Stall Ball ...

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think the shot clock is coming.

Disagree...between the additional expense (it would have to be 100% adoption state wide. That’s a MASSIVE investment in my state) and the heightened need for qualified table personnel, I don’t think it will happen any time soon.

The truth is that “stall ball” is employed ina tiny percentage of games. It only gets discussed (the need for a shot clock) because of sensationalized headlines and social media hype.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

Disagree...between the additional expense (it would have to be 100% adoption state wide. That’s a MASSIVE investment in my state) and the heightened need for qualified table personnel, I don’t think it will happen any time soon.

The truth is that “stall ball” is employed ina tiny percentage of games. It only gets discussed (the need for a shot clock) because of sensationalized headlines and social media hype.

Massive investment? North and South Dakota are about as conservative as they come. If both of those states can make the change, any state can do it. Finding table personal has also been a challenge that is not really challenging. I have officiated in some very small, rural, communities and they get it done.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by CJP

Massive investment? North and South Dakota are about as conservative as they come. If both of those states can make the change, any state can do it. Finding table personal has also been a challenge that is not really challenging. I have officiated in some very small, rural, communities and they get it done.

North and South Dakota are also as sparsely populated as they come. I’m in Florida...there has to be THOUSANDS of high schools here so I think it would be a massive investment.

Maybe it’s our distracted student population or (lack of) basketball popularity, but table personnel are VERY challenging here. A shot clock will not help our cause in my opinion.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

North and South Dakota are also as sparsely populated as they come. I’m in Florida...there has to be THOUSANDS of high schools here so I think it would be a massive investment.

Maybe it’s our distracted student population or (lack of) basketball popularity, but table personnel are VERY challenging here. A shot clock will not help our cause in my opinion.

I know one school paid about $7500 (installed) for new shot clock equipment. It is not that expensive.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by CJP

I know one school paid about $7500 (installed) for new shot clock equipment. It is not that expensive.

That is more than I will make officiating for the entire season!
So it would more than double a school’s expense for basketball. In other words the school could pay for all of the officials for the entire season for less than that amount.

Not likely that shot clocks are coming.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That is more than I will make officiating for the entire season!
So it would more than double a school’s expense for basketball. In other words the school could pay for all of the officials for the entire season for less than that amount.

Not likely that shot clocks are coming.

It would not double the schools basketball budget. Don't be so dramatic.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by CJP

It would not double the schools basketball budget. Don't be so dramatic.

Well, are you sure? What would the rule be? Only varsity? There are schools that have multiple gyms. So it could drastically increase the budget of many schools. Heck schools a few years ago were complaining about not being able to buy new uniforms in just one sport, so not sure why this is not a bigger expense. Granted it might be mostly a one-time big expense up front, but that is still a big expense.

Peace

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by CJP

I know one school paid about $7500 (installed).... It is not that expensive.

That’s a hell of a lot more than I would have guessed...that IS expensive.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by CJP

I know one school paid about $7500 (installed) for new shot clock equipment. It is not that expensive.

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

That’s a hell of a lot more than I would have guessed...that IS expensive.

I'm in the "expensive" camp. Let's assume a school hosts 50 combined varsity and JV games in a season. Now take the cost of the shot clock and divide by 50 to get $150/per game. To reduce that down to the $5 raise that a 3-person official in, say, Wisconsin, could certainly use would take 10 years (150/10=15, 15/3=5). So investing in a shot clock could conceivably set back a modest $5 officials' pay raise by 10 years (and that's just the varsity officials; this says nothing for sub-varsity officials). That would be a significant loss in pay after inflation.

I'm in a state right now where I think the pay is frankly too high, but in lots of places it's way too low with severe reluctance to raise it. Yet we feel obligated to mandate a shot clock? Yeah....no wonder Wisconsin reconsidered it's shot clock dictum last year. That was a smart decision.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I'm in a state right now where I think the pay is frankly too high ...

In the words of Isaac Hayes, "Shut your mouth".

[griblets]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I’m in Florida...there has to be THOUSANDS of high schools here so I think it would be a massive investment.

Maybe it’s our distracted student population or (lack of) basketball popularity, but table personnel are VERY challenging here. A shot clock will not help our cause in my opinion.

I'm in FL, too, and I couldn't agree more. The expense would be enormous and not worth the "benefit." Some schools barely have a functioning game clock, let alone a shot clock. We often can't get personnel who can properly start and stop the game clock.

Adding a shot clock in FL would create many more problems than it would solve.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by griblets

Some schools barely have a functioning game clock, let alone a shot clock. We often can't get personnel who can properly start and stop the game clock.

Here in overly expensive and overly taxed Connecticut, we always hear about how cheap it is to live down South. Maybe now I know why?

[Pantherdreams]

Almost every game i officiate has a shot clock now so bias beware.

I don't have a dog in the fight. As an official there is definitely less for me to manage and the table to manage when there is no shot clock. Teams tend to make the game easier or more difficult to officiate not the built in pace or deliberate play.

As a basketball person I think everyone should have to play with a shot clock. There are good and bad teams and good and bad basketball with both. However, shot clock basketball puts the game back in kids hands. I see more kids who are trained to play, more kids taking shots, more coaches who have to communicate with players rather than direct players. I think the coaches have to be better at connecting, teaching and developing players in shot clock game as their work has to be done before they hand it over to the kids. The no shot clock game allows the game to be about fewer kids, possessions, and players and be more coach controlled.

As an official I could care less one way or the other. As a basketball fan and ambassador give the shot clock game and type of players/coaches everytime.

[SC Official]

This is such a solution looking for a problem.

If you operate under the assumption that this type of basketball is an abomination and should be banned, the reality is that it's only employed in a microscopic percentage of high school games. Based on social media you would think half of the high school coaches in the country employ stall ball; that's simply not true. Why don't more defenses pressure opponents that play this style of offense and force them to do something?

Cost is a big deal whether or not people like to hear it. Granted, I find it humorous to hear schools b*tch and moan about not having money to give officials a modest pay increase while simultaneously rolling out the "latest and greatest" new uniforms every year and spending a fortune to make their gyms look the best in the state. A shot clock sounds great until administrators see the price tag just for the equipment; then there are the installation costs as well as having to pay and train someone competent enough to run the thing correctly. Heck some schools have scoreboards that are so old that I'm not even sure it's possible to synchronize and wire the shot clocks; so now you're asking them to buy new scoreboards, as well. And many schools have more than one gym.

For as many issues as there are running shot clocks correctly at the small college level, those problems get magnified in high school and turn into big headaches for officials. Also there are so many 20-year "veteran" officials that I would not feel comfortable managing the shot clock and learning all the rules (in many cases they can't even manage the game clock).

What is the reward of enduring these growing pains? To be more like college? To force more (bad) shots?

Also, people forget that this is high school basketball. A coach's job is to employ the best strategy for his/her team to win. At the high school level the talent spectrum is much wider than the college level, so it's not unreasonable that the rules allow for more strategies to be competitive regardless of how "entertaining" they may be. HS sports do not exist to entertain fans nor to "get kids ready for the next level."

At most I could see the NFHS making this an allowable state adoption. I do not see it being mandated nationwide. And if it were it wouldn't be immediate; there would be a 3-5 year buffer to allow schools and states to budget properly and implement all the requirements.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by SC Official

This is such a solution looking for a problem.

If you operate under the assumption that this type of basketball is an abomination and should be banned, the reality is that it's only employed in a microscopic percentage of high school games. Based on social media you would think half of the high school coaches in the country employ stall ball; that's simply not true. Why don't more defenses pressure opponents that play this style of offense and force them to do something?

Cost is a big deal whether or not people like to hear it. Granted, I find it humorous to hear schools b*tch and moan about not having money to give officials a modest pay increase while simultaneously rolling out the "latest and greatest" new uniforms every year and spending a fortune to make their gyms look the best in the state. A shot clock sounds great until administrators see the price tag just for the equipment; then there are the installation costs as well as having to pay and train someone competent enough to run the thing correctly. Heck some schools have scoreboards that are so old that I'm not even sure it's possible to synchronize and wire the shot clocks; so now you're asking them to buy new scoreboards, as well. And many schools have more than one gym.

For as many issues as there are running shot clocks correctly at the small college level, those problems get magnified in high school and turn into big headaches for officials. Also there are so many 20-year "veteran" officials that I would not feel comfortable managing the shot clock and learning all the rules (in many cases they can't even manage the game clock).

What is the reward of enduring these growing pains? To be more like college? To force more (bad) shots?

Also, people forget that this is high school basketball. A coach's job is to employ the best strategy for his/her team to win. At the high school level the talent spectrum is much wider than the college level, so it's not unreasonable that the rules allow for more strategies to be competitive regardless of how "entertaining" they may be. HS sports do not exist to entertain fans nor to "get kids ready for the next level."

At most I could see the NFHS making this an allowable state adoption. I do not see it being mandated nationwide. And if it were it wouldn't be immediate; there would be a 3-5 year buffer to allow schools and states to budget properly and implement all the requirements.

If it was up to me, I would mandate the shot clock for postseason play, because that is where the stalling strategy is most likely to rear it's ugly head (early rounds can have one team coming in who is over matched relative to the other). In many cases, postseason games (especially in later rounds), are played at neutral sites that already have functioning shot clock equipment. For early rounds, I would have nearby sites with shot clock capabilities host the games, in the event that neither competing schools have shot clocks, or bring in portable shot clock units (those can be had as cheaply as $279). In this way, the games that matter in the postseason would have a shot clock, and states would be able to decide whether shot clocks should be adopted in the regular season as well. If enough schools acquire shot clocks on their own, for the postseason or as part of a routine scoreboard upgrade, there is no reason for shot clocks not to be implemented for the regular season. This is exactly what DC charter schools are doing (public and private schools already have permanent or portable shot clock units).