NCAA rule changes for next year.

[reedny]

instead you would have the 29-chuck offense. When were more points scored pre shot clock or 35 second shot clock?

Watching a team stalling for 29 seconds beats watching them stall for 34 seconds every time!!

 

[Deano]

How about new and better officials!

 

[jvbj01]

A shorter clock would give each team more possessions and possibly help us defensively with the zone by giving to opposing team less time looking for a good shot. I like the idea.

 

[Dave85]

How about a four point shot line? I hate the idea but I've heard other people talk about it.

 

[reedny]

How about new and better officials!

Good idea. Here's a list of requirements for candidates:

1- they actually understand that a secondary defender who moves under a ball-handler who's already in the air ... commits a blocking foul!!!;;
2- there's no such thing as a foul for standing there with your hands in the air;
3- if you call a T on JB for running onto the court, then you'd have to throw Jamie Dixon out of every game;
4- Calls against northern teams should not increase just because the game is being played south of the mason-dixon line.

 

[Dave85]

Good idea. Here's a list of requirements for candidates:

1- they actually understand that a secondary defender who moves under a ball-handler who's already in the air ... commits a blocking foul!!!;;
2- there's no such thing as a foul for standing there with your hands in the air;
3- if you call a T on JB for running onto the court, then you'd have to throw Jamie Dixon out of every game;
4- Calls against northern teams should not increase just because the game is being played south of the mason-dixon line.

I agree with all your comments. Check out this quote:

"There’s no need to rehash Jim Boeheim’s epic court storming at Duke. While he was clearly enraged over what he believed to clearly be an outrageous call, was there an ulterior motive to his madness? Syracuse ranks eight in the conference with 21.1 free throws attempted per game. Virginia, Duke and North Carolina all rank ahead of the Orange. Those four teams just happen to be the top four seeds in the ACC Tournament. The Orange, along with Pittsburgh and Notre Dame, is one of three newbies in unchartered waters this year. If Boeheim’s eruption at Cameron helps earn the Syracuse a few extra whistles against the league heavies in the conference tournament, then the negative publicity that followed will be worth it."

http://sujuiceonline.com/2014/03/11/things-to-watch-for-as-syracuse-approaches-postseason-play/

As I've suspected and posted before. Someone needs to do an analysis on free-throws-attempted and if there's some kind of bias. I just don't understand the charge/block rules at all. It's pure chaos as far as I am concerned.

 

[Easy Goer]

I agree with all your comments. Check out this quote:

"There’s no need to rehash Jim Boeheim’s epic court storming at Duke. While he was clearly enraged over what he believed to clearly be an outrageous call, was there an ulterior motive to his madness? Syracuse ranks eight in the conference with 21.1 free throws attempted per game. Virginia, Duke and North Carolina all rank ahead of the Orange. Those four teams just happen to be the top four seeds in the ACC Tournament. The Orange, along with Pittsburgh and Notre Dame, is one of three newbies in unchartered waters this year. If Boeheim’s eruption at Cameron helps earn the Syracuse a few extra whistles against the league heavies in the conference tournament, then the negative publicity that followed will be worth it."

http://sujuiceonline.com/2014/03/11/things-to-watch-for-as-syracuse-approaches-postseason-play/

As I've suspected and posted before. Someone needs to do an analysis on free-throws-attempted and if there's some kind of bias. I just don't understand the charge/block rules at all. It's pure chaos as far as I am concerned.

I keep hearing/reading that Boeheim's actions were about future games/calls. However I feel if anything the opposite has happened. Has Syracuse had a block/charge call on either end of the court go their way since the Duke game? I haven't really kept track but can't think of one. And if there have been, I'm guessing like one or two tops.

 

[Dave85]

I keep hearing/reading that Boeheim's actions were about future games/calls. However I feel if anything the opposite has happened. Has Syracuse had a block/charge call on either end of the court go their way since the Duke game? I haven't really kept track but can't think of one. And if there have been, I'm guessing like one or two tops.

Someone should get the videos for 100 charge calls and 100 block calls and verify the rules. Whatever the referees call, it makes no sense to me. I bet you if you put 10 referees in a room they would each have a different result on the 100 videos as to whether it was the right call or not.

 

[Doc5120]

Coach on court = Technical.

No ifs, ands, or buts.

Buzz Williams would not make it to the 1st TV timeout, EVER.

 

[reedny]

The new rule (I call it the Brandon Triche Rule) states that a secondary defender has to be set (in legal guarding position) before the offensive player gathers for a shot (goes into upward motion). Before this change, the defender had to be set before the offensive player left the floor. See this article for an explanation: http://www.streakingthelawn.com/bas...rule-changes-charge-hand-check-uva-basketball

If an official doesn't understand the distinction (as was the case in the Duke game) ... he should do something else for a living. IMO, this was why JB was so irate at the end of the Duke game. If you lip-read, you can see him saying, "that's the new rule right there ... that's the new rule".

Since he was absolutely correct, I'm not going to blame him for being irate, and neither should the official. With only a few seconds to go, the official should have circled the other ref's and changed the call, instead of pretending the coach was out of line and double-teeing him. As it was, the official misunderstood the rule, blamed the (understandably) irate coach, and handed the wrong team a win.

 

[JohnCuse44]

The length of the clock is part of the reason that the kids can't score.

Players in college routinely pass up good shots within the flow of their teams' offenses because their coaches have told them to "be patient" and work the shot clock. Teams do this against the zone, but it shows up plenty against man-to-man defenses, too.

As a result, many offensive possessions in college hoops last 30 or seconds. These scenarios see lots of player movement and ball reversals, but often much of that action is wasted by design--it doesn't necessarily function to create better scoring chances early in the possession. In fact, it often operates to avoid them. This leads to plenty of rushed, poorly devised shots as the shot clock winds down.

In essence, the longer shot clock leads to more opportunities for players to be less active in meaningful ways and to take more ill-advised shots. It is wise to remember John Wooden's advice that we should "never mistake activity for achievement."

Good insight I have noticed our team doing this quite a bit this year unfortunately.

 

[SBU72]

Coach on court = Technical.

No ifs, ands, or buts.

I generally agree but in some arenas, they put the bench so close to the court, it is almost impossible to walk in front of it without stepping on the court. Any coach standing and trying to communicate with his team in even a calm matter would end up on the court.

 

[SBU72]

Some of my wants are already rules:

[ ] Freedom of movement to be increased. Anything that promotes movement on offense and hustle on defense rather than clutch and grab (which they are working on now). This has to continue to be called ticky tack until it's adopted by most teams. I don't care if people hate the NBA, the freedom of movement allows for a much better brand of basketball and doesn't reward players that aren't as good as others (or aren't working as hard).

[ ] Fully adopt the NBA rules and spirit of the rules regarding blocks v. charges. Taking straight aim at the hoop and barreling into a defender should never be allowed, but understanding when an offensive player commits to the act of shooting has to be defined better and a bang/bang call should always go to the offensive player. We want more games where a game-changing play is contested at the point of attack (see Rak's defensive play at the end of the game versus Duke syracuse) versus a charge (see @Duke).

No reset on the 10 second back court limit, 30 second shot clock and keeping coaches off the court are all things I agree with.

No harm, no foul. Gain no advantage, no foul. Players bumping into or are bumped but have no effect on the shot, should not be called a foul. Player running into a defender is trying to gain an advantage, a foul. A defender who bumps into an offensive player to throw him off his shot is trying to gain an advantage. If he doesn't succeed, then why call a foul.

 

[Dave85]

No harm, no foul. Gain no advantage, no foul. Players bumping into or are bumped but have no effect on the shot, should not be called a foul. Player running into a defender is trying to gain an advantage, a foul. A defender who bumps into an offensive player to throw him off his shot is trying to gain an advantage. If he doesn't succeed, then why call a foul.

What have we learned from our ACC games. When at Duke, and Syracuse is driving to the basket it's a charge. When at UVA, when Syracuse establishes position in front of a player driving to the basket it's a blocking foul. In other words, the foul is on Syracuse is the rule.

 

[tbonezone]

i'm fine with the 35 second clock. i'm fine with 5 fouls. and i like the possession arrow.
if i were to tinker at all with the rules next year however first order of business would be :

a) limit the numbers of games officials can ref. mandatory two days off between games.
b) a foul called when no time has elapsed off the clock is automatic 2 shots and the ball.
c) officials get just one look at the instant replays and then decide the call within 1 minute.

these small changes would greatly enhance the overall product In My Humble Opinion.

 

[CU44SE]

Dave, college kids today can't score with 35 seconds. You think it would be better if they had less time?

I honestly think it would. Players would be more willing to attack, possibly going to the free throw line more. Also, a quicker paced game will lead to more rushed shots and turnovers which will ultimately lead to more run outs and fast break points. Not to mention, each team will have an increase in the number of possessions. I know some people say 30 seconds, I tend to think a nice happy medium is 27 seconds; 3 seconds longer then NBA and 3 seconds slower then the women's game.

Here are some stats:

The slowest paced 40 minute game possible at 35 seconds would equate to 68.5 total possessions in a game (34.25 poss/team). If the clock was bumped down to 27 seconds, the slowest possible paced game would be played with 88.88 possessions in a game (44.44 poss/team). Obviously every game is not played at the slowest of paces, but this is a starting point. This is an increase of 29.75% and on average, a team would get 10 more possessions a game, which does not factor in anything which I stated above.

Taking the pittsburgh game from this year as an example, their were 109 possessions in the game, averaged to 54.5 possessions per team. We actually played 5 other games below this pace, two of which were actually under 50 possessions a game. Taking what we learned from above, there is a 29.75% increase in the number of possessions with a shot clock at 27 seconds instead of 35 seconds. Taking that Pittsburgh game then as an example, we can assume that there would have been 142.42 possesion's (70.71 poss/team). We played 3 games this year where we had over 70 possessions and a fourth game just under at 69.6 possessions. Those three games were against Fordham (89 points), Cal (92 points), Binghamton (93 points), and the game just under Eastern Michigan (70 points).

Essentially, I believe scoring would go up significantly if the shot clock was decreased. I would also say that there would also be less parity; leading to more blowouts. Which is probably the sole reason why they will not change the shot clock.

 

[donniesyracuse]

Cut the number of timeouts a team can call by three or four. In the last minute of games, teams call timeouts on every possession. It's ridiculous and gets worse during the postseason. Also, I think after a team makes a basket, its possession has ended, so they should not be able to call a timeout.

 

[CU44SE]

Cut the number of timeouts a team can call by three or four. In the last minute of games, teams call timeouts on every possession. It's ridiculous and gets worse during the postseason. Also, I think after a team makes a basket, its possession has ended, so they should not be able to call a timeout.

Hmm personally, I'd rather they change media timeouts to every 5 minutes instead of 4. I think that would be better then taking tomeouts or restricting there use. Obviously that will never happen because that means less commercials which equates to less revenue.