(04-09-2015 10:45 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-09-2015 10:28 PM)FargoBison Wrote:  1. Centralize officiating, conferences should not control this.
2. Reduce the shut clock to 30 seconds
3. Any timeout called within 30 seconds of the 16-12-8-4 minute mark is the media timeout
4. When a player fouls out, get rid of the mandatory stoppage, if the coach needs a timeout he should have to call one.
5. Widen the lane, move the three point line back and increase the restricted area
6. Cut timeouts to just 30 seconds.
7. For the NCAA tournament have an NBA style replay center, it would speed up reviews and increase accuracy.

The rest of the world is at 24 Seconds Shot Clock...the NCAA should do the same.

If you want to watch the NBA then just watch the NBA.

(04-10-2015 11:13 AM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(04-09-2015 10:45 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-09-2015 10:28 PM)FargoBison Wrote:  1. Centralize officiating, conferences should not control this.
2. Reduce the shut clock to 30 seconds
3. Any timeout called within 30 seconds of the 16-12-8-4 minute mark is the media timeout
4. When a player fouls out, get rid of the mandatory stoppage, if the coach needs a timeout he should have to call one.
5. Widen the lane, move the three point line back and increase the restricted area
6. Cut timeouts to just 30 seconds.
7. For the NCAA tournament have an NBA style replay center, it would speed up reviews and increase accuracy.

The rest of the world is at 24 Seconds Shot Clock...the NCAA should do the same.

If you want to watch the NBA then just watch the NBA.

Agreed. Also, not everybody uses a 24 second shot clock. Women's basketball uses a 30 second clock.

(04-09-2015 10:03 PM)Rabonchild Wrote:  First we need to come to the reality that TV time outs for commercials are going to be the way of life for a long time. As much as I don't like the commercials TV pays big money for the games. Thus TV is the goose that lays the golden egg.

This is a very narrow-minded way of thinking. There are many entertainment alternatives out there that do not play commercials the entire program. HBO, Netflix, NPR, etc. This is one of the primary reasons I subscribe to Netflix but not Hulu Plus. Netflix does not show commercials.

More and more I have decided if entertainment tries to force me to both pay for a service and watch commercials, I will be canceling that service. I know I dont speak for everyone but I do represent a certain percentage of the population.

The whole idea that there has to be commercials and timeouts needs to be challenged.

Well, timeouts are part of the game but the way the TV timeouts are handled can be altered.

Stop the practice of protesting a 3 point or 2 point shot made. These reviews take up a lot of time and in a couple of cases took upwards of 10 minutes even after game resumed to make a change in call that would have beaten UK in regulation instead over going to OT.

I notice everyone seems to be focused on the shot clock, and nobody thinks officiating has become problematic.

There he goes! After him! Follow me! (and over the cliff they go...)

officiating has become a big problem. They need to go back like they started calling the games 2 years ago- and when coaches howl about it tell them to stfu. Eventually the coaches will adjust and the game will get a lot better.

The NCAA should also allow coaches and players to complain about bad officiating without fear of reprisal. If somebody sucks as an official, I see no problem with somebody stating that fact publicly.

A shorter shot clock might lead to more possessions per game but I'm not convinced that it will translate to significant increases in scoring. My thought is a shorter shot clock would help the defense more than the offense. It's a few less seconds the defense needs to cover players, protect the basket and avoid unnecessary fouls. For the offense, it's less time per possession to get a player open or a good look at the basket.

(04-10-2015 01:08 PM)prp Wrote:  A shorter shot clock might lead to more possessions per game but I'm not convinced that it will translate to significant increases in scoring. My thought is a shorter shot clock would help the defense more than the offense. It's a few less seconds the defense needs to cover players, protect the basket and avoid unnecessary fouls. For the offense, it's less time per possession to get a player open or a good look at the basket.

from the link I posted earlier in the thread:
The early returns show the potential for a few more possessions per game, but nothing substantial that signals a fundamental change in the game. Entering Monday each team in the CBI, which holds its championship on Monday night, and the NIT and CIT, which resume Tuesday, has averaged four more points and 3.5 more possessions per game than it did during the regular season, according to possession data from KenPom.com. That would make the game as fast as it has been since 2002-03.

and maybe more interesting:
Thirty seconds offers a nice balance, and though there have been fears that teams would be less efficient under even the five-second change. In the CBI, CIT and NIT, teams have actually been more efficient under the new shot clock than they were during the season, going from an average of 1.046 points per possession to 1.063 points per possession.

So the change made the game faster in 13 years. And teams were actually more efficient under the change.

(04-09-2015 10:09 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  All of those suggestions and not one single one that involves lowering the shot clock count?

Because it would not speed up the game. Note his suggestions are referring to the time it takes for a game to complete, not the speed of the action. More possessions equals more stoppages in play. It would lengthen the game to shorten the shot clock. Not to say it is a bad thing, just that it goes against what he is trying to accomplish.

I do think they could remove one TV timeout per half. That is similar to what NBA games have (4 TV timeouts per half, including between quarters, and that is over 24 minutes, and not 20). Yes it sounds counterproductive, but those two TV timeouts would go a long way towards keeping games within the 2 hour TV window. Plus it would fundamentally change the way the game is played, as that extra timeout allows teams to play with shorter benches. It also allows coaches to conserve TO's early which leads to them using them all in the last two minutes.

The networks will make up the commercial time with time left between games they currently don't have. Note I think they should do this for regular season games, but not the tournament. Make the additional timeout during the tournament one thing that everyone has to adjust to.

(04-09-2015 10:03 PM)Rabonchild Wrote:  7. The officials only review for flagrant fouls

Regardless of timing issues, this is a bad idea.

(04-09-2015 10:03 PM)Rabonchild Wrote:  9. Every player gets 6 fouls per game, keeping the best players in the game creating a better game to watch.

This is counterintuitive to your proposal. This would make the game longer, as players can foul more.

(04-10-2015 10:23 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  1. Make officials answer to the media after each game, explaining the reasoning for controversial calls in detail
2. Deduct pay from officials for egregiously bad calls made after a review

While it sounds good in theory, this would really hamper officiating even more. When your paycheck and livelihood literally depends on a single call, you stop calling the game, and start worrying about your job. That doesn't make you do it better: it just makes it more stressful. And leads to lack of focus and more blown calls. And thus the quality will go down.

(04-10-2015 01:56 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-09-2015 10:09 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  All of those suggestions and not one single one that involves lowering the shot clock count?

Because it would not speed up the game. Note his suggestions are referring to the time it takes for a game to complete, not the speed of the action. More possessions equals more stoppages in play. It would lengthen the game to shorten the shot clock. Not to say it is a bad thing, just that it goes against what he is trying to accomplish.

I do think they could remove one TV timeout per half. That is similar to what NBA games have (4 TV timeouts per half, including between quarters, and that is over 24 minutes, and not 20). Yes it sounds counterproductive, but those two TV timeouts would go a long way towards keeping games within the 2 hour TV window. Plus it would fundamentally change the way the game is played, as that extra timeout allows teams to play with shorter benches. It also allows coaches to conserve TO's early which leads to them using them all in the last two minutes.

The networks will make up the commercial time with time left between games they currently don't have. Note I think they should do this for regular season games, but not the tournament. Make the additional timeout during the tournament one thing that everyone has to adjust to.

actually you are wrong- the NBA has 5 per half. 2 in the 1/3 quarter and 3 in the 2/4 quarter- then add the quarter break and it's 6.

What they need to do is have it like I've seen where if a team timeout is called within 30 seconds of a TV timeout, it becomes the tv timeout as well.

(04-10-2015 11:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  officiating has become a big problem. They need to go back like they started calling the games 2 years ago- and when coaches howl about it tell them to stfu. Eventually the coaches will adjust and the game will get a lot better.

I think they need to go back to the way they called it 30 years ago.
If you don't allow players to be mugged, there will be more scoring and the flow will be better. It will also take the officials out of the game as they would not have to make a judgment call on whether to call that particular foul or not.

I'd like to see the old NBA 3 to make 2 rule on double bonus. That would decrease the fouling at the end of the game.

The international trapezoid lane would decrease the roughness in the lane.

The international 3 point line would bring back 2 point jump shots which are higher %, but now aren't used as much because the 3 pointer is worth 50% more and isn't that hard a shot. It would also push the defenses out a little more, reducing congestion.

I'm indifferent on a 35 or 30 second clock, but I don't want 24.

The time outs and fouls ruin alot of the endings of good games for me.

Cut down the number of allowable fouls to 4 per player. Commit 4 fouls and you're out of the game.

(04-09-2015 10:26 PM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  No fouls. Total free-for-all. In turn this pulls in the UFC crowd and everyone wins!

Seems like we pretty much already have that

(04-10-2015 02:09 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  The time outs and fouls ruin alot of the endings of good games for me.

Agree...besides no team should ever have anything to gain by committing a foul. IMO in the last two minutes the fouled team should get the free throws and the ball out of bounds. Stop all of that senseless fouling

Three point line should be moved(try 1 yr. experiment) to the NBA line.More space and room underneath(and elsewhere) for scoring.Also might be less fouls with the extra space.

7 fouls = 1-and-1
10 fouls = 2 shots
13 fouls = 2 shots, plus the ball

Fouls in the last 2-minutes = fouled team's choice, ball out of bounds with a new shot clock OR 2 shots (plus ball if 13+ fouls)

[In Overtime, the fouls reset to 2 (1-and-1), 5 (2 shots), and 7 (2 shots, plus ball). Same rules for the last 2 minutes of each OT session.]

Add a deep four-point line to make things interesting down the stretch.