One thing football got right

[TrollyMcTroller]

Penalties.

I love that in football a team can decline a penalty. I think the game would be much better (especially the end) if teams could decline foul shots.

You'd still have a momentary stoppage of play when the whistle blows, but the coach should be able to decline fouls shots and just maintain possession. It would totally eliminate any advantage gained by "strategic" fouling at the end of games. That would mean in a close game you'd get to see actual basketball being played the last few minutes instead of a free throw shooting contest that takes an extra 10 minutes to run 0:57 off the clock.

I'd probably suggest something like this:

If a foul is whistled, the personal foul (and team foul) will be assessed to the player regardless if free throws are taken or not.

If the shot clock is under 0:25, then an extra ten seconds will be added to the shot clock if free throws are declined.

It's not even that I hate watching free throws. I just hate the mentality of "well, we couldn't take the lead by playing good basketball, so fuck it, let's start breaking rules and hope that gives us enough of an advantage to win."

 

[rmilia1]

Penalties.

I love that in football a team can decline a penalty. I think the game would be much better (especially the end) if teams could decline foul shots.

You'd still have a momentary stoppage of play when the whistle blows, but the coach should be able to decline fouls shots and just maintain possession. It would totally eliminate any advantage gained by "strategic" fouling at the end of games. That would mean in a close game you'd get to see actual basketball being played the last few minutes instead of a free throw shooting contest that takes an extra 10 minutes to run 0:57 off the clock.

I'd probably suggest something like this:

If a foul is whistled, the personal foul (and team foul) will be assessed to the player regardless if free throws are taken or not.

If the shot clock is under 0:25, then an extra ten seconds will be added to the shot clock if free throws are declined.

It's not even that I hate watching free throws. I just hate the mentality of "well, we couldn't take the lead by playing good basketball, so fuck it, let's start breaking rules and hope that gives us enough of an advantage to win."

Man thats tough for me. I get where you are coming from but thats part of what makes CBB exciting, is the pressure to make those FT's... Although my team would be 14-1 right now instead of 12-3 if your policy was in place. LOL. I guess IM ALL IN!!!

 

[gordontrue]

Interesting thoughts.

If I understand what you're saying correctly, wouldn't every game essentially be over once the leading team gets possession under 35 seconds?

I suppose the trailing team can still try to trap and steal aggressively, risking the foul since there's nothing to lose.

The longer I think about the more I almost kind of like it.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Interesting thoughts.

If I understand what you're saying correctly, wouldn't every game essentially be over once the leading team gets possession under 35 seconds?

I suppose the trailing team can still try to trap and steal aggressively, risking the foul since there's nothing to lose.

The longer I think about the more I almost kind of like it.

Yeah the idea is to encourage good defense, instead of just trying to put a guy in a bear hug and send him to the line. Another problem I have with the late game strategy (and the ref's inclination to swallow their whistles) is that it often leads to really hard/aggressive fouling because even when it's clear a team is trying to foul, the refs won't blow the whistle at the end of the game until somebody is practically bleeding.

And I'm sure that free throws would still be a factor at the end of a game (if my shooting guard gets fouled who shoots 90+ percent from the line, and I'm in the double bonus, I'm probably taking the shots) but just less than they are now.

 

[podsox]

college needs to eliminate the 1 and 1. it is basically a turnover in todays game. id prefer that teams are not allowed to foul in the backcourt under 2 minutes. if they do it is 2 shots and the ball.

 

[gpm1976]

I'd like to see flopping & purposely drawing fouls go away as well. James and Wade perfected the art of going up for a shot w/the soul intent of drawing a foul. I HATE this and it's showing up in college now.

 

[jonvi]

Interesting thoughts.

If I understand what you're saying correctly, wouldn't every game essentially be over once the leading team gets possession under 35 seconds?

I suppose the trailing team can still try to trap and steal aggressively, risking the foul since there's nothing to lose.

The longer I think about the more I almost kind of like it.

Trolly....the problem I have with your proposal is the bold above. If I can't stop the clock with a foul, the team with the lead automatically wins the game. They just dribble out the clock.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Trolly....the problem I have with your proposal is the bold above. If I can't stop the clock with a foul, the team with the lead automatically wins the game. They just dribble out the clock.

Well, that isn't true. The alternative to fouling is forcing a turnover. The alternative to that is to play better the other 39:25. It's not like they started the game, down a few points. They had plenty of opportunities to score.

But even if that was true, why is that bad? Why shouldn't the team that is up with 30 seconds left win the game?

 

[Shanemansj13]

So when a team is behind with no shot clock, they would just keep fouling them and they would keep declining the FT's?? I don't see how this could work out.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

So when a team is behind with no shot clock, they would just keep fouling them and they would keep declining the FT's?? I don't see how this could work out.

Why would they keep fouling?

 

[Shanemansj13]

Why would they keep fouling?

Bc if they choose not to shoot FT's, what will happen they will take the ball out of bounds?

So they either foul or lose. Only opportunity is to steal the in bound pass. And there would be rare comebacks in basketball. Free throws are part of the game, it just wouldn't make sense.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Bc if they choose not to shoot FT's, what will happen they will take the ball out of bounds?

So they either foul or lose. Only opportunity is to steal the in bound pass. And there would be rare comebacks in basketball. Free throws are part of the game, it just wouldn't make sense.

Why is an inbound pass the only opportunity to get the ball? Is there some rule against trapping, or stealing passes that I'm unaware of?

Comebacks in the last 30 seconds would certainly be more rare. I also fail to see why that's inherently a bad thing.

And for the record, I'd also like to see what are obviously flagrant fouls at the end of games (no play on the ball) called as such. Or better yet, bring back the "intentional" foul.

Fouls are going to happen. That's unavoidable. But I don't like any strategy that rewards fouling.

 

[jonvi]

Well, that isn't true. The alternative to fouling is forcing a turnover. The alternative to that is to play better the other 39:25. It's not like they started the game, down a few points. They had plenty of opportunities to score.

But even if that was true, why is that bad? Why shouldn't the team that is up with 30 seconds left win the game?[/QUOTE]

1st bold. SU has 142 steals through 15 games. That works out to .236 steals per minute. The chances of getting a steal is very, very unlikely. Especially if the winning team has a true pg.

Yes they should have played better the other 39 minutes.

2nd bold....that's a fair point. In football, the clock runs out that last possession when the team with the ball has the lead. BUT...in football, the losing team can stop the clock with a time out or an incomplete pass, offensive penalty etc. In basketball, there is not an opportunity for clock stoppage when the ball is in play.

In bball, a tall, thick, athletic team has the advantage. The intentional foul is one way to even that out...to an extent. I think you are removing the drama that comes with ending a bball game...the drama that there is still some hope to pull out a victory.

But....ok....the game is down to 40 seconds and trolly you are up by 2. I just scored so you have the ball. I might could go with your proposal if you forced the winning team to shoot the ball. Like in that last 35 seconds, when the ball was inbound, the game clock does not start until expiration of the shot clock or the ball hits the rim.

If I can't foul and send you to the line, there has to be something that makes you shoot or lose possession of the ball.

 

[jonvi]

QUOTE=TrollyMcTroller;4341643]Well, that isn't true. The alternative to fouling is forcing a turnover. The alternative to that is to play better the other 39:25. It's not like they started the game, down a few points. They had plenty of opportunities to score.

But even if that was true, why is that bad? Why shouldn't the team that is up with 30 seconds left win the game?[/QUOTE]

I'm rewriting this...

1st bold. SU has 142 steals through 15 games. That works out to .236 steals per minute. The chances of getting a steal are very unlikely. Especially if the winning team has a true pg or a couple of players that can handle the ball.

Yes they should have played better the other 39 minutes.

2nd bold....that's a fair point. In football, the team with the lead can run the clock out.

In football, the losing team can stop the clock with a time out or an incomplete pass, offensive penalty etc. Which as long as you have a timeout, you can force the winning team to play and make a 1st down or there is a change of possession. In bball, other than the shot clock or turnover or a foul, there is no way to force a change of possession. In football you have the four down or a 1st down rule.

I think your plan makes it harder for a team to make up ground in the last 60 seconds and by doing that you are removing the drama that comes with ending a bball game...the drama that there is still some hope to pull out a victory.

If I can't foul and send you to the line, there has to be something that makes you shoot or lose possession of the ball and not just dribble out the clock.

In the end, I really don't believe as a fan I'm getting as much bang for the buck. I think I like it better the way it is.

 

[dcZONAfan]

QUOTE=TrollyMcTroller;4341643]Well, that isn't true. The alternative to fouling is forcing a turnover. The alternative to that is to play better the other 39:25. It's not like they started the game, down a few points. They had plenty of opportunities to score.

But even if that was true, why is that bad? Why shouldn't the team that is up with 30 seconds left win the game?[/QUOTE]

I'm rewriting this...

1st bold. SU has 142 steals through 15 games. That works out to .236 steals per minute. The chances of getting a steal are very unlikely. Especially if the winning team has a true pg or a couple of players that can handle the ball.

Yes they should have played better the other 39 minutes.

2nd bold....that's a fair point. In football, the team with the lead can run the clock out.

In football, the losing team can stop the clock with a time out or an incomplete pass, offensive penalty etc. Which as long as you have a timeout, you can force the winning team to play and make a 1st down or there is a change of possession. In bball, other than the shot clock or turnover or a foul, there is no way to force a change of possession. In football you have the four down or a 1st down rule.

I think your plan makes it harder for a team to make up ground in the last 60 seconds and by doing that you are removing the drama that comes with ending a bball game...the drama that there is still some hope to pull out a victory.

If I can't foul and send you to the line, there has to be something that makes you shoot or lose possession of the ball and not just dribble out the clock.

In the end, I really don't believe as a fan I'm getting as much bang for the buck. I think I like it better the way it is.

yea I gotta agree with Jonvi on this one. I understand what you're saying Trolly, but it's as simple as this: when you are standing 12 feet away from the hoop and nobody is allowed to play defense on you, there is no reason why you should miss. If you do, well then the other team gets a shot.

You know what I love about end of game free throws? they show you who has the clutch gene! Aaron Gordon is an awful FT shooter, there's no doubt about that. But when we REAAAAAAAALLY needed him last night (and I say REAAAAAAALLY because it's not like we didn't need him to hit the front end of both the one and one's that he missed) he came through and hit two that pushed our lead to 3. CLUTCH, and i felt so good for him

 

[MI Nightmare]

I'd like to see flopping & purposely drawing fouls go away as well. James and Wade perfected the art of going up for a shot w/the soul intent of drawing a foul. I HATE this and it's showing up in college now.

Just now showing up in college and because of James and Wade? Hahaha. You haven't watched much Duke basketball over the years.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Just now showing up in college and because of James and Wade? Hahaha. You haven't watched much Duke basketball over the years.

Wait a sec... didn't both of them play on the 2008 Olympic team?

Coached by K...

Coincidence???

 

[MI Nightmare]

Why is an inbound pass the only opportunity to get the ball? Is there some rule against trapping, or stealing passes that I'm unaware of?

Comebacks in the last 30 seconds would certainly be more rare. I also fail to see why that's inherently a bad thing.

And for the record, I'd also like to see what are obviously flagrant fouls at the end of games (no play on the ball) called as such. Or better yet, bring back the "intentional" foul.

Fouls are going to happen. That's unavoidable. But I don't like any strategy that rewards fouling.

In essence, the team fouling would still be rewarded by receiving opportunities at additional turnovers i.e. inbound pass (steal) trap (5 second violation) jump ball (possession arrow) all while burning minimal time off the clock. I'd rather just see time run off (10-15 seconds perhaps, with under two minutes to go --- and like you mentioned, extend the shot clock if necessary so not to penalize the offense) when fouled, paired with a technical. That would lessen opportunities, force cleaner play, and keep the game moving. I'd also be open to giving the team fouled three shots from the line and the ball back:

An intentional/flagrant/technical....call it what you want...3 FTs, the ball, and a 10 second run off the clock (under 2 minutes --- extended shot clock if applicable).

Waiting an additional 10 minutes for Auburn and Ole Miss to figure their shit out last night (so my game could get under way) was enough torture to see these ridiculous, timeout and foul infested endings, modified.

 

[jonvi]

In essence, the team fouling would still be rewarded by receiving opportunities at additional turnovers i.e. inbound pass (steal) trap (5 second violation) jump ball (possession arrow) all while burning minimal time off the clock. I'd rather just see time run off (10-15 seconds perhaps, with under two minutes to go --- and like you mentioned, extend the shot clock if necessary so not to penalize the offense) when fouled, paired with a technical. That would lessen opportunities, force cleaner play, and keep the game moving. I'd also be open to giving the team fouled three shots from the line and the ball back:

An intentional/flagrant/technical....call it what you want...3 FTs, the ball, and a 10 second run off the clock (under 2 minutes --- extended shot clock if applicable).

Waiting an additional 10 minutes for Auburn and Ole Miss to figure their shit out last night (so my game could get under way) was enough torture to see these ridiculous, timeout and foul infested endings, modified.

yeah....I guess I get that.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

1st bold. SU has 142 steals through 15 games. That works out to .236 steals per minute. The chances of getting a steal are very unlikely. Especially if the winning team has a true pg or a couple of players that can handle the ball.

Yes they should have played better the other 39 minutes.

Agreed. It is fairly unlikely. It would make come from behind victories in the last minute a rarity. Kinda like Christmas. Why do you hate Christmas jonvi?!? Why????

2nd bold....that's a fair point. In football, the team with the lead can run the clock out.

In football, the losing team can stop the clock with a time out or an incomplete pass, offensive penalty etc. Which as long as you have a timeout, you can force the winning team to play and make a 1st down or there is a change of possession. In bball, other than the shot clock or turnover or a foul, there is no way to force a change of possession. In football you have the four down or a 1st down rule.

I disagree. In football, once a team is in victory formation you pretty much have zero chance of getting the ball back. I don't think I've ever seen or even heard of game where a team got the ball back in that situation. The ball is effectively out of play. The game play clock and the game clock are running and the ball isn't in play.

The play clock and the shot clock server similar purposes (to force the offense to advance) but its very different. In basketball if the clock is running, the ball is in play, which means the defense does have a chance to make a play on the ball. Getting a turnover while the clock is winding down in basketball is unlikely. Getting a turnover while the clock is winding down (and the ball hasn't been snapped) in football is impossible

I think your plan makes it harder for a team to make up ground in the last 60 seconds and by doing that you are removing the drama that comes with ending a bball game...the drama that there is still some hope to pull out a victory.

If I can't foul and send you to the line, there has to be something that makes you shoot or lose possession of the ball and not just dribble out the clock.

In the end, I really don't believe as a fan I'm getting as much bang for the buck. I think I like it better the way it is.

I agree, it does make it harder. I think it should be harder. I think the team that played the best 39 minutes of basketball should have the best chance to win. I don't think a team should be rewarded for playing an inferior game for 39 minutes, who then decided "well that didn't work... lets start breaking the rules." Make no mistake. That's what fouling is. Breaking the rules. It's strategic cheating.

Let's say you were watching an auto race. One of the rules is that you'll receive a 5 second penalty for cutting a corner. Towards the end of the race, one driver is down quite a bit so instead of driving faster, he simply cuts through the infield, takes his 5 second penalty, but still ends up winning the race. Is that a proper victory?

Don't get me wrong. I don't like slowing down the game, and all of the other stuff that comes with free throws, but what I hate the most is the poor sportsmanship it encourages. My biggest objection to the whole thing, is not the result, it's the reasoning behind it.