NIT Experimental Rules

[so cal lurker]

From Bleacher report:

2018 NIT to Feature Experimental Rules Including Extended 3-Point Line | Bleacher Report

Extending three point line, wider key, and changing from halves to quarters.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

From Bleacher report:

2018 NIT to Feature Experimental Rules Including Extended 3-Point Line | Bleacher Report

Extending three point line, wider key, and changing from halves to quarters.

Also shot clock reset to 20 on a missed shot. All for halves to quarters, don't have a strong opinion on the others.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by frezer11

Also shot clock reset to 20 on a missed shot. All for halves to quarters, don't have a strong opinion on the others.

Why?
I prefer halves.
My reasons: One fewer possible buzzer-beater attempt to deal with, two fewer intermissions, and my personal belief that the game has better flow.

Fouls can be reset at the midpoint (or first stoppage of play thereafter) without needing to end the period of play.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why?
I prefer halves.
My reasons: One fewer possible buzzer-beater attempt to deal with, two fewer intermissions, and my personal belief that the game has better flow.

Depends on what they do with the TV time outs--there are already so many darned intermissions there's no flow. If they keep all 4 current TV TO's PLUS the quarter intermission, the game will become virtually unwatchable. If they move to just one TV TO during each quarter, the flow will be better than it is now. What did women do with TV TOs when they converted to quarters?

(Personally, I'm not a fan of re-starting the foul count at quarters, but no one asked me . . .)

[Player989random]

The quarters are coming. More commercial time to sell means higher revenue. I like halves, but it ain't the end of the world. Same with fouls resetting every quarter and the bonus at the 5th foul.

An extended 3-point arc is going to decrease scoring, so I doubt that'll stay. Maybe they hope to counteract that with the shot clock resetting to 20, forcing more shots.

And why widen the free-throw lane? They trying to create a lower defensive block?

[scrounge]

I like it, nearly all of them. No real opinion on resetting fouls each quarter, but seems fine if that's what they want to do. Much prefer quarters, like the shot clock idea, the longer 3 pt arc may encourage marginal chuckers to take better shots, etc.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Player989random

The quarters are coming. More commercial time to sell means higher revenue. I like halves, but it ain't the end of the world. Same with fouls resetting every quarter and the bonus at the 5th foul.

Don't be so sure about that one. It has been said the problem with Quarters is they would actually lose some media built in time. And it seems like the committee is not willing to make that change at this point. Not saying it will not ever happen, but the reasoning has to be worked out. The Men's committee does not seem to care what women's basketball does either.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Player989random

And why widen the free-throw lane?

The key used to look like a key:



And then along came Leroy Edwards, George Mikan, Bob Kurland, Bill Russell, and Wilt Chamberlain. As these imposing centers dominated the paint, scoring at will, the key was widened, and widened again. As big men continue to get taller, stronger, and faster, the rules continue to evolve.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Player989random

And why widen the free-throw lane? They trying to create a lower defensive block?

The wider FT lane and extended 3pt arc are supposed to create more space by pulling the players further out from the basket. The idea is that there will be more freedom of movement and less physical play on drives to the basket and cutters through the lane.

A secondary defender has further to go in order to help if the shooter he is guarding is spotted up farther away from the basket.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why?
I prefer halves.
My reasons: One fewer possible buzzer-beater attempt to deal with, two fewer intermissions, and my personal belief that the game has better flow.

Fouls can be reset at the midpoint (or first stoppage of play thereafter) without needing to end the period of play.

I've just enjoyed what its done for the women's game, specifically with the foul count reset. I suppose you're right about resetting at the midpoint, but because that time would vary, I think a quarter break is a more logical time. If they were to switch to quarters and go media at the 5:00 mark, it would be just about perfect for me.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The wider FT lane and extended 3pt arc are supposed to create more space by pulling the players further out from the basket. The idea is that there will be more freedom of movement and less physical play on drives to the basket and cutters through the lane.

A secondary defender has further to go in order to help if the shooter he is guarding is spotted up farther away from the basket.

I like this explanation. Let's see if it plays out.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Player989random

And why widen the free-throw lane? They trying to create a lower defensive block?

1) IMHO, there SHOULD be a lower defensive block. This provides some guidance for when the RA does or does not apply. The Men's rule about not considering the RA for plays involving a rebound and quick drive isn't very good as it stands (again, IMHO).

2) You don't need to widen the lane to create the LDB.

3) NCAA-W already use the LDB.

[JRutledge]

I am not seeing the benefit of an LDB at all. Seems easy or not enough plays even come into play with the current situation.

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Widening the lane won’t do squat if there isn’t a 3 seconds POE to go along with it.

Good idea....but darn it, yet another thing to pull our attention away from refereeing the defense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Widening the lane won’t do squat if there isn’t a 3 seconds POE to go along with it.

Good idea....but darn it, yet another thing to pull our attention away from refereeing the defense.

I don't think that conclusion follows. If an offensive player is in the lane, a defensive player is nearby (or, if not, a basket will follow within the 3-second timeframe). If you are watching the defense, you will see the offensive player and can count.