Someone competent to run it. I have run into enough problems in my college games.

And partners who will know WTF the rules are in regards to the shot clock at the HS level.

Please, No Shot Clock In Connecticut ...
 

Connecticut only uses a shot clock for private prep school games at the varsity level, not at lower level games. Even though I review the shot clock rules before each private prep school game that I work, I always hope that my partner is a college official.

It doesn't help that the shot clock operator is usually a student, and is often female student for a boys game. Her secondary job is to operate the shot clock after her primary job of flirting with the cute prep school boys.

I wonder what the average cost was to lay down 3 point lines and what problem existed so that it had to be implemented? I'm guessing there wasn't much resistance to that particular change.

Point is, as past has shown, sometimes things are implemented regardless.

I am sure a 3 point line was a lot easier to add than a shot clock. And a shot clock that works properly and is easy to use.

Again, I would never cost is the only issue. I just think that it takes another level of game awareness to use that device and to catch mistakes. As stated, I see enough mistakes at the lower level college level. And the good teams that I see, do not often need a shot clock anyway. What I think we might see is more forced shots or bad shots because there is a shot clock. I still see scores in the 30s in many cases because not all high school teams can shoot.

Peace

How much does it cost to pay a three point line operator and how often do the lines need to be maintained?

Maintenance ...
 

Back when I was coaching middle school basketball, the gymnasium floor would be stripped, sanded, lines repainted, and varnished, every several years, or so. And, if I remember correctly, it wasn't cheap. The floor was simple revarnished every year, or so.

Welpe and Rut said it well. I'll just add that there's far more involved with implementing a shot clock than a three point line. They're both fruits, but it's still apples and oranges.

But that was and is being done regardless of adding new lines. For a lot of courts the lbs could have been added at a normal repaint time.

I referee in North Dakota and we have had a shot clock (10 years) for quite few years (we also adopted the 3 point line in the 1982-83 basketball season...as you can imagine ND hasn't had a voice on the NF rules committee for quite some time). It started with our bigger school classification and is now implemented for both divisions (yes, we are that small and have only 2 classes of basketball:):)).

I agree with both Pantherdreams and JRuts original comments on the issue.

As an official (and a parent), this is what I have experienced:

1) Games are much more enjoyable to work. Constant action is dictated by the shot clock and coaches have adjusted.

2) More kids are playing and therefore coaches are developing and spending more time with kids. Even the smallest schools are better at developing players because the constant action requires deeper benches. Historically, we saw teams with shallow benches slow play down to help keep their players fresh.

3) I officiated college basketball for 20 years and the number of problems with shot clock operators at the varsity level isn't a whole lot different than the small college level. We use the shot clock in subvarsity contests (soph and JV) and just like we train players, coaches, timers, and scorers....shot clock operators learn the trade as well at this level.

4) In my opinion, the shot clock has made the game different and for the better. I also live in a border city and our group covers Minnesota as well. Most of us would like to see Minnesota adapt the shot clock....it is more fun to officiate.

5) The vast majority of our games are covered with 3 officials....primarily because the coaches and administrators saw the need with the additional constant action both offensively and defensively.

6) The initial resistance due to cost was relatively short-lived, as it was seen that the benefits far outweighed the negatives. Around here it meant that a team delayed new uniform purchases for 1 year.

Just some thoughts from a guy who has lived and continues to live both worlds. The game of high school basketball is fine either way, no right or wrong...it is just my opinion that the games are more fun work and more kids are being developed and playing. We are here to make our game the best that it can be, I don't care if that benefits the college game or not...only interested in the impact on our game.

PS

North Dakota also implemented the Restricted Arc this year for our bigger shcools. I, personally, was not a big fan in the beginning. But, I was proven wrong....absolutely loved it, coaches loved it, and the players loved it. Really improved the game under the basket....I didn't think high school kids could adjust, but I was wrong. It is here to stay in our small part of the world.

The next question I want to know NDref, do you have more college players playing high school than other areas?

I only ask because we have plenty from my area and we have not had a shot clock. Even AAU games do not have a shot clock for the most part either (actually I have never done and AAU game with one in this area).

If they changed I would adjust just like any other rule, but I do not think it is necessary for what Geno was talking about. Or maybe that is for the women's game, and we have a lot of college players even in his program that seem to be doing just fine.

Peace

Jeff,

No, we do not have more college players...probably less due to population, geography, and demographics. I agree with your comments regarding Geno....I see them as mostly self-serving on his part.

I was just sharing my thoughts and experience as it relates to high school basketball in my part of the world. I would say, however, that the shot clock has improved girls basketball overall more than boys basketball in our state. It has made it harder to "hide" players and rely on star players....hence my earlier comments regarding developing players and extending the bench.

We all take pride in our avocation and adjust to what is asked of us....it is just what we do.

Take care.

I was only trying to relate to Geno's synopsis. I am sure the population is not that big, but just in my immediate area, we have a lot of good D1 players who are making a difference in both genders. Because if there are not more coming from your area at least related to the population, then it must not be working the way he suggest.

Peace

Jeff,

You are correct, it is not working in the way he sees it; but adding value in other ways that I feel help the game at the high school level. Thanks for the positive dialogue.