NCAA-Men's Rule Change Proposals
 

NCAA committee calls for 30-second shot clock among series of proposals to speed up games

Some of y'all need to start lobbying, one of the proposals is to eliminate coaches calling time-outs.

Renewed emphasis on cleaning up physical play on the perimeter and post. IMO, those D1 officials we see on TV all the time are not very diligent in keeping the perimeter clean.

Another link: http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-...kage-proposals

The women's proposed changes are out, too (10 minute quarters, 2 FTs after 5 fouls per quarter, advance ball to half court after TO, 10-second backcourt does not reset).

So NCAA-W is the new WNBA D-League?

If they are getting rid of the request from a coach, that is a great thing.

Peace

And that has been different than what?

Peace

Is that a problem???

This is a bit of a danger line (from ncaa.org's release):

...since screeners aren't currently required to be stationary.

The quote on NCAA.org is interesting:

1. Maybe it's just me but I thought the verbiage regarding screening and post play was already a rule as opposed to a POE on the men's side, or is that just another spot where the two rules committees branched off two years ago?

2. BNR, you've got that right. If the top dogs don't do it, the low end of the totem pole won't either. I know our S-RE has no problem keeping on supervisors to maintain the guidelines. I can call those things in my sleep.

Hard to make good progress on this point when there are people that consciously refuse to call it the way they are asking that it be called. Specifically, the hand-checking absolutes that too many want to still apply RSBQ principles to even though they NCAA and NFHS have clearly stated that the RSBQ threshold most officials use allows more contact than they want before it becomes a foul.

I think we know what they're talking about....the screen where the screener leans out or steps out into the path of the defender at the last moment, creating contact that slows the defender down, and it goes uncalled. It happens a lot.

Do you think the Men's should go to 4 qtrs? If so, would like the 5 team fouls and shoot 2 free-throws?

The point at which you go into the bonus is really no connected to the quarters vs. halves issue.

I can see pros and cons with going with separate foul count per quarter. Whatever the case, it should not be tweaked to shoot fewer FTs overall if they want the game to be less physical. If they eliminate the 1+1, that would allow a team a few more fouls give in some cases.

I know we think we know but remember the second time NCAAM changed the LGP rule for an airborne shooter and the initial interp was any movement by the defender - including backwards - would result in a blocking foul?

That's why I get concerned sometimes.

I do not understand what the big deal is about coaches calling timeouts. It doesn't add any time to the game.

I had a post a couple of years ago about college basketball changes. Here are a couple more.

1) Three team fouls to the bonus in overtime. There is no reason team fouls in the second half should carry into overtime.

2) Two fouls to the bonus in the last two minutes in the half. It is hard to watch having a team commit five take fouls with thirty seconds left to get to the bonus.

3) Absolutely no need to have ten seconds to shoot a free throw. The only basketball person I ever saw ever bring this up is David Stern.

4) No ten seconds to congratulate the free throw shooter after he makes a free throw.

5) No reset of the back court count if a team calls a timeout.

6) Fouls with under :14 on the shot clock should be reset to :14 on the clock.

Very FIBA like.

#1. Sure there is....it is just an extension of the 4th quarter. Teams should carry with them the accumulation of the foul count unti lthe game ends.

#2. Unnecessary. It is very rare that a team has just 2-3 fouls that late in the half.

#3. Doesn't matter. No need to create violations here for no good reason.

#4. Already a rule, just not strictly enforced.

#5. Doesn't really fix a problem. If a team wants to spend a timeout to get more time, why not.

#6. Why? Doesn't fix a problem. Why should the offense be left with less time to setup and run a play when the defense fouled to prevent the prior attempt.


Keep it simple. The game doesn't need more exception rules like mos these you suggest. While individually not that complicated, why make the rules more convoluted?

Do tell..why is this an issue? Players would be only ones allowed to call a TO during a live ball?

I am not against it because of time. I am against it because it gives a false expectation that we are paying attention to them. Coaches often yell at the wrong official anyway.

Peace

Here's the problem: A1, A2, B1 and B2 are scrambling for the ball on the floor. You're paying attention to the players to make sure no one kills anyone and one of the HCs - either seeing their player get two hands on the ball or anticipating one of their players will get two hands on the ball - starts requesting a timeout. You're watching all those players on the floor and now you have to process:

1. Did the team have control when the request was made
2. Was the person who made the request actually the HC

All the while you don't want to take your eyes off the players. It happens to all of us and, generally, we all hate it when it does.

Camron,

I get the impression he could have proposed eliminating spousal abuse and you would have shot it down :)

Nah, I'd go for that one. :)


Sometimes, people just want to change things to change things without having any good reason to do so.