Can anybody please tell me why college basketball still has the possession arrow

[thebigeast44]

One of the worst rules in all of sports IMHO. Jump the damn ball!!!

 

[jgeorge322]

One of the worst rules in all of sports IMHO. Jump the damn ball!!!

Why don't we just have the players race to the end of the court or shoot a foul shot or play rock paper scissor. Why is jumping the ball the solution to a tie up? It is not equitable in any sense.

 

[thebigeast44]

Why don't we just have the players race to the end of the court or shoot a foul shot or play rock paper scissor. Why is jumping the ball the solution to a tie up? It is not equitable in any sense.

Because it's called a jump ball - not a rock/paper/scissor ball

 

[TDTOrange]

Because it's called a jump ball - not a rock/paper/scissor ball

What if we just refer to it as a held-ball? Then what?

How about we do it dodgeball/XFL style, that'd be fun. But it might just result in more tie ups and we'd just be in an endless loop.

New idea, no tie ups ever. Rip the ball away. Strongest man wins. Nothing bad could come of that, right?

 

[jgeorge322]

Because it's called a jump ball - not a rock/paper/scissor ball

Then i propose a name change! I'd switch it to held ball though, not rock paper scissor ball.

 

[LennX6]

Because noone has championed the effort to remove it (aside from Dicky V who calls it out every game). I hate it but it does save time and there are so many jump balls during a game that its easier to award a possession.

What I would like to see done is in the final 5 minutes have a tie up go to a jump ball. That would certainly make it fair especially when you have a situation where a team forces a tie up in the final minute down 2 and they dont have the arrow in their favor.

If I remember correctly one of the reason why it was removed is because of the inconsistencies of the actual toss.

Another thing they can do is start calling fouls on players diving in or on a pile. Eventually that play will disappear , hopefully resulting in less "jump ball" situations.

 

[jncuse]

I prefer the arrow to be honest. I really hate the jump ball because if a guard is involved his chance is much less than 50% - how is that fair if the guard forced the tie-up?.

If anything I think certain defined tie-ups forced by the defence, should result on the ball going right to the defence. For other plays that result in a tie-up, outside of these defined plays should go to the arrow.

For example a scramble on the floor, would go to an arrow. But if sombody ties the ball of someone while that player had clear possesion or was in the process of taking a shot, that ball would go to the defence.

 

[jncuse]

I've always thought that basketball should be the same on all levels and everywhere. Same game duration. Same quarters. Same shot clock and time needed to get it to midcourt. Same lane and 3 point line. Etc. etc. Why should it be different?

No sport has kids play the same duration as the pros. Not good for the kids, and is also a resource issue (gyms, rinks could not find open time in most situations)

 

[SaltLakeOrange]

There is nothing wrong with alternating procession. And I think its predictability makes it more appealing for coaches. If the coaches want to change it back, not a problem, but if it stays this way forever, I'd be fine with it.

 

[inept fan]

To Protect the kids. It's easy to forget that they are just kids.

 

[pfister1]

Question that occurs to me; why was the jump ball at the start of the second half eliminated? If its good enough for determining possession at the outset of the game, why not determine possession after the half in the same way.

For those that want to reward the defense; what if you continue to use the alternating arrow, but don't reset the shot clock unless possession changes. The defense is rewarded when the arrow is pointing their way because they get possession. They are also rewarded when the arrow is not pointing their direction because they have interrupted the offensive flow, and where the shot clock is winding down put the offense into a situation where they must reset but don't have a full 35 seconds to work with to run a play to get a good shot.

Its not that spectacular of a defensive play that you need to reward the defense with a change of possession every time it happens. In fact many times as has been pointed out by the comments regarding the tendency to cause a scrum, its a questionable play ie. foul- that causes the tie up.

 

[cpatrocks]

The last team to possess the ball prior to the Jump Ball situation should just lose the ball. This would then reward the defensive team for creating the jump ball situation.

 

[jgeorge322]

I prefer the arrow to be honest. I really hate the jump ball because if a guard is involved his chance is much less than 50% - how is that fair if the guard forced the tie-up?.

If anything I think certain defined tie-ups forced by the defence, should result on the ball going right to the defence. For other plays that result in a tie-up, outside of these defined plays should go to the arrow.

For example a scramble on the floor, would go to an arrow. But if sombody ties the ball of someone while that player had clear possesion or was in the process of taking a shot, that ball would go to the defence.

just curious, are you british?

 

[Cowtown]

For those that want to reward the defense; what if you continue to use the alternating arrow, but don't reset the shot clock unless possession changes. The defense is rewarded when the arrow is pointing their way because they get possession. They are also rewarded when the arrow is not pointing their direction because they have interrupted the offensive flow, and where the shot clock is winding down put the offense into a situation where they must reset but don't have a full 35 seconds to work with to run a play to get a good shot.

That's the way it works in FIBA. In fact, when a non-shooting foul is called, if the shot clock is above 14 seconds, it stays where it was when the whistle went. If it's below 14 secs, it resets to 14.

 

[SWC75]

There is nothing wrong with alternating procession. And I think its predictability makes it more appealing for coaches. If the coaches want to change it back, not a problem, but if it stays this way forever, I'd be fine with it.

John Wooden was the advocate for alternating possession. His reason: "Because you never know what is going to happen with a jump ball."

Only a coach would think that was a bad thing. :bang:

 

[Charco]

The last team to possess the ball prior to the Jump Ball situation should just lose the ball. This would then reward the defensive team for creating the jump ball situation.

I like rewarding the defensive team, which I don't believe a jump ball does. It just rewards the taller player, which seems particularly arbitrary.

With the current system the defensive team will gain the ball or gain the possession arrow. They can only be in a better situation after a tie-up.

The offensive team will lose the ball or lose the possession arrow. They can only be in a worse situation after a tie-up.

 

[Cowtown]

John Wooden was the advocate for alternating possession. His reason: "Because you never know what is going to happen with a jump ball."

Only a coach would think that was a bad thing. :bang:

Look, - no crap to you, SWC - too many guys are ignoring a very important aspect of this, and that is that coaches like the possession arrow. The actual crux of this lies in the answer to "Why do coaches like it?" Everyone opposed to the possession arrow needs to step back and take a longer view.

Actually, they prefer the arrow is more accurate; because they fear the alternative. And why do they like predictability (or, the elimination of variables)? Because coaches earn their living coaching basketball. Consider two more things, if you will: first, the pensions and stock options in their business aren't great. Second, the players themselves are routinely and dangerously unpredictable. Anyone else remember Chris Webber? How about Scoop Jardine? Want more? Okay, how many practices and games did Terrence Roberts participate in during his 4 years at SU, while never figuring out how to play the same defense they played all through his career?

Now, when strange things happen in their favorite team's games, fans (most of whom are almost completely stimulus-driven) chatter; when they happen a lot, they chatter a lot, and most of it is negative. When these things begin to cost the team wins (think $ - as in alumni donations!), they also begin to cost coaches their jobs. If you want qualified career coaches to run your program, you can't expect them to take chances with their income and subject their families' well-being to a sea of random and often bizarre variables. And this is why they think in a manner commensurate with John Wooden's comment above.

 

[SWC75]

Look, - no crap to you, SWC - too many guys are ignoring a very important aspect of this, and that is that coaches like the possession arrow. The actual crux of this lies in the answer to "Why do coaches like it?" Everyone opposed to the possession arrow needs to step back and take a longer view.

Actually, they prefer the arrow is more accurate; because they fear the alternative. And why do they like predictability (or, the elimination of variables)? Because coaches earn their living coaching basketball. Consider two more things, if you will: first, the pensions and stock options in their business aren't great. Second, the players themselves are routinely and dangerously unpredictable. Anyone else remember Chris Webber? How about Scoop Jardine? Want more? Okay, how many practices and games did Terrence Roberts participate in during his 4 years at SU, while never figuring out how to play the same defense they played all through his career?

Now, when strange things happen in their favorite team's games, fans (most of whom are almost completely stimulus-driven) chatter; when they happen a lot, they chatter a lot, and most of it is negative. When these things begin to cost the team wins (think $ - as in alumni donations!), they also begin to cost coaches their jobs. If you want qualified career coaches to run your program, you can't expect them to take chances with their income and subject their families' well-being to a sea of random and often bizarre variables. And this is why they think in a manner commensurate with John Wooden's comment above.

Wow! All of that is dependent on a jump ball?

I know perfectly well why coaches don't like unpredictable things. They are held responsible for outcomes so they want the events leading to outcomes to be as predictable as they can make them. it's as simple as that. I've always felt the reason why coaches love to practice so much is that they are in control of the practices and not of the games themselves. They can stop the action whenever they don't like what they see and tell the players to do it over again. Their practices are also not editorialized about in the paper, (or on the radio or the internet). That's where coaches live. Games are where they work. When a coach refuses to play a talented player because he doesn't practice well it's not just that the player hasn't paid the price for excellence- he has desecrated what the coach considers to be sacred and thus not earned the privilege to show his talents in a game, even if those talents might win the game.

Thus coaches don't like plays where "you never know what is going to happen", even if fans might be more entertained by them.

 

[Eagles20]

Question that occurs to me; why was the jump ball at the start of the second half eliminated? If its good enough for determining possession at the outset of the game, why not determine possession after the half in the same way.

For those that want to reward the defense; what if you continue to use the alternating arrow, but don't reset the shot clock unless possession changes. The defense is rewarded when the arrow is pointing their way because they get possession. They are also rewarded when the arrow is not pointing their direction because they have interrupted the offensive flow, and where the shot clock is winding down put the offense into a situation where they must reset but don't have a full 35 seconds to work with to run a play to get a good shot.

Its not that spectacular of a defensive play that you need to reward the defense with a change of possession every time it happens. In fact many times as has been pointed out by the comments regarding the tendency to cause a scrum, its a questionable play ie. foul- that causes the tie up.

The shot clock doesn't get reset back to 35 on any jump ball that doesn't change possession. It stays put unless it's under 14 then it gets reset to 14 in college basketball.

 

[TDTOrange]

The shot clock doesn't get reset back to 35 on any jump ball that doesn't change possession. It stays put unless it's under 14 then it gets reset to 14 in college basketball.

Shot clock doesn't change at all in any circumstance when a jump-ball is ruled and offense keeps possession. I think you're thinking of a kicked-ball.

 

[Eagles20]

Shot clock doesn't change at all in any circumstance when a jump-ball is ruled and offense keeps possession. I think you're thinking of a kicked-ball.

Yes kicked ball... Wow I really blew that one lol

 

[Cowtown]

Wow! The jump ball is dependent on all that?

There, fixed it for you.

 

[Cowtown]

When a coach refuses to play a talented player because he doesn't practice well it's not just that the player hasn't paid the price for excellence- he has desecrated what the coach considers to be sacred and thus not earned the privilege to show his talents in a game, even if those talents might win the game.

Thus coaches don't like plays where "you never know what is going to happen", even if fans might be more entertained by them.

a.) Sacred? Nah. It's because it's a team game. We both know you can't prosper in that context with one 'renegade' doing his own thing, while everyone else works at making what they practiced all week work in the game. Think: zone defense . For the committed individual, go play golf or tennis, or X-Box. Or deep-six your scholly & go play for Marist.

b.) Keep in mind what I said, that the coach earns his living doing this, and too much "you never know what is going to happen" is generally counter-productive to sustaining that. One-point-wins on buzzer-beaters are very entertaining, but I don't know a single coach who prefers that to being up 20 when the final buzzer goes. And if you want good coaches, you'll always hire the guy who works toward the latter.