Rules changes proposed for next season

[OnceAhawk]

After a college basketball regular season marked by low scoring, slow tempo, overly physical play and an endless stream of late-game timeouts, the sport's powerbrokers are making changes aimed to make the game more appealing.

On Friday, the men's basketball rules committee announced that it would recommend

* shortening the shot clock from 35 seconds to 30
* increase the restricted area arc in front of the basket from three feet to four feet, and
* three changes aimed at reducing timeouts.

The strategy is simple: A shorter shot clock is expected to lead to more possessions, a faster pace of play and perhaps an increase in scoring. Expanding the charge circle should reduce the low-post collision rate.

For timeouts, the recommendation are to reduce timeouts from five to four, with no more than three carrying over from the first to the second half; quicker resumption of play coming out of timeouts and player disqualifications; disallowing coaches from calling timeouts in live ball situations; and making a timeout called within 30 seconds of a media timeout stand for the media timeout.

In addition, the committee wants officials to be able to review shot clock violations on made field goals at any point in a game. And the committee recommended lifting the ban on dunks in pre-game warmups. Finally, the committee wants officials be able to penalize players for faking fouls, or diving.

The rules proposal next goes to the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight panel, which decides which proposals will be enacted.

The whole story: http://www.hawkcentral.com/story/sp...l-rules-shot-clock-block-charge-arc/27368185/

 

[MepoDawg#]

The flopping rule won't fly, too subjective.

 

[hooper56]

I got to think Old BO Ryan is going to hate this.

 

[OnceAhawk]

I got to think Old BO Ryan is going to hate this.

it will be interesting; will 5 seconds be that big of a difference? if you read the article, the opinions are mixed

 

[hooper56]

it will be interesting; will 5 seconds be that big of a difference? if you read the article, the opinions are mixed

It seemed like they took a ton of shots after the 30 second mark.

 

[DanL53]

I read on Peegs that in the NIT scoring only went up about half a point. So I'm still not convinced I like the faster shot clock.

I do like the timeout ideas, especially no timeout during live balls. If I understand correctly, that means no time out in a scrum, or when trapped in a corner? I like it.

And as to moving the no charge line out another foot, I believe it just plays into the idea that ball denial defense is becoming more important than ever. Give me the speed guys who can front bigger, slower players! Hmmmmmm, McCaffery already did!

 

[DarkThunder#61]

On Friday, the men's basketball rules committee announced that it would recommend

* shortening the shot clock from 35 seconds to 30 (Don't care, and by all accounts unnecessary.)
* increase the restricted area arc in front of the basket from three feet to four feet, and (Eh sure why not. Might as well...)
* three changes aimed at reducing timeouts.

The strategy is simple: A shorter shot clock is expected to lead to more possessions, a faster pace of play and perhaps an increase in scoring (key word- perhaps). Expanding the charge circle should reduce the low-post collision rate. (Or make it harder for players to take a charge in the lane at all, which is still legal AND necessary, but oh well...)

For timeouts, the recommendation are to reduce timeouts from five to four (yes.), with no more than three carrying over from the first to the second half (okay...); quicker resumption of play coming out of timeouts and player disqualifications (yes, and to go off another point I had heard or was brought up....let's not allow players to treat player ejections and disqualifications and other things of that nature as a quick time out. Keep players on the court and not allow them to huddle by their bench. Refs should also be allowed to tell coaches to go to hell if they don't like these rules and can't take advantage of them especially when it is apparent that they are trying to do so. But that's just my personal touch....);

disallowing coaches from calling timeouts in live ball situations;

............................................................................................


and making a timeout called within 30 seconds of a media timeout stand for the media timeout.

In addition, the committee wants officials to be able to review shot clock violations on made field goals at any point in a game (Might as well.). And the committee recommended lifting the ban on dunks in pre-game warmups (Seemed unnecessary in the first place other than for the hopes that our opponents would have a lapse in judgment......). Finally, the committee wants officials be able to penalize players for faking fouls, or diving. (You mean they want the refs to actually enforce the rules?.....)

 

[DarkThunder#61]

I read on Peegs that in the NIT scoring only went up about half a point. So I'm still not convinced I like the faster shot clock.

I do like the timeout ideas, especially no timeout during live balls. If I understand correctly, that means no time out in a scrum, or when trapped in a corner? I like it. (Yeah but really that's where the issue comes from. It's not the rule itself, it's that certain people don't like that coaches bail their players out with timeouts when they're trapped or about to get a 5 or 10-sec violation. Reducing the number of timeouts will be a better halfway point than to completely take away a coach's ability to call a timeout during the game. If we go by the rule change, a team is on a 15-0 run and gets a break-away steal for a dunk, then it's on the player to call the timeout to "slow the momentum". It's just an extra and unnecessary add-on to me. If a coach wants a timeout then he'd have to yell and/or get his player's attention to signal the ref (who may even be standing right next to him) for a timeout as opposed to just going to a ref and requesting one himself. Say the coach sees something and wants a timeout, but if he can't get his players' attention while they're going through the motions, then his team is f***ed for the time being.

Maybe give restrictions to certain situations as to whether or not a timeout can be called (like when there isn't clear possession). Like for example, after a made basket (or dead-ball situation), once you in-bound the ball, you can't call a timeout until you have established possession on your side of the court. That would eliminate a few of your instances of teams bailing themselves out with timeouts, and maybe even encourage teams to press more, which in turn could open up the pace of play.)

 

[El Simbolo]

Didn't they also propose "enforcing current defensive rules"? What does that mean? And something about offensive verticality too? Hopefully leads to less shoving and overly physical play

 

[hawkeyesports92]

I got to think Old BO Ryan is going to hate this.

Old Bo will adapt and continue to kick ass. They need to get rid of half of the time outs.

 

[dawgs_04]

Didn't they also propose "enforcing current defensive rules"? What does that mean? And something about offensive verticality too? Hopefully leads to less shoving and overly physical play

It means they would clearly define and enforce the rules put in place for 2013-2014. Those rules were enforced through some of the pre conference and then back to business as usual because the coaches own the refs.

 

[vinhawk]

After a college basketball regular season marked by low scoring, slow tempo, overly physical play and an endless stream of late-game timeouts, the sport's powerbrokers are making changes aimed to make the game more appealing.

On Friday, the men's basketball rules committee announced that it would recommend

* shortening the shot clock from 35 seconds to 30
* increase the restricted area arc in front of the basket from three feet to four feet, and
* three changes aimed at reducing timeouts.

The strategy is simple: A shorter shot clock is expected to lead to more possessions, a faster pace of play and perhaps an increase in scoring. Expanding the charge circle should reduce the low-post collision rate.

For timeouts, the recommendation are to reduce timeouts from five to four, with no more than three carrying over from the first to the second half; quicker resumption of play coming out of timeouts and player disqualifications; disallowing coaches from calling timeouts in live ball situations; and making a timeout called within 30 seconds of a media timeout stand for the media timeout.

In addition, the committee wants officials to be able to review shot clock violations on made field goals at any point in a game. And the committee recommended lifting the ban on dunks in pre-game warmups. Finally, the committee wants officials be able to penalize players for faking fouls, or diving.

The rules proposal next goes to the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight panel, which decides which proposals will be enacted.

The whole story: http://www.hawkcentral.com/story/sp...l-rules-shot-clock-block-charge-arc/27368185/

 

[vinhawk]

If they really want to speed up the game they should look at all the foul call in the last 2 min. Some times the 2 min. take a half hour.

 

[Mohawkeye]

Thought I read today they were considering giving players 6 fouls. That would be huge for Woody and Iowa next year.

 

[Legend12]

Thought I read today they were considering giving players 6 fouls. That would be huge for Woody and Iowa next year.

I think that is something being considered for next year's changes. Probably would test it out in the NIT like the did the 30 second shot clock this year.

 

[bouma1415]

Thought I read today they were considering giving players 6 fouls. That would be huge for Woody and Iowa next year.

I would rather see them go to unlimited fouls, but after 5 fouls, the player gets 3 free throws, and after 9 fouls, the player gets 4 free throws. Let the stars keep playing. That is what people want to see...but penalize them for being overly aggressive.

Also call the hand checking on defense, the pushing and shoving under the basket, and the backing into a defensive player while dribbling as an offensive foul. Defensive player has position, so call the charge.

 

[CoachoftheFuture1]

bouma1415, you got it right about the offensive player being allowed to dribble and back into a defender who has established position. That's one of the worst things to happen to basketball. That HAS to be an offensive foul. The defender is entitled to his spot on the floor. Just because the offensive player may outweigh the defender or simply continues to push him back as an offensive technique is no reason to allow this. It is fundamentally contrary to the very concept of basketball as a game of finesse rather than brute strength. Force a defender off his established position by a fraction of an inch--boom--it's a foul. Call it consistently and it will stop. And it's one of the easiest calls in the game, unlike traditional charging.

And it's great to stop coaches from calling TO during a live ball situation, but it should be extended to include players. NO ONE should be allowed to call TO when the ball is in play. But at least these proposed changes are headed in the right direction.

 

[sanjosebill]

Bo Ryan will always adapt. His teams always do. The last 2 years their offense had looked almost completely different

 

[buttermypancakes]

Bo Ryan will always adapt. His teams always do. The last 2 years their offense had looked almost completely different

That's what happens when you have the player of the year and two other 1st round picks. When they can't run their offense through Frank it will be different and back to boring basketball. They will still be good as usual but it took 3 first rounders to make Wisconsin halfway fun to watch.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

After a college basketball regular season marked by low scoring, slow tempo, overly physical play and an endless stream of late-game timeouts, the sport's powerbrokers are making changes aimed to make the game more appealing.

On Friday, the men's basketball rules committee announced that it would recommend

* shortening the shot clock from 35 seconds to 30
* increase the restricted area arc in front of the basket from three feet to four feet, and
* three changes aimed at reducing timeouts.

The strategy is simple: A shorter shot clock is expected to lead to more possessions, a faster pace of play and perhaps an increase in scoring. Expanding the charge circle should reduce the low-post collision rate.

For timeouts, the recommendation are to reduce timeouts from five to four, with no more than three carrying over from the first to the second half; quicker resumption of play coming out of timeouts and player disqualifications; disallowing coaches from calling timeouts in live ball situations; and making a timeout called within 30 seconds of a media timeout stand for the media timeout.


Changes proposed all seem to be improvements. I am not a fan of reviews, except for end-of-game shots or problems with the clock.
In addition, the committee wants officials to be able to review shot clock violations on made field goals at any point in a game. And the committee recommended lifting the ban on dunks in pre-game warmups. Finally, the committee wants officials be able to penalize players for faking fouls, or diving.

The rules proposal next goes to the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight panel, which decides which proposals will be enacted.

The whole story: http://www.hawkcentral.com/story/sp...l-rules-shot-clock-block-charge-arc/27368185/

 

[Titanhawk2]

The flopping rule won't fly, too subjective.

Why? I didn't call a foul but you flopped. That's not hard

 

[EpenesaEpenesa]

They can do what they want, but until the grabbing, holding and getting killed at the rim is consistently called a foul, the game will be low scoring.

 

[Myvue]

They can do what they want, but until the grabbing, holding and getting killed at the rim is consistently called a foul, the game will be low scoring.

To many fouls are already being called. If they call any more at least half of each team will foul out.

 

[DanL53]

To many fouls are already being called. If they call any more at least half of each team will foul out.

No. Stick to calling games the right way and teams will adjust. The threat that teams will keep fouling is ridiculous...they will lose every game they are in! Who the heck is in charge, the officials and the written rules, or coaches!?!?

The NBA made a change. Why can't the NCAA? The only thing stopping it is disinterest and goofs who think lowering the shot clock is good for an offense. Riiiiiiiiiiiight...I'm salivating at the thought of our three quarter court and then trap press causing teams to have about fifteen to twenty seconds to fire up a shot! That's time running out at the end of a game time. Without a play written up at a timeout! We can now expend more energy on our defense KNOWING we don't have to do so for as long.

 

[EpenesaEpenesa]

To many fouls are already being called. If they call any more at least half of each team will foul out.

Who cares. Make teams/coaches adjust

 

[PhantomFlyer]

bouma1415, you got it right about the offensive player being allowed to dribble and back into a defender who has established position. That's one of the worst things to happen to basketball. That HAS to be an offensive foul. The defender is entitled to his spot on the floor. Just because the offensive player may outweigh the defender or simply continues to push him back as an offensive technique is no reason to allow this. It is fundamentally contrary to the very concept of basketball as a game of finesse rather than brute strength. Force a defender off his established position by a fraction of an inch--boom--it's a foul. Call it consistently and it will stop. And it's one of the easiest calls in the game, unlike traditional charging.

And it's great to stop coaches from calling TO during a live ball situation, but it should be extended to include players. NO ONE should be allowed to call TO when the ball is in play. But at least these proposed changes are headed in the right direction.

Your first point has been one of my biggest gripes about college and pro basketball. Why should a guy be able to muscle a established position defender out of the way, just because he weighs more. If he defender holds his ground and lets the offensive player knock him down the refs don't call a foul. So, you are penalized for establishing position and not being large. The defender has established position, the offensive guy shouldn't be able to push him around.