2015-16 NFHS Proposed Basketball Rule Changes ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Hugh Refner

Reducing the closely guarded distance from 6 feet to 3 feet will increase fouls, especially post play, by at least 25%.

Didn't the NCAA do this with womens basketball a few years ago? What was the result?

[crosscountry55]

Some of these suggested changes, like the wider lane, 6 PFs for DQ, advancing the ball on backcourt timeouts and the 10s backcourt count non-reset are pipe dreams until the NCAA adopts them first.

Adherence to the "rules changes trickle-down effect" is a tried and true method of the NFHS committee.

Yeah, except for maybe some definitions changes (SD, post-player, etc.) I see hardly any of these getting adopted. Except that maybe giving states the choice on shot clock use would be approved, because eight states already have them, and if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

[paulsonj72]

How about the halves instead of quarters. We here in Minnesota have been playing 18:00 halves since the 05-06 season and it is going quite well thank you very much. Lower level games are 14 or 16 minute halves

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by paulsonj72

How about the halves instead of quarters. We here in Minnesota have been playing 18:00 halves since the 05-06 season and it is going quite well thank you very much. Lower level games are 14 or 16 minute halves

There was no time period recommended, or even mentioned, in the proposed rule change. It made the list because of the number of positive responses on the NFHS Questionnaire:

10. Would You Favor: Playing the game in halves?

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There was no time period recommended, or even mentioned, in the proposed rule change. It made the list because of the number of positive responses on the NFHS Questionnaire:

10. Would You Favor: Playing the game in halves?

I'm not opposed to it as long as they don't increase the number of allotted timeouts. Six to one, half dozen to another.

I'm sure they'd start with 16-min halves. States that wanted to try (or continue with) 18 would probably do so at the expense of conceding their periodic opportunity for a regional seat on the rules committee (the same way the shot clock states concede such a seat).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I'm not opposed to it as long as they don't increase the number of allotted timeouts.

Here in Connecticut, our private prep school games are played with 16 minute halves, four 60 second timeouts, and two 30 second timeouts.

I really prefer eight minute periods, the "guaranteed" break after eight minutes to catch my breath, both physically, and mentally, and to possibly confer with my partner about how the game is progressing, and whether, or not, we should make any adjustments.

If the NFHS goes to halves, I can live with it. I agree with Adam, "I don't see this as a big deal either way".

[BryanV21]

I don't understand why some people feel so strongly about the halves/quarters argument. I guess it would make the game quicker, so officials don't have to stick around so long. But would it make that big a difference? I mean, it's like the new pace of play rules in MLB, which are shaving maybe 10 to 15 minutes off of a three hour game. Frankly, is it worth the headache? I don't think so.

But if halves were adopted country-wide, then there should be a couple more time outs added for teams. You shouldn't just take away two one minute breaks (the ones between quarters). Even if you give teams a couple extra 30-second TOs instead of full ones.

Heck, I know in some fast-paced games I appreciate the breaks.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by paulsonj72

How about the halves instead of quarters. We here in Minnesota have been playing 18:00 halves since the 05-06 season and it is going quite well thank you very much. Lower level games are 14 or 16 minute halves

I'm sure it's going well. Quarters are working well for us. I don't see this as a big deal either way.