http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaabk/1...spartanntp

Writer has 15 proposed changes to college basketball to make it "great again."

What I found most amazing is that other than switching to 4 quarters instead of 2 halves (a minor change), I thought they were all bad.

There are three changes I would make:

1) Start actually calling fouls again. Watch a game from the 60s/70s. They get away with so much more now.
2) Move the 3 point line to the international line. NBA line is too far for college players. Current line is really a little too easy and it means a lot of the court, between the layup/short jumper and 3 pointer, isn't used much for shooting.
3) Adopt the old NBA 3 to make 2 rule for double bonus. If you have 3 shots to make 2, it will reduce the value of endlessly fouling.

I would be happy if college basketball just adopted nearly all of the FIBA (international) rules.

See the differences on this chart: http://www.fiba.com/rule-differences
(The chart lists the old NCAA shot clock rule, not the current one.)

The last two minutes of the game drives me nuts. Takes forever because of all the "unintentional fouling".

I just don't understand why a team should gain by fouling. In the last two minutes........ change the rule so that the team fouled gets the free shots AND the ball out of bounds. Like a technical foul.

Stop all of the ridiculous fouling, to make the opposing team shoot free throws and hope they miss.

(03-30-2017 02:09 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  The last two minutes of the game drives me nuts. Takes forever because of all the "unintentional fouling".

I just don't understand why a team should gain by fouling. In the last two minutes........ change the rule so that the team fouled gets the free shots AND the ball out of bounds. Like a technical foul.

Stop all of the ridiculous fouling, to make the opposing team shoot free throws and hope they miss.

I wouldn't want to totally take that away. But it has gotten ridiculous. That's why I was suggesting the 3 to make 2.

A radical change would be 3 shots to make 3 after a certain number of fouls in the last 2 minutes.

(03-30-2017 02:09 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  The last two minutes of the game drives me nuts. Takes forever because of all the "unintentional fouling".

I just don't understand why a team should gain by fouling. In the last two minutes........ change the rule so that the team fouled gets the free shots AND the ball out of bounds. Like a technical foul.

Stop all of the ridiculous fouling, to make the opposing team shoot free throws and hope they miss.

Adjustable hoops. Make them an inch or two larger in diameter when my guys have the ball, and an inch or two smaller when the opposing team is on offense. It could be our little secret. Nobody else needs to know.

(03-30-2017 12:41 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I would be happy if college basketball just adopted nearly all of the FIBA (international) rules.

See the differences on this chart: http://www.fiba.com/rule-differences
(The chart lists the old NCAA shot clock rule, not the current one.)

I also like the fast restart in FIBA. The piddling around after the ball goes out of bounds is annoying.

(03-30-2017 02:09 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  The last two minutes of the game drives me nuts. Takes forever because of all the "unintentional fouling".

I just don't understand why a team should gain by fouling. In the last two minutes........ change the rule so that the team fouled gets the free shots AND the ball out of bounds. Like a technical foul.

Stop all of the ridiculous fouling, to make the opposing team shoot free throws and hope they miss.

In theory, I might agree with you. But in practice, these rules are designed to pay the bills. ESPN, CBS, Fox, et al aren't going to pay as much when they can't have some reasonable hope that fans will continue to watch during those last two minutes. They want to keep alive the possibility of a comeback, and they want the clock to stop as often as possible to accomplish this (and also to allow for more commercial breaks).

Too many schools have too much to lose financially if end of game rules are changed.

I've been watching college hoops since the early 1970s, and it's just as great as it's ever been, no better or worse.

It's been remarkably consistent that way despite all kinds of changes over the years.

The only change I ever wanted was the introduction of a shot clock to kill the UNC "four corners" strategy, but in hindsight, that didn't make the game any better. I just "hated" UNC so feared the strategy.

In truth, as Dean Smith predicted, the shot clock would make the strong stronger - UNC has won 4 national titles since it was introduced and are on the verge of a fifth, they had only won one before then, and four corners games had a fascination all their own.

And even pre- shot clock, most games ended 70-65 just like they do now.

(03-30-2017 02:09 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  The last two minutes of the game drives me nuts. Takes forever because of all the "unintentional fouling".

I just don't understand why a team should gain by fouling. In the last two minutes........ change the rule so that the team fouled gets the free shots AND the ball out of bounds. Like a technical foul.

Stop all of the ridiculous fouling, to make the opposing team shoot free throws and hope they miss.

But what if it's a 1 point game and it's not an intentional foul? You want refs making a judgement call like that?

BTW this guy wants to eliminate all offensive fouls and wants the defense to not to be able to be in the paint. He's an idiot.

(03-31-2017 08:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I've been watching college hoops since the early 1970s, and it's just as great as it's ever been, no better or worse.

It's been remarkably consistent that way despite all kinds of changes over the years.

The only change I ever wanted was the introduction of a shot clock to kill the UNC "four corners" strategy, but in hindsight, that didn't make the game any better. I just "hated" UNC so feared the strategy.

In truth, as Dean Smith predicted, the shot clock would make the strong stronger - UNC has won 4 national titles since it was introduced and are on the verge of a fifth, they had only won one before then, and four corners games had a fascination all their own.

And even pre- shot clock, most games ended 70-65 just like they do now.

During those "four corners" years before the shot clock, UNC was averaging more than 80 points a game (for example in the '76-'77 season they averaged 83.6). That was an extremely efficient offense, usually resulting in a lay up due to spreading the floor and opening up the lane. I don't think anyone ever retroactively went back to view tape to see how many times UNC took a shot within 30 seconds while running the four corners, but I believe it was more often than not.

It wasn't just a stalling tactic.

the rule that they need to do is like international ball if offensive team shoots and misses but gets off rebound, they don't reset the shot clock full, but they take it to for international ball 14 seconds. For college game, it'd be 20 seconds.

(03-30-2017 05:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 02:09 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  The last two minutes of the game drives me nuts. Takes forever because of all the "unintentional fouling".

I just don't understand why a team should gain by fouling. In the last two minutes........ change the rule so that the team fouled gets the free shots AND the ball out of bounds. Like a technical foul.

Stop all of the ridiculous fouling, to make the opposing team shoot free throws and hope they miss.

I wouldn't want to totally take that away. But it has gotten ridiculous. That's why I was suggesting the 3 to make 2.

A radical change would be 3 shots to make 3 after a certain number of fouls in the last 2 minutes.

That would certainly be an improvement.

(03-31-2017 08:43 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 02:09 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  The last two minutes of the game drives me nuts. Takes forever because of all the "unintentional fouling".

I just don't understand why a team should gain by fouling. In the last two minutes........ change the rule so that the team fouled gets the free shots AND the ball out of bounds. Like a technical foul.

Stop all of the ridiculous fouling, to make the opposing team shoot free throws and hope they miss.

But what if it's a 1 point game and it's not an intentional foul? You want refs making a judgement call like that?

Then do not foul. You do have a point, so maybe one free shot and the ball out of bounds would be better. Just stop the current system. When it is obvious the foul is intentional call intentional.

(03-31-2017 08:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I've been watching college hoops since the early 1970s, and it's just as great as it's ever been, no better or worse.

It's been remarkably consistent that way despite all kinds of changes over the years.

The only change I ever wanted was the introduction of a shot clock to kill the UNC "four corners" strategy, but in hindsight, that didn't make the game any better. I just "hated" UNC so feared the strategy.

In truth, as Dean Smith predicted, the shot clock would make the strong stronger - UNC has won 4 national titles since it was introduced and are on the verge of a fifth, they had only won one before then, and four corners games had a fascination all their own.

And even pre- shot clock, most games ended 70-65 just like they do now.

In the 80s, BE rugby replaced basketball. There were a lot of 100 point games in the 70s (not that it was most of them). BE rugby dropped it into the 50s and 60s. The 3 point shot and shot clock picked up the scoring again.

(03-31-2017 10:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 08:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I've been watching college hoops since the early 1970s, and it's just as great as it's ever been, no better or worse.

It's been remarkably consistent that way despite all kinds of changes over the years.

The only change I ever wanted was the introduction of a shot clock to kill the UNC "four corners" strategy, but in hindsight, that didn't make the game any better. I just "hated" UNC so feared the strategy.

In truth, as Dean Smith predicted, the shot clock would make the strong stronger - UNC has won 4 national titles since it was introduced and are on the verge of a fifth, they had only won one before then, and four corners games had a fascination all their own.

And even pre- shot clock, most games ended 70-65 just like they do now.

During those "four corners" years before the shot clock, UNC was averaging more than 80 points a game (for example in the '76-'77 season they averaged 83.6). That was an extremely efficient offense, usually resulting in a lay up due to spreading the floor and opening up the lane. I don't think anyone ever retroactively went back to view tape to see how many times UNC took a shot within 30 seconds while running the four corners, but I believe it was more often than not.

It wasn't just a stalling tactic.

The four corners "offense" certainly wasn't just a set play to generate layup opportunities...

http://blog.syracuse.com/sports/2012/04/...e_3-p.html

Quote:On February 24, 1979, fourth-ranked North Carolina made its annual trip to Cameron Indoor Stadium to play sixth-ranked Duke. Tar Heels coach Dean Smith ran his famous Four Corners offense in an effort to force the Blue Devils out of their zone, but Duke wouldn’t budge. After the Blue Devils scored the game’s opening bucket, Carolina held the ball for 11 minutes. The score at halftime was 7-0 in Duke’s favor. The Blue Devils eventually won by those seven points, 47-40.

I grew to like the NIT foul rule where they started over at the 10 minute mark. None of the games I watched turned into a free throw shooting contest at the end. The games didn't get bogged down and where enjoyable to watch.

(03-31-2017 08:43 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-30-2017 02:09 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  The last two minutes of the game drives me nuts. Takes forever because of all the "unintentional fouling".

I just don't understand why a team should gain by fouling. In the last two minutes........ change the rule so that the team fouled gets the free shots AND the ball out of bounds. Like a technical foul.

Stop all of the ridiculous fouling, to make the opposing team shoot free throws and hope they miss.

But what if it's a 1 point game and it's not an intentional foul? You want refs making a judgement call like that?

Then don't foul.

I also like the rule that any foul results in the team that was fouled getting the ball back.

Just call basket interferrence when a player sticks his hand up through the rim to block a shot.