs left.

The biggest thing that can improve scoring in the game though, in my opinion, is to clean-up play. The game should be called closer to the way its called in the NBA. No hand-checking outside the three point line; clean-up some of the fouls down low; don't let players ride each other all the way down the court.

It would be difficult to implement such a change and the first season of stringent calls would probably be a painful foul-fest as oft-fouling teams like West Virginia, VCU, etc, would probably be slow to shed old habits. But, for the good of the game, I'd like to see the refs actually enforce the rules and go back to a more finesse and skill-based game like that in the 70s and before. Just watch old highlights to see how little fouling was permitted. I think enforcing the rules would go a long way to increasing scoring and the excitement in the game.
 

EYEoftheSTORM

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 3, 2009
3,124
515
113
35
Ames, Iowa
First, I disagree with your "the game would be ruined" assertions. Secondly, I guess it comes down to philosophical views regarding competition, and how victory in a competition is awarded. To me, it seems that victory should be a measure of who is best at the desired aspects of the game, not who is best at coping with the ramifications of intentionally breaking the rules of the game (i.e. a Rick Barnes style foul-a-thon for the last four minutes of a game). If it wouldn't be for broken rules, there probably wouldn't be free throws in basketball.
Fundamentals only go so far. At some point you need strategy otherwise it would be Duke, UK, UNC, and KU winning the title every year...
 
Last edited:

cyclones500

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2010
38,753
26,756
113
Michigan
basslakebeacon.com
Addressed in various places in this thread, directly or indirectly -- I despise the 'scrum' timeout. A/k/a held-ball bailout. I would be OK with it if there are limited options for teams to use a clock-stop-only timeout -- I mentioned that concept in the other thread. Even then I think that's against spirit of the game, like the ball-save in-air timeout.
 

Cyclones_R_GR8

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Feb 10, 2007
23,936
25,920
113
Omaha
Some of you younger guys never saw the old "Four Corners" games where they would pass the ball around the perimeter with no shot clock for what seemed like an eternity. Now those were games with no flow.
 

wonkadog

Well-Known Member
Apr 17, 2006
4,857
399
83
Ames, IA
I remember Tim Floyd using that 1 and 1 gap to his advantage. In one game his dedicated fouler came in and played less than a minute and accumulated 3 fouls. If I remember correctly it worked, too. On those three possessions they only gave up a point or maybe two. That's not to mention how frustrated their poor foul shooting big was getting.

I would do this all the time if I were a coach because of another reason. The refs obviously even up the fouls if they get too far out of whack no matter how much the more aggressive team deserves it. So instead of letting them make up crap on your "good" players to even up the count (assuming you have less fouls overall), send in a scrub to pick up the fouls that even up the team fouls and then get him out of there.
 

HFCS

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2010
75,494
65,728
113
LA LA Land
It's all on the timeouts for me. I freaking hate all the timeouts - 5 for each team, plus 8 for tv = 18 timeouts in a 40 minute game. Total insanity.

Tv timeout under 12 and 6 in each half. 4 timeouts for each team, with 1 being use it or lose it.

I know now it's all about $ and ad space but it is just ridiculous. Just up the cost of the add space to compensate for there being less of it. Supply and demand.

Wife: "how much time is left in the game"
Me: "3 minutes on the game clock but that could mean anywhere between 5 minutes and 45 minutes of real time"
 

HFCS

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2010
75,494
65,728
113
LA LA Land
While we're changing things the flopping, especially on 3 point shots, is just an enjoyment killer and needs to end. I'd also like to see way more no-calls on block/charge situations. If the ref doesn't know, then the ref shouldn't blow. I think everyone could live with that and it would even out over a season. Having a good flopper on your team is about as important as having a good shot blocker in the game today.

It'd be easy to get rid of flopping in NCAA and NBA if they wanted to. Review after games and horrible flops with no contact get a one game suspension. NBA does it already but it's silly small fines that are more of an embarrassment than an actual punishment.
 

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
48,375
39,158
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
It'd be easy to get rid of flopping in NCAA and NBA if they wanted to. Review after games and horrible flops with no contact get a one game suspension. NBA does it already but it's silly small fines that are more of an embarrassment than an actual punishment.

There should be more fouls called on the offensive player in the following circumstances:

Shooter kicks out leg to make contact with a defender passing laterally to contest a shot.
Shooter extends arm or shoulder to the side to make contact with a defender closing out to contest shot.
Shooter fakes to get defender to leave his feet and then jumps into defender (not straight up) while taking the shot.
Ball handler repeatedly rams defender with his butt to displace him from legal guarding position in the post.

If similar contact was initiated by defender (extending knee to impede a player, arm bar a ball handler, bodying up a dribbler) it would be an easy foul call, why isn't it called on the offensive player?