24-Second Shot Clock

[Snapshot9]

The 35 second shot clock is just fine. Most teams press some, at least part of the game, and take 10 seconds off the clock before the offensive team gets set to begin with.

[ShockBand]

I wonder if a 30 second clock would actually make our "disrupt" press even more effective, as it would leave the other team with 5 fewer seconds to get their offense set going. In some ways, I think if you shorten the shot clock you can consider dumping the 10 second backcourt rule, since if you waste that much time in the back you've hampered your offensive time anyway. But I think I would miss the hard trapping press that looks to force the 10 second call.

[1979Shocker]

I think if you shorten the shot clock you can consider dumping the 10 second backcourt rule, since if you waste that much time in the back you've hampered your offensive time anyway.

I don't think the women have the 10 seocnd backcourt rule with their 30 second shot clock.

We could do like the NBA and go to an 8 second backcourt rule. That would really help our press and everyone else's, too.

[RoyalShock]

We could do like the NBA and go to an 8 second backcourt rule. That would really help our press and everyone else's, too.

I'm not sure I like that. Teams, including WSU, will end up blowing through their timeouts just to avoid the violation. That's already being done enough.

I say leave it alone.

[1972Shocker]

I'm thinking that shortening the shot clock tends to diminish the benefit of the X's and the O's and provide an advantage to the teams with the best Jimmies and Joes. In other words, it benefits the Big Boys and the teams full of the best athletes (i.e. last year's Kentucky team).

The playing field is already tilted in favor of the Big Boys.

If they do make such a change will they also outlaw zone defenses. Again dimishing the benefit of the X's and the O's.

Also, these kinds of changes always seem to have unintended consequences.

I'm not really interested in seeing the college game turned into a less-skilled version of the NBA.

It would be interesting to hear what the college coaching profession has to say about this issue.

[Shox21]

Apparently the concensus on this Board is to leave the shot clock alone.

I have no opinion one way or the other but I will try to paraphrase a few of Mr. Fraschilla's points:

The 24-second clock is so short, a premium is put on developing young players at all five positions who can do all things: handle, pass and shoot the ball. Because the short clock requires a number of players on a team who can handle the ball while initiating and creating offense not only for the team but for themselves, a player has to continuously improve his offensive fundamentals. If players start at the youth level learning this you will have skilled players who can make smart decisions if they find the ball in their hands as the clock winds down.

"The perception of international big men, who have developed multiple skills and can play both inside and out, has not happened by accident."

No shot clock in the youth leagues and very few on the high school level means fewer possessions and fewer decision-making opportunities.

He goes on to say that the 24-second clock forces teams to get into their offense quickly and with efficiency. "Smart teams utilize the lower shot clock, defensively, to force tough, low-percentage shots each time down the floor versus teams that lack offensive discipline."

FF believes that the 24-second shot clock would strengthen players' skills and their understanding of the game and that it would enhance teamwork at the high school and grassroots level and would make a much more exciting game for the players, fans and coaches.

He apparently coaches each year at a EuroCamp. This year he experimented with Butler's "quick-hitting screen-and-roll offense with the 24-second clock." He said the players loved it.

[RoyalShock]

While some of his thoughts are sound, I don't at all agree that a shorter shot clock (or using a shot clock) will increase decision-making opportunities. There are 40 minutes in a game. Every cut, screen, pass and dribble are decision-making opportunities. Increasing the number of possessions will only create more "to shoot or not to shoot" decisions.

The point of basketball is to score more points than your opponent, which is easier to do when you take good shots. While the defensive side of the issue makes things a wash, reducing the shot clock puts less emphasis on shot-selection and offensive system execution (i.e. teamwork).

I fear the end result will turn college b-ball into the NBA.

The 35-second clock strikes a nice balance between making it easy to watch and maintaining the integrity and competitive balance of the game.

Furthermore, it will only help the top programs and BCS conferences that already get the top skilled athletes and playmakers.

[Kung Wu]

Does anybody have a link to a "hard-to-watch" game before the shot clock was implemented? I'd like to watch one and refresh my memory as to what it was like. Sometimes our memories don't do history justice and things weren't really as bad as they seemed and I want to feel that for myself. :)

[Ashockalypse]

Well said Royal and you know what? Why the hell don't we fix the broke stuff in College sports and not the stuff that aint broke? Stupid idea. The NBA sucks and this would take us right there.

[SubGod22]

I will say that HS will implement a shot clock when the economy recovers enough for schools to afford it. I believe there are some states that use it to some degree and the Federation wants to add it. But they're looking at 35 to 45 seconds. But the way things are going that's a number of years off.

There's no need to change the college game. It's fine the way it is.

[Kung Wu]

There's no need to change the college game. It's fine the way it is.

Completely agree. I am trying to remember if it was truly even broken before the shot clock. There were some shutdown defense teams out there, sure, but that sure added to the overall strategy mix. Did the shot clock really even make it better? REALLY?

[SubGod22]

Can't help ya there as I don't remember the game prior to the shot clock

[pogo]

There's no need to change the college game. It's fine the way it is.

Completely agree. I am trying to remember if it was truly even broken before the shot clock. There were some shutdown defense teams out there, sure, but that sure added to the overall strategy mix. Did the shot clock really even make it better? REALLY?

Dean Smith and the four corner offense. That should suffice. An interesting story (to me anyway) My uncle was in the first graduating class at the AF Academy and played golf. His coach was Dean Smith. The following fall Dean Smith needed someone to keep team statistics for his JV team and asked my uncle because he was a math/statistics major. He developed the four corner offense at the AFA because he explained to my uncle that he had alot of short slow players. He first used it at (this is my uncles memory) at New Mexico State. His recollection was that the AFA was up by 2 points at half and used the 4 corner offense the entire second half....scored 6 points and won by 4. He said they were lucky to get out alive since the crowd was displeased by the flow of the game.

[SubGod22]

There's no need to change the college game. It's fine the way it is.

Completely agree. I am trying to remember if it was truly even broken before the shot clock. There were some shutdown defense teams out there, sure, but that sure added to the overall strategy mix. Did the shot clock really even make it better? REALLY?

Dean Smith and the four corner offense. That should suffice. An interesting story (to me anyway) My uncle was in the first graduating class at the AF Academy and played golf. His coach was Dean Smith. The following fall Dean Smith needed someone to keep team statistics for his JV team and asked my uncle because he was a math/statistics major. He developed the four corner offense at the AFA because he explained to my uncle that he had alot of short slow players. He first used it at (this is my uncles memory) at New Mexico State. His recollection was that the AFA was up by 2 points at half and used the 4 corner offense the entire second half....scored 6 points and won by 4. He said they were lucky to get out alive since the crowd was displeased by the flow of the game.

I've seen HS teams use it like that to some degree. When I was in HS, El Dorado was playing Ark City at the T-Bird Classic. AC's best player got into foul trouble in the 3rd quarter so the stalled the final 3 minutes. They started the 4th with him on the bench and stalled for 2 or 3 minutes then called timeout to check him in. El Dorado was up about 5 at the time and let them do it, but the EHS fans weren't too pleased. The AC fans didn't care. The Circle fans laughed the entire time. I believe AC ended up losing by one but really didn't stand much of a chance without their star.

The part in HS that bothers me are OT games. I've seen a number of games where the team that wins the tip will hold for the last shot if they can't get a lay up. I saw one game that for 3 OTs they did this. The team won the tip, missed their shot and went to the next OT. It's rather boring and doesn't really teach the kids anything positive.

But again, those are both HS examples of no shot clock