Bear Down Wildcats

— The rules committee will try to work with the National Association of Basketball Coaches about the number of timeouts in a game, and the long breaks that come with them. Belmont coach Rick Byrd, chairman of the men's basketball rules committee, said, "The flow of the game, the final two minutes … will be discussed."

— Adams, the outgoing head of officiating, said he believes officials like to call charges, but the mindset should be, if he's not sure the defender has met qualifications for one, he should call a block. That's not necessarily what's been happening.

— Adams said there are 38 fouls a game on average, and he thinks the sport could "live" with 45 or so a game if it would make the game better. Perhaps if officials call tighter fouls early, it could reduce contact overall, and teams would eventually adapt. There has been a general sentiment that if the rules were just officiated as they were written, that could help clean up physicality in the game, too.

— Hyland said a 4-foot restricted-area arc might cut down on block/charge calls — the toughest judgment call for officials.

— There will also be a discussion about the use of replays for judgment calls in light of the ending of UCLA-Southern Methodist in the NCAA tournament's Round of 64. The game ended on a controversial goaltending call. By current rule, because it was a judgment call it could not be reviewed.

“Our game is ugly right now,” SMU coach Larry Brown said before last season, during a panel discussion among American Athletic Conference coaches. “I think our game will get uglier with a shorter clock.”

It is intriguing that Brown would be one to voice this position, given that he has coached so many years at the professional level, even won an NBA championship in charge of the 2004 Detroit Pistons.

Why does he say this? Because he’s smart enough to understand a 30-second cycle would profoundly enhance the strength of the defense. The coaches know this. I spoke with a handful of Division I head coaches and assistants at the adidas Uprising tournament near Indy last month, and unanimously they expressed that a 30-second clock would lead to more “soft” pressure designed to cut shot-clock time, more zone defenses and more unattractive late-clock shots attempted merely to avoid an impending turnover.

FightWildcatsFight wrote:Why not mirror the NBA's rules? It never made sense to me why collegiate sports use different rules than their professional counterparts. If the NBA product is so great, why not just emulate that at the NCAA level?

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

FightWildcatsFight wrote:Why not mirror the NBA's rules? It never made sense to me why collegiate sports use different rules than their professional counterparts. If the NBA product is so great, why not just emulate that at the NCAA level?

NBA rules would emphasize talent gaps. The 24 second clock puts a premium on players being able to create shots. Same with the extended 3 point line. Right now, a less talented team can work the clock for better shots and take advantage of easier 3's to win games where they are at a significant talent disadvantage.

Whether this is a good or bad thing depends on your perspective. From a purely self-interested Arizona fan perspective, the closer the rules get to the NBA, the better situation we're in.

Olsondogg wrote:People are acting like the NBA is a better game...it's not. It has more talented players, but as for the game, it is not better.

I'll give you an example. Listening to the radio (cause I don't watch much of the NBA anymore) the discussion was on a revolutionary change that Steve Kerr made on defense by basically switching a defensive assignment and electing not to guard someone. I heard what a great coaching move that was and on and on....

Really? A coach made a switch and that's a discussion? Please. Its a star's game...the clear out, 1 on 1, hero basketball shot. In fact, the NBA promotes "hero ball".

Gross. Take the NBA, I don't want CBB to resemble it.

gumby wrote:It's evolved from clear-out/ "hero ball." At least for the teams that want to win it. Spurs certainly didn't win that way. More ball movement and balanced scoring now.

Memo to NBA: "Hero Ball" has a negative connotation.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:I like watching the NBA, but for entirely separate reasons than CBB. The NBA is fun because you get to watch the best basketball players in the world demonstrate their skill in pure form. It does deemphasize coaching to some extent, but that's fine. You watch to see Steph Curry shake defenders and drop 25 footers with 5 hands in his face.

College is more fun because you have an actual, personal connection to a school and because it is a crazy, anything can happen game. The skill level isn't close to as high, so you don't enjoy that nearly as much.

The NBA unfairly gets a bad rap for being iso oriented. That's largely faded, and it's underrated how hard it is to execute even an iso. The other team knows you'd probably like to have LeBron go one on one, and will attack that. Even in an iso play, the chess match with sending a double, spacing the floor, chipping cutters, backside action...there's plenty to watch. The best teams aren't iso oriented either.

As a longtime basketball player, having played against college and future pros, the amount of skill in the pro game is mind boggling enough where it easily gets lost/overlooked. Having played against pros who had marginal success, I can't begin to imagine how badly a guy like LeBron would carve me up or even a decent D1 player.

Olsondogg wrote:Look you guys can say the iso is gone from the NBA, but every time I tune into a game, I see someone going one on one and throwing up a horrible shot...that sometimes goes in.

True the Spurs were an anomaly recently, which everyone outside of a few fans found boring. That's the problem right there. Good quality basketball that is played the right way in the NBA is boring.

The game in CBB moves too slow? Could it be the number of timeouts afforded to a team perhaps? Reduce that and you hav me sold. Gumby has a few good points on how to improve the game, but officiating is a start.

As far as wanting to resemble the NBA game, no...don't. The NBA hasn't been good in a long time and isn't gonna get better until they do something about the early entry rule and the NBADL. Turn that into a true developmental league that players can enter without going to college, and weed out the kids that don't want to play CBB. Make a 2 year committment to college or a year in the DL. That would help.

Olsondogg wrote:Look you guys can say the iso is gone from the NBA, but every time I tune into a game, I see someone going one on one and throwing up a horrible shot...that sometimes goes in.

True the Spurs were an anomaly recently, which everyone outside of a few fans found boring. That's the problem right there. Good quality basketball that is played the right way in the NBA is boring.

The game in CBB moves too slow? Could it be the number of timeouts afforded to a team perhaps? Reduce that and you hav me sold. Gumby has a few good points on how to improve the game, but officiating is a start.

As far as wanting to resemble the NBA game, no...don't. The NBA hasn't been good in a long time and isn't gonna get better until they do something about the early entry rule and the NBADL. Turn that into a true developmental league that players can enter without going to college, and weed out the kids that don't want to play CBB. Make a 2 year committment to college or a year in the DL. That would help.

TucsonClip wrote:Finally, I have no idea why you think the age rule would make the NBA a better product in any way. Thats another argument, which I wont go into detail in this thread.

TucsonClip wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:I like watching the NBA, but for entirely separate reasons than CBB. The NBA is fun because you get to watch the best basketball players in the world demonstrate their skill in pure form. It does deemphasize coaching to some extent, but that's fine. You watch to see Steph Curry shake defenders and drop 25 footers with 5 hands in his face.

College is more fun because you have an actual, personal connection to a school and because it is a crazy, anything can happen game. The skill level isn't close to as high, so you don't enjoy that nearly as much.

The NBA unfairly gets a bad rap for being iso oriented. That's largely faded, and it's underrated how hard it is to execute even an iso. The other team knows you'd probably like to have LeBron go one on one, and will attack that. Even in an iso play, the chess match with sending a double, spacing the floor, chipping cutters, backside action...there's plenty to watch. The best teams aren't iso oriented either.

As a longtime basketball player, having played against college and future pros, the amount of skill in the pro game is mind boggling enough where it easily gets lost/overlooked. Having played against pros who had marginal success, I can't begin to imagine how badly a guy like LeBron would carve me up or even a decent D1 player.

I always tell people who claim the NBA is terrible to watch, its not a better game than the NBA, iso ball, ect... Go watch a college game and then turn on an NBA game. Tell me switching back to a college game doesnt hurt your eyes, even if it is a Bulls vs. Hornets game.

TucsonClip wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Look you guys can say the iso is gone from the NBA, but every time I tune into a game, I see someone going one on one and throwing up a horrible shot...that sometimes goes in.

True the Spurs were an anomaly recently, which everyone outside of a few fans found boring. That's the problem right there. Good quality basketball that is played the right way in the NBA is boring.

The game in CBB moves too slow? Could it be the number of timeouts afforded to a team perhaps? Reduce that and you hav me sold. Gumby has a few good points on how to improve the game, but officiating is a start.

As far as wanting to resemble the NBA game, no...don't. The NBA hasn't been good in a long time and isn't gonna get better until they do something about the early entry rule and the NBADL. Turn that into a true developmental league that players can enter without going to college, and weed out the kids that don't want to play CBB. Make a 2 year committment to college or a year in the DL. That would help.

The iso will never be gone. The point is, the NBA isnt Allen Iverson, Michael Jordan, Tracy McGrady, Vince Carter slow it down, clear it out and go 1v1 anymore. The last two years have been the fastest average pace since 92-93. FTA/FGA are down, fouls are down, turnovers are down, 3PA are up 80% from the early 90's, last year was the first year since 94-95 with a league average score over 101 points.

The league also set the all-time paid attendance record this year, average arena attendance set records, ect.

Change has come swiftly. The league is different than what most remember even six years ago.

The fact that people thought the Spurs were boring the last five years is based off people making general assumptions about style of play. San Antonio hasnt scored under 103 PPG since 09-10.

Do you see where I am going with this? People's assumptions and unproven statements have led to false truths.

I do not want college basketball to mirror the NBA, but a 30 second shot clock is needed. Pace of play needs to increase, like it or not.

Finally, I have no idea why you think the age rule would make the NBA a better product in any way. Thats another argument, which I wont go into detail in this thread.

Olsondogg wrote: I could give a rats ass what attendence was. Nickelback being extremely popular doesn't make them a great band.

Furthermore, the tourney just had some incrdedible ratings this year, and believe Vegas was quite happy too.

The shot clock will do nothing to the game. Zip, zero, zilch. Not without other rule changes to go along with it. I brought up the age rule to show that the NBA is taking young talent and basically sending it to the D League anyway. I don't care if it helps or hurts the NBA...I think it would help college basketball which is all I care about. You can have your NBA game and the "fun" of watching it. I see bullshit on a nightly basis that is thrown into a vine and sold as something amazing. It's not a great game most nights it's played. It hurts watching it from a basketball standpoint.

TucsonClip wrote:

Olsondogg wrote: I could give a rats ass what attendence was. Nickelback being extremely popular doesn't make them a great band.

Furthermore, the tourney just had some incrdedible ratings this year, and believe Vegas was quite happy too.

The shot clock will do nothing to the game. Zip, zero, zilch. Not without other rule changes to go along with it. I brought up the age rule to show that the NBA is taking young talent and basically sending it to the D League anyway. I don't care if it helps or hurts the NBA...I think it would help college basketball which is all I care about. You can have your NBA game and the "fun" of watching it. I see bullshit on a nightly basis that is thrown into a vine and sold as something amazing. It's not a great game most nights it's played. It hurts watching it from a basketball standpoint.

Im pretty sure the players union and the owners give a rats ass about attendance... Not sure what your point was there.

Not denying anything about NCAA basketball. Your statement was that fans think the Spurs are boring, its iso ball and 1v1 and it hasnt been good in a long time. Your opinions are fine, but no need to ignore actual facts.

The age rule has nothing to do with the D-League. In fact, as I have been discussing for over a year, the D-League is expanding, will have an affiliate for every team, more flexible roster rules and will be partially subsidized by the new TV deal.

Im not here trying to get "you" to watch the NBA. I could care less and thats not my job. I just think its amusing when people use their opinions that are based off 12 year old information to make a case against something.

I love CBB and want to keep it a separate entity, albeit with a few rule changes to make the game more comprehensive overall.

Olsondogg wrote:

TucsonClip wrote:

Olsondogg wrote: I could give a rats ass what attendence was. Nickelback being extremely popular doesn't make them a great band.

Furthermore, the tourney just had some incrdedible ratings this year, and believe Vegas was quite happy too.

The shot clock will do nothing to the game. Zip, zero, zilch. Not without other rule changes to go along with it. I brought up the age rule to show that the NBA is taking young talent and basically sending it to the D League anyway. I don't care if it helps or hurts the NBA...I think it would help college basketball which is all I care about. You can have your NBA game and the "fun" of watching it. I see bullshit on a nightly basis that is thrown into a vine and sold as something amazing. It's not a great game most nights it's played. It hurts watching it from a basketball standpoint.

Im pretty sure the players union and the owners give a rats ass about attendance... Not sure what your point was there.

Not denying anything about NCAA basketball. Your statement was that fans think the Spurs are boring, its iso ball and 1v1 and it hasnt been good in a long time. Your opinions are fine, but no need to ignore actual facts.

The age rule has nothing to do with the D-League. In fact, as I have been discussing for over a year, the D-League is expanding, will have an affiliate for every team, more flexible roster rules and will be partially subsidized by the new TV deal.

Im not here trying to get "you" to watch the NBA. I could care less and thats not my job. I just think its amusing when people use their opinions that are based off 12 year old information to make a case against something.

I love CBB and want to keep it a separate entity, albeit with a few rule changes to make the game more comprehensive overall.

Look, I don't care about the NBA nor it's attendance. You brought up attendance as some sort of proof that because something is popular makes it good...which is not the case.

You can condemn me for "12 year old information" but what I pointed out as my opinion rings true. The NBA advertises "Hero ball" for christ's sake. My point about age restrictions would help the college game, which is all I care about.

My opinions are not based off false information, they are based on the times I've turned on the television over the past three weeks to watch Jordan/Howard get intentionally fouled to get them on the FT line so they can miss a few gimmies, and then watch Harden/Paul play hero ball and then complain about a foul that was or was not called. But enjoy the NBA, I couldn't care less....

Just because offensive metrics are trending positively doesn't make it a nice game to watch. Hopefully rule changes in college can help the game be more palatable to "fans" seeking a game that is played "quicker", but the shot clock isn't going to do that.

ASUHATER! wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

TucsonClip wrote:

Olsondogg wrote: I could give a rats ass what attendence was. Nickelback being extremely popular doesn't make them a great band.

Furthermore, the tourney just had some incrdedible ratings this year, and believe Vegas was quite happy too.

The shot clock will do nothing to the game. Zip, zero, zilch. Not without other rule changes to go along with it. I brought up the age rule to show that the NBA is taking young talent and basically sending it to the D League anyway. I don't care if it helps or hurts the NBA...I think it would help college basketball which is all I care about. You can have your NBA game and the "fun" of watching it. I see bullshit on a nightly basis that is thrown into a vine and sold as something amazing. It's not a great game most nights it's played. It hurts watching it from a basketball standpoint.

Im pretty sure the players union and the owners give a rats ass about attendance... Not sure what your point was there.

Not denying anything about NCAA basketball. Your statement was that fans think the Spurs are boring, its iso ball and 1v1 and it hasnt been good in a long time. Your opinions are fine, but no need to ignore actual facts.

The age rule has nothing to do with the D-League. In fact, as I have been discussing for over a year, the D-League is expanding, will have an affiliate for every team, more flexible roster rules and will be partially subsidized by the new TV deal.

Im not here trying to get "you" to watch the NBA. I could care less and thats not my job. I just think its amusing when people use their opinions that are based off 12 year old information to make a case against something.

I love CBB and want to keep it a separate entity, albeit with a few rule changes to make the game more comprehensive overall.

Look, I don't care about the NBA nor it's attendance. You brought up attendance as some sort of proof that because something is popular makes it good...which is not the case.

You can condemn me for "12 year old information" but what I pointed out as my opinion rings true. The NBA advertises "Hero ball" for christ's sake. My point about age restrictions would help the college game, which is all I care about.

My opinions are not based off false information, they are based on the times I've turned on the television over the past three weeks to watch Jordan/Howard get intentionally fouled to get them on the FT line so they can miss a few gimmies, and then watch Harden/Paul play hero ball and then complain about a foul that was or was not called. But enjoy the NBA, I couldn't care less....

Just because offensive metrics are trending positively doesn't make it a nice game to watch. Hopefully rule changes in college can help the game be more palatable to "fans" seeking a game that is played "quicker", but the shot clock isn't going to do that.

it being popular means it isn't bad....

so the other option usually is good...

ASUHATER! wrote:and just because legions of people like something doesn't make it bad. stop trying to be all hipster about the nba.

Olsondogg wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

TucsonClip wrote:
Im pretty sure the players union and the owners give a rats ass about attendance... Not sure what your point was there.

Not denying anything about NCAA basketball. Your statement was that fans think the Spurs are boring, its iso ball and 1v1 and it hasnt been good in a long time. Your opinions are fine, but no need to ignore actual facts.

The age rule has nothing to do with the D-League. In fact, as I have been discussing for over a year, the D-League is expanding, will have an affiliate for every team, more flexible roster rules and will be partially subsidized by the new TV deal.

Im not here trying to get "you" to watch the NBA. I could care less and thats not my job. I just think its amusing when people use their opinions that are based off 12 year old information to make a case against something.

I love CBB and want to keep it a separate entity, albeit with a few rule changes to make the game more comprehensive overall.

Look, I don't care about the NBA nor it's attendance. You brought up attendance as some sort of proof that because something is popular makes it good...which is not the case.

You can condemn me for "12 year old information" but what I pointed out as my opinion rings true. The NBA advertises "Hero ball" for christ's sake. My point about age restrictions would help the college game, which is all I care about.

My opinions are not based off false information, they are based on the times I've turned on the television over the past three weeks to watch Jordan/Howard get intentionally fouled to get them on the FT line so they can miss a few gimmies, and then watch Harden/Paul play hero ball and then complain about a foul that was or was not called. But enjoy the NBA, I couldn't care less....

Just because offensive metrics are trending positively doesn't make it a nice game to watch. Hopefully rule changes in college can help the game be more palatable to "fans" seeking a game that is played "quicker", but the shot clock isn't going to do that.

it being popular means it isn't bad....

so the other option usually is good...

Huh? Plenty of popular things are bad...just because legions of people like something doesn't make it good.

Olsondogg wrote: Look, I don't care about the NBA nor it's attendance. You brought up attendance as some sort of proof that because something is popular makes it good...which is not the case.

You can condemn me for "12 year old information" but what I pointed out as my opinion rings true. The NBA advertises "Hero ball" for christ's sake. My point about age restrictions would help the college game, which is all I care about.

My opinions are not based off false information, they are based on the times I've turned on the television over the past three weeks to watch Jordan/Howard get intentionally fouled to get them on the FT line so they can miss a few gimmies, and then watch Harden/Paul play hero ball and then complain about a foul that was or was not called. But enjoy the NBA, I couldn't care less....

Just because offensive metrics are trending positively doesn't make it a nice game to watch.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:The only one I don't like is eliminating the 5 second call on dribblers. Other than that, I either like them or am neutral.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:The only one I don't like is eliminating the 5 second call on dribblers. Other than that, I either like them or am neutral.

TucsonClip wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:The only one I don't like is eliminating the 5 second call on dribblers. Other than that, I either like them or am neutral.

They pretty much never call it anyway, so I am ok with it.

the real dill wrote:-35 second shot clock reduced to 30
-Restricted arc from 3 to 4 feet
-removal of one 2nd half team timeout
-no more live ball timeouts by coaches
-no more 5 second call on dribbling player
-flopping/faking a foul can be ruled a technical
-backcourt timeout does not reset 10 second count

I like all of these.

gumby wrote: No timeouts without having possession. Just made a bucket? It's not your ball anymore.

Olsondogg wrote:Thanks for all the factual information guys.