"4 Quarters + Team Fouls + Free Throws" - NCAA Rules Experiment 2017

[WheatShock]

I've never liked the NBA ruling that the bonus is always two shots. My thought is that the second shot should be earned: either by making the first or being fouled into the double bonus.

I would prefer eliminating the double bonus entirely. Make everything in the bonus a 1 & 1 unless its a shooting foul.

[WuDrWu]

Why change something that isn't broken? I don't think the 4 quarters thing does anything but generate more commercial advertising monies. I also don't like the foul thing. There's so much strategy that goes into the 1-and-1 shooting. Why change that?

Yes, let's keep trying to be like the NBA in everything as if that's what everybody wants. People watch college basketball because it's college basketball, NOT because it's the NBA.

That's pretty much where I am. We've done the shot clock, shortened it. Like the shot clock but thought 35 was fine. 24 would be terrible. Eliminated the 5 count, and I despise that one. So stupid. Now we're going to 4 quarters (you know it's going to happen). I'm not terribly against this as going from 8 timeouts to 6 a game is a good thing. I guess I kind of like resetting the fouls, but not eliminating the 1-1. I HATE that.

And in general, more like the NBA is NOT good.

[pie n eye]

It's not screwed up. The first time out of the second half does not apply to the rule, so that's when you would have seen the back to back stopages.

Ok, that makes sense then.

[SirShoxAlot]

After some thought, there is one aspect of this that I like. If they're going to call games tight like they try to at the beginning of each season, resetting team fouls every 10 minutes is a good idea. It's so hard to watch when both teams have eight fouls by the under 12 media timeout and the rest of the half just drags.

Of course, just letting the players play would be even better and eliminate the need for the rule change.

[Heinro]

That's pretty much where I am. We've done the shot clock, shortened it. Like the shot clock but thought 35 was fine. 24 would be terrible. Eliminated the 5 count, and I despise that one. So stupid. Now we're going to 4 quarters (you know it's going to happen). I'm not terribly against this as going from 8 timeouts to 6 a game is a good thing. I guess I kind of like resetting the fouls, but not eliminating the 1-1. I HATE that.

And in general, more like the NBA is NOT good.

I agree entirely with both you and Fever. If I wanted to watch the NBA, I would. I'm not sure how it would work, but I doubt they would elimitate a media timeout. I would almost consider it more likely that they add a 1 minute timeout at the 10 minute mark thus making it the under 4s and an under 10. Doing away with the 1-1 would suck, I'd prefer WheatShock's method and make very freethrow a 1-1. You want to talk about increasing game flow, less 2 shot fouls.

Lots of the rule changes lately have sucked, imo. Some of the technical rules are terrible.

How about we actually implement some rules that would improve the college game like reviewing goaltends and adding a breakway rule to college basketball?

[WuShock16]

But back to media timeouts, I thought there was a rule implemented recently that if a timeout was called within a certain time period of the media timeout, that it would count as the media timeout. I've noticed numerous times this year that coaches have called timeouts with say 12:08 left, the timeout ensues, then the next stoppage of play at say 11:42, they do the media timeout. Am I missing something? Was it too big of a $$$$$$$$$$$$ hit to the NCAA that they repealed it? So much for helping the flowwwwww of the game$$$$$$$$$$..

No rule repeal. It's just that they kept the rule that says that the first second half timeout automatically becomes a full timeout that doesn't convert into a media timeout. In the NCAA Tournament, I believe the first timeout of each half converts to a full timeout, not just the second half.

Say what you want about the wisdom of doing that, but that's the explanation to your question.

[ShockCrazy]

That's pretty much where I am. We've done the shot clock, shortened it. Like the shot clock but thought 35 was fine. 24 would be terrible. Eliminated the 5 count, and I despise that one. So stupid. Now we're going to 4 quarters (you know it's going to happen). I'm not terribly against this as going from 8 timeouts to 6 a game is a good thing. I guess I kind of like resetting the fouls, but not eliminating the 1-1. I HATE that.

And in general, more like the NBA is NOT good.

I know most people view this as moving towards the NBA. But men's college basketball is the only place where basketball is played in halves. Doesn't happen in highschool or any FIBA competition. Also the bonus rules are the same at all levels above highschool.

[WSUwatcher]

Finally someone got it right, SC -- if I hadn't gone into the kitchen to help my wife clean up the debacle resulting from her helping our 9-year-old bake Valentine's cookies for school tomorrow, I'd have responded directly to Doc and beaten you to the punch. So kudos.

I'm not a huge fan of changing rules just for the sake of doing it, but in this case the question isn't why the men's college game might be heading in the direction of four quarters; it's why the US college game -- and, again, specifically the US MEN'S college version of the game -- should be different from basketball everywhere else and at every other level. If we're that determined to preserve the legacy of James Naismith, what the hell; let's reinstall the peach baskets.

Personally, I have to admit I'll be a little nostalgic myself whenever the switch to quarters finally occurs. But I don't see much use in complaining that everyone else is out of step, especially about something ultimately more cosmetic than substantive. The other question that comes to my mind is, how will a ref like Higgins, who gets paid by the free throw, react when it happens?

[ShockBand]

I'm OK with quarters if it means only three media timeouts per half. Have the "short" ones at the under 5 minute mark of each quarter (probably a 2 or 2.5 minute TO), and a longer one between quarters (probably 3 or 3.5 minute).

[jdshock]

Doing away with the 1-1 would suck, I'd prefer WheatShock's method and make very freethrow a 1-1. You want to talk about increasing game flow, less 2 shot fouls.

The 2nd free throw is hardly the cause of lengthy stoppages. The act of getting everyone on the court to come over and set up for a free throw is what causes bad game flow.

If every free throw were a 1 and 1, there would be a lot more hack-a-shaq style strategies out there. If you're a 70% free throw shooter, your expected return on two free throws is 1.4 points. I don't know how to do the calculation for a 1 and 1* but it would be substantially lower. If you've got a bad free throw shooter who is tearing it up inside, send in Hamilton to foul him constantly.

*math nerds - is it just .7 for the first free throw and (.7*.7) for the second free throw since that takes into consideration the probability of having a second free throw? If so, your expected return is 1.19.

[ShockCrazy]

The 2nd free throw is hardly the cause of lengthy stoppages. The act of getting everyone on the court to come over and set up for a free throw is what causes bad game flow.

If every free throw were a 1 and 1, there would be a lot more hack-a-shaq style strategies out there. If you're a 70% free throw shooter, your expected return on two free throws is 1.4 points. I don't know how to do the calculation for a 1 and 1* but it would be substantially lower. If you've got a bad free throw shooter who is tearing it up inside, send in Hamilton to foul him constantly.

*math nerds - is it just .7 for the first free throw and (.7*.7) for the second free throw since that takes into consideration the probability of having a second free throw? If so, your expected return is 1.19.

Yeah you are right, so for people wondering the math for this is a sum of expected points for all outcomes. So in a one and one situation a 70% shooter misses the first 30% so 0 points * .3 chance, the shooter also makes both .7*.7 of the time for 2 points, so 2*.49=.98, and then the remaining percentage one point is scored so .21 chance * 1 point = .21. So the final sum is 1.19 expected points.

Also if anyone is currently wondering the timeout rules for women's basketball it is here: https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/f...Guidelines.pdf The only change I would expect to the men's game is narrowing the window for the first timeout turning into the media timeout to the way it is in the men's game now(30 seconds before or anytime after).

[ShockerPhi]

I'm kind of torn about the rule change. Having quarters won't matter much either way for me, but I love the idea of fouls resetting after each quarter. BUT, I also LOVE the 1-and-1 situation that college basketball has going for it. I'm not sure how you can incorporate both very well...

[pie n eye]

The 2nd free throw is hardly the cause of lengthy stoppages. The act of getting everyone on the court to come over and set up for a free throw is what causes bad game flow.

If every free throw were a 1 and 1, there would be a lot more hack-a-shaq style strategies out there. If you're a 70% free throw shooter, your expected return on two free throws is 1.4 points. I don't know how to do the calculation for a 1 and 1* but it would be substantially lower. If you've got a bad free throw shooter who is tearing it up inside, send in Hamilton to foul him constantly.

*math nerds - is it just .7 for the first free throw and (.7*.7) for the second free throw since that takes into consideration the probability of having a second free throw? If so, your expected return is 1.19.

I agree going strictly to 1 and 1 could bring rise to some interesting and not necessarily viewer friendly strategies. However, please hack our Shaq. He's shooting 78% from the line this year. Incredible for a big man. In general we're an outstanding FT shooting team. Overall 72% with eight players over 70%.

[im4wsu]

In 1951-'52, '52-'53, and '53-'54, games were four ten minute quarters.

http://www.orangehoops.org/NCAA/NCAA%20Rule%20Changes.htm

[WheatShock]

I agree going strictly to 1 and 1 could bring rise to some interesting and not necessarily viewer friendly strategies. However, please hack our Shaq. He's shooting 78% from the line this year. Incredible for a big man. In general we're an outstanding FT shooting team. Overall 72% with eight players over 70%.

My reasoning for eliminating 2 shots for all but shooting fouls had nothing to do with game flow. It rewards teams who make their free throws and opens the door for more late comebacks. It could also have some adverse side effects and lead to a few interesting late game stratagies. I would also support raising the number of fouls to get into the bonus which would improve game flow.