"Hey Ref, that's five seconds!"

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

The high school game is adopting a shot clock in more and more states. I think it will be the norm in the future. How long that takes, who knows 10? 20 years?

The push-back that I hear the most is the cost to outfit all of the schools with a shot clock.

That is a big reason. I work in a state where they do not even have a play clock in high school football games. A shot clock is a huge cost and I was told that it might be around $4000-5000 to add to any school. I know many schools that might not be able to pay that let alone pay more to officials. Schools in my state are crying poor about a lot of things that have nothing to do with sports. So I can only imagine this is a hard sell across the country. But the cost is not my major concern with this rule, the application is my concern.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That is a big reason. I work in a state where they do not even have a play clock in high school football games. A shot clock is a huge cost and I was told that it might be around $4000-5000 to add to any school. I know many schools that might not be able to pay that let alone pay more to officials. Schools in my state are crying poor about a lot of things that have nothing to do with sports. So I can only imagine this is a hard sell across the country. But the cost is not my major concern with this rule, the application is my concern.

Peace

Schools always cry poor. It is what they do, even when they're flush with money. The Portland school district is on a binge to rebuild ALL of their HSs. Some needed it for sure but they're rebuilding a HS about every two years. They've finished 2. Three more are on the schedule for the next couple of years. They only have 9. They have the smallest class sizes in the state too, by a lot. They all still complain about the money even when they are in good shape financially.

As for shot clocks, I just saw something very interesting...

Form Sautter: The time is now for a shot clock in Nebraska high school basketball | Boys basketball | omaha.com

The most recent publicized statistics by MaxPreps in 2014 show the national average winning score in states without a shot clock is 60 points. In states with a shot clock it's 58.5 points. Total scoring averages are higher in states that do not use a shot clock (104.2 combined points per game) versus those that do (101.4).

The shot clock apparently leads to fewer points scored???? That says to me the shot clock, while it increases the number of shots, increases the number of missed shots more than the number of shots it creates. Hmmm.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But the cost is not my major concern with this rule, the application is my concern.

State interscholastic sports governing bodies, athletic directors, school principals, and boards of education, are concerned with the cost. Many officials are concerned about the application.

I only work a few private prep school games a season, they use a shot clock for all their varsity games, and there's always a problem with the shot clock operator. Literally, always.

If we ever go to a universal shot clock, I can live up to my end of the bargain and learn the rules like the back of my hand, I'm not sure I can say that about the shot clock operators, especially in middle school, freshmen, and junior varsity games. And as important as we believe varsity games are (they count), there are certainly a lot more subvarsity games than there are varsity games, and those poor officials may have to deal with subpar shot clock operators.

(Full disclosure. I'm biased. I like the high school game just the way it is, with no shot clock, as God intended.)