Wisconsin Changes

[ODog]

Originally Posted by Rich

Name one thing about this that is negative from an official's standpoint OTHER than playing 4 extra minutes per game.

Here are two: more fouls, more free throws.

[SE Minnestoa Re]

Originally Posted by Rich

Personally, I love it. Name one thing about this that is negative from an official's standpoint OTHER than playing 4 extra minutes per game.

Sometimes when officiating small schools without depth, the middle of the first half often gets very disjointed. Kids could use the break but coaches seem wary of using their timeouts for this reason.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Eliminating quarters gets rid of two last second shots and two AP throw ins (not a big deal granted).

I don't see a big deal in changing...well except NCAA women just went to quarters, so much for greater consistency.

One of the reasons behind NCAAW's switch to quarters was to fall in line with the way the game is played at all other levels of the sport. NCAAM is now the only code that plays halves.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

One of the reasons behind NCAAW's switch to quarters was to fall in line with the way the game is played at all other levels of the sport. NCAAM is now the only code that plays halves.

Nope, for me NCAAW is the only code that plays quarters.

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Would you really want two extra time-outs per game and a game that's 4 minutes longer? Because you know every coach would make sure to use the "use it or lose it" TO, even if they're down 50.

I'm not saying I'd want two extra timeouts per game, I'm saying that they could be added if the coaches think it's a huge concern.

As for the "game that's 4 minutes longer" thing... it's already 4 minutes longer in MN, so that doesn't really make a difference to me.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

I'm not saying I'd want two extra timeouts per game, I'm saying that they could be added if the coaches think it's a huge concern.

As for the "game that's 4 minutes longer" thing... it's already 4 minutes longer in MN, so that doesn't really make a difference to me.

What's the purpose of going to halves but turning around and giving the teams 2 more time-outs?

HS games are agonizing enough at 32 minutes, I definitely have no desire to add an extra 4 minutes to it.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What's the purpose of going to halves but turning around and giving the teams 2 more time-outs?

HS games are agonizing enough at 32 minutes, I definitely have no desire to add an extra 4 minutes to it.

I'm an assigner for 22 schools for conference varsity games.

I've already had a couple of people ask if the fees will go up since the game length is increasing by 12.5%. I've answered truthfully -- it's unlikely in the short term.

I've seen Facebook threads where others have shut down those questions cause "the schools have no money" and the usual canard of "do it for the children."

All our officials for 2015-16 are contracted for a certain rate. Why should they work 4 extra minutes every night without being able to ask that question (and without being ridiculed for asking)?

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

HS games are agonizing enough at 32 minutes, I definitely have no desire to add an extra 4 minutes to it.

Are you saying you want to take away playing time from those fourth string girls riding the end of the bench?? How dare you!

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Are you saying you want to take away playing time from those fourth string girls riding the end of the bench?? How dare you!

Chances are they will not be playing the extra 4 minutes. (Of course, you already know that)

Here in Oregon, they have a solution for that....the 5th quarter. Some Freshman or JV games are scheduled with a 5th quarter.. It is played 1st and isn't played by the usual starters/subs. It isn't included in the game score. It gives those less skilled players chances to get on the court and play a while....and the officials get 25% more than a 4 quarter assignment.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Chances are they will not be playing the extra 4 minutes. (Of course, you already know that)

Here in Oregon, they have a solution for that....the 5th quarter. Some Freshman or JV games are scheduled with a 5th quarter.. It is played 1st and isn't played by the usual starters/subs. It isn't included in the game score. It gives those less skilled players chances to get on the court and play a while....and the officials get 25% more than a 4 quarter assignment.

That would be nice.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Here in Oregon, they have a solution for that....the 5th quarter. Some Freshman or JV games are scheduled with a 5th quarter.. It is played 1st and isn't played by the usual starters/subs. It isn't included in the game score. It gives those less skilled players chances to get on the court and play a while....and the officials get 25% more than a 4 quarter assignment.

Similar here in Connecticut for many of our public middle school leagues. The extra time is after the "regular" game, usually ten minutes of running time.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Similar here in Connecticut for many of our public middle school leagues. The extra time is after the "regular" game, usually ten minutes of running time.

The public MS league in which I officiate plays five periods.

• First half: Three four-minute periods. All players must play at least one full period. the best players have to start, the next five talented players play the second period, etc. (Exception: Teams with 16 or more players can request a stoppage with 2:00 left in period #3 to enter the players that haven't yet played.)
• Second half: Two six-minute periods. For teams with 8 or more players, players can play no more than 3-4 periods for the entire game (depending on squad size).

The third period can be very painful to watch... and officiate.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

The public MS league in which I officiate plays five periods.

• First half: Three four-minute periods. All players must play at least one full period. the best players have to start, the next five talented players play the second period, etc. (Exception: Teams with 16 or more players can request a stoppage with 2:00 left in period #3 to enter the players that haven't yet played.)
• Second half: Two six-minute periods. For teams with 8 or more players, players can play no more than 3-4 periods for the entire game (depending on squad size).

The third period (where the five weakest players from each team play) can be very painful to watch... and officiate.

They might know it anyway and I'm not one for trying to hide it from them but is it really necessary or helpful to formalize it and declare a certain set of players as the weakest five?

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

The public MS league in which I officiate plays five periods.

• First half: Three four-minute periods. All players must play at least one full period. the best players have to start, the next five talented players play the second period, etc. (Exception: Teams with 16 or more players can request a stoppage with 2:00 left in period #3 to enter the players that haven't yet played.)
• Second half: Two six-minute periods. For teams with 8 or more players, players can play no more than 3-4 periods for the entire game (depending on squad size).

The third period (where the five weakest players from each team play) can be very painful to watch... and officiate.

Well, that is just bizarre. Who is ranking these players as the "best five", "worst five" etc. Seems like something that somebody drew up on paper and thought it was a brilliant idea. When in reality it is an absolutely terrible idea in every way possible.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by camron rust

They might know it anyway and I'm not one for trying to hide it from them but is it really necessary or helpful to formalize it(...)

I've subsequently revised my comment with your feedback in mind.

Originally Posted by jpgc99

Seems like something that somebody drew up on paper and thought it was a brilliant idea. When in reality it is an absolutely terrible idea in every way possible.

I agree. Before I officiated (when I was lived up to my screen name), a friend of mine coached MS basketball and our league merged with this one. Initially, he and his assistant planned their first half strategy not knowing this was the rule until the pre-season league meeting.

The idea is good in theory, but it's not good in practicality/actuality.

Personally, I like what our local CYO league does for its JV level program (grades 4-6):

• All players must participate in at least two quarters (any amount of time in each).
• No player may play all four quarters (doable if the team has 7 or more dressed).
• For games going to overtime, there's no restrictions on who can play in the extra period(s).

This may not be a perfect solution either, but the majority of CYO JV coaches have a system in place to make it work and get everyone in the game within the spirit/letter of the rule. I'd rather see this than the five-period setup popular in the some of area's public middle school leagues.