NCAA On-Court Logos

[timasdf]

NCAA Question: The court graphic in the picture shows commercial/nonprofit logos placed on the court between the attack line and end line on each side of the court. This logo placement is legal since the logos do not interfere with any court markings.

__ Correct
__ Incorrect



[B]Rule 1.2.2.4 Commercial or Nonprofit Logos—A maximum of two commercial or nonprofit logos shall be permitted on the playing court and must conform to the following standards:
a. The logo(s) shall fit into a box that is not larger than 3 meters by 3 meters (10 feet by 10 feet), with no more than one logo on each half of the playing court;
b. This box shall be located between the attack line and end line and must not interfere with any required court markings or boundary lines;

***************************************

Based on the scale court diagram above, the Taco Bell logo appears to be a 20' x 5' logo. I answered that the Taco Bell logo is not legal, because is obviously over 10' wide. This was deemed incorrect. Huh?

The only way that 20' logo fits in a 10' x 10' box is if it's still folded before being placed on the floor!

[IK13]

Send it to PAVO. The picture is directly from this year’s clinic powerpoint. Of course, since it is not CRS, do expect to be ignored. While there - maybe tell them that the clinics themselves, in their current form, are outdated and a waste of time and money…

[bob jenkins]

I also missed this one. :shrug: Someone justified it to me by stating that the question asks about placement, and not size. To the extent that's correct, it makes for a poor question, imho.

I do think the clinics should be available as a recording for those who cannot attend in person.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by IK13

While there - maybe tell them that the clinics themselves, in their current form, are outdated and a waste of time and money…

While I agree with your assessment, do not expect it to change any time soon. Our clinician last year essentially told us to save our breath.

Having said that, on this year's questionnaire after the clinic, I did say that it was 30-45 minutes too long and there was no need to do TWO book reports.

[IK13]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

While I agree with your assessment, do not expect it to change any time soon. Our clinician last year essentially told us to save our breath...

I don't doubt it. They are getting paid (by you and me). It's job security.

[timasdf]

Originally Posted by IK13

Send it to PAVO. The picture is directly from this year’s clinic powerpoint. Of course, since it is not CRS, do expect to be ignored.

I know this was from the rules clinic presentation. Still doesn't make it right to contradict an explicit rule.

Originally Posted by IK13

While there - maybe tell them that the clinics themselves, in their current form, are outdated and a waste of time and money…

100% It's especially egregious when many officials in the lower 48 states are a 16 hour round trip drive from the nearest clinic location. Do those officials in Hawaii and Alaska travel to PAVO rules clinics?

I have every intention of speaking with those in charge about this. I may not be successful, but it won't stop me from trying.

[IK13]

...and a new note/clarification re CRS and timeouts today...

[FMadera]

I too struggled with this. I settled on the verbiage of the question which asked about *placement* and not *size.*

Other than that, yeah, it's maybe not the best illustration.

[timasdf]

Originally Posted by FMadera

the question which asked about *placement* and not *size.*

Since a court diagram graphic was included with the question and "placed on the court" was part of the question, I think it would be reasonable to consider "placement" as the logo being placed on or affixed to the court, not the specific location on the court.

It continues to amaze me that those that create the exam(s) don't consider how their vague or incomplete questions can cause confusion and frustration.

The NFHS exams were rife with questions like this in the past. They have been substantially better in the last 10-15 years (though still not perfect - see the 2026 NFHS exam answer of "ball hits a backboard and would have remained in play...").