KoB2011 Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 36 minutes ago, IUFLA said: You weren't trying to score...Many times, you're simply burning clock... One of the reasons Valvano employed the strategy pre shot clock was because teams (notably UNC) would play keep away rather than basketball... Even with the shot clock coaches identify poor FT shooters and utilized it to stop the clock, and hopefully get the ball back without giving up any points in the process... While I agree that sticking with something "because it's always been done that way" is dumb, I'll counter with making changes simply for the sake of change is dumber... But we have a shot clock now, so teams can't just hold the ball in perpetuity. If you think teams can still hold it too long at the end of the game, let's move to a 24 second shot clock. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 5 minutes ago, IU Scott said: It is more exciting at the end if the game when you are down 1 and the team is shooting a 1-1. That puts way more pressure on the shooter to hit the first shot. If you have two or just makes for less suspense. Are the point of rules to create suspense? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5fouls Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 18 minutes ago, btownqb said: This thread is completely derailed. You guys want to talk about 1 and 1s.... tag me in another thread. Sorry to all. I should have known the possibility of trying something different wasn't going to go over well with a few. It's discussion. The purpose of this board. Maybe, technically not this thread, but it's an interesting topic to discuss/debate. There are no rights and wrongs. Just opinions. Why take a jab at other posters while 'apologizing'? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artesian_86 Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 I had to vent to one of my HS teacher colleagues who's a huge IU fan, bb coach and calls HS bb games on his local radio station.... I asked him....What are your thought on the game in general including the play at the end of a potential no-call? I thought it was a missed no-call. His reply.... Me too! Clearly an offensive foul...I think IU suffered the same fate as Purdue--I'm calling it: "The Big Ten wants NW to make the tournament syndrome", so officials will assist them as necessary. I believe we are owed two games now! Iowa and NW. IF we go back to first half we can talk about the joke first technical, the three hook and holds of Trayce which is supposed to be a flagrant foul that allowed for offensive rebounds, the incredible number of illegal screens that NW sets--like the one where Tamar used the illegal screen to get a steal...Oh, oops not get called for a foul, or perhaps we could ask how many free throws TJD SHOULD have shot. But hey isn't it exciting to see NW among the elite? Unless we look at schedule inequalities and compare them and us--how come we only get MN once? Nebraska once? PU twice, ILL twice, MSU twice, IA twice...?? Do you think ANY Big Ten team would trade us schedules? The good news is in the big dance we may be able to get away from these types of things and if we do I think an Elite 8/Final Four is very reasonable. Let's get fully healthy and make a run at it. OK I feel better now after venting. JT 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5fouls Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 13 minutes ago, BGleas said: Then we should also adopt the NBA's 4th quarter advance the back rule. It would make the game way more exciting as well and it puts more pressure on the defense late in the game adding suspense. How much more exciting would last nights ending have been if IU could call timeout and have a SLOB with 4 seconds left where we could have got a real shot off? I am 1,000,000,000,000,000 percent behind ball advancement at the end of the game. Absolutely great rule for creating suspense. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 Just now, 5fouls said: It's discussion. The purpose of this board. Maybe, technically not this thread, but it's an interesting topic to discuss/debate. There are no rights and wrongs. Just opinions. Why take a jab at other posters while 'apologizing'? It wasn't a jab. Just a fact. Anything that is brought up about change with the college game a few of you can't handle it. Which is fine. It's all opinion. The bold though, there are some posters that come here to complain about the way others post (lame way to be)... so, I was trying to avoid that/not argue with Scott and then hear about it later on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IUFLA Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 3 minutes ago, btownqb said: This thread is completely derailed. You guys want to talk about 1 and 1s.... tag me in another thread. Sorry to all. I should have known the possibility of trying something different wasn't going to go over well with a few. No, your defense is "I don't like it" or making change just for the sake of change... When you ask me why, I provide justification for my position... As far as halves vs quarters I found this Seth Davis article interesting... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGleas Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 1 minute ago, 5fouls said: I am 1,000,000,000,000,000 percent behind ball advancement at the end of the game. Absolutely great rule for creating suspense. I was thinking about that immediately after JHS's heave at the end of the game. I'd be all over this one too. Would be a great addition to the game. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 1 minute ago, IUFLA said: No, your defense is "I don't like it" or making change just for the sake of change... When you ask me why, I provide justification for my position... As far as halves vs quarters I found this Seth Davis article interesting... 👌 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierDom Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 2 hours ago, KoB2011 said: That’s fair, I’ll buy we don’t know and it’s certainly possible the first tech was warranted, even though it was improperly administered. Obviously we don't know, but think about that though. What coach Rosemond said was so bad that it should change the outcome of that game that thousands of people paid money to see, tens of thousands more watched on tv and 20 some kids spent their lives preparing for. But, coach said a bad word, so the other team wins? Seems like technical fouls should be used to make sure the teams don't get into a fight and to make sure the refs don't get abused on the sideline. It seems pretty far fetched to think either of those things were happening here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IUskim Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 17 minutes ago, IUFLA said: No, your defense is "I don't like it" or making change just for the sake of change... When you ask me why, I provide justification for my position... As far as halves vs quarters I found this Seth Davis article interesting... yeah sorry. Completely disagree about the game flowing better. I’ve been to several iuwbb and watched all of them I could this year and to me the games had way better flow than that of the men’s game. Of course that article was written back in 2016 so he might have changed his tune but to me it felt like the games with quarters had much better flow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawg Bawls Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 34 minutes ago, BGleas said: Then we should also adopt the NBA's 4th quarter advance the back rule. It would make the game way more exciting as well and it puts more pressure on the defense late in the game adding suspense. How much more exciting would last nights ending have been if IU could call timeout and have a SLOB with 4 seconds left where we could have got a real shot off? Like last night we would have already been down on our side taking ball with 2.5 secs left? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 (edited) 14 minutes ago, IUskim said: yeah sorry. Completely disagree about the game flowing better. I’ve been to several iuwbb and watched all of them I could this year and to me the games had way better flow than that of the men’s game. Of course that article was written back in 2016 so he might have changed his tune but to me it felt like the games with quarters had much better flow. Or there is just a hint of bias, stubbornness that the men's game is so good that it doesn't need altering. Edited February 16, 2023 by btownqb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 (edited) 40 minutes ago, IUFLA said: No, your defense is "I don't like it" or making change just for the sake of change... When you ask me why, I provide justification for my position... As far as halves vs quarters I found this Seth Davis article interesting... Aren't all your points basically that you want chaos at the end instead of rewarding the better team? Like your defense of a 1:1 is to reward the defense instead of the offense. "Hey we fouled you, and we get to benefit from it." What other sport is that the case? Edited February 16, 2023 by KoB2011 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5fouls Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said: "Hey we fouled you, and we get to benefit from it." What other sport is that the case? Professional Wrestling. NASCAR 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drroogh Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 16 minutes ago, btownqb said: Or there is just a hint of bias, stubbornness that the men's game is so good that it doesn't been altering. So why did the men’s game change from quarters to halves in the 50’s?😉 Hey if @IUFLA can flirt with you so can I! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 3 minutes ago, Drroogh said: So why did the men’s game change from quarters to halves in the 50’s?😉 Hey if @IUFLA can flirt with you so can I! Branch McCracken was a progressive. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 1 hour ago, BGleas said: Then we should also adopt the NBA's 4th quarter advance the back rule. It would make the game way more exciting as well and it puts more pressure on the defense late in the game adding suspense. How much more exciting would last nights ending have been if IU could call timeout and have a SLOB with 4 seconds left where we could have got a real shot off? No thank you, why get rewarded for calling a timeout. I love the Bryce Drew play or the Laettner shot. The thing about the NBA it isn't getting the ball at half court but at the hash mark. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BGleas Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 1 minute ago, IU Scott said: No thank you, why get rewarded for calling a timeout. I love the Bryce Drew play or the Laettner shot. The thing about the NBA it isn't getting the ball at half court but at the hash mark. Why get rewarded for fouling? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 1 hour ago, KoB2011 said: Are the point of rules to create suspense? So what good comes from changing the rules to having everything 2 shots 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoB2011 Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 Just now, IU Scott said: So what good comes from changing the rules to having everything 2 shots It doesn't allow the defense to be rewarded for committing a foul. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 49 minutes ago, IUskim said: yeah sorry. Completely disagree about the game flowing better. I’ve been to several iuwbb and watched all of them I could this year and to me the games had way better flow than that of the men’s game. Of course that article was written back in 2016 so he might have changed his tune but to me it felt like the games with quarters had much better flow. Maybe that could be because of the style of play instead of having quarters or halves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 Could a side effect (is that the right term?) of awarding 2 shots for 7 team fouls, instead of a 1-1, be.... the game is a little less physical/defenders are more aware of fouling? And... that lead to more entertainment/intrigue.... anyways? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 (edited) 9 minutes ago, IU Scott said: So what good comes from changing the rules to having everything 2 shots Fouling is part of the game. No one has ever said what the benefit to the game having all fouls being 2 shots. The double bonus was brought in to try to stop fouling at the end of the game but it didn't change anything Edited February 16, 2023 by IU Scott 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted February 16, 2023 Report Share Posted February 16, 2023 1 minute ago, btownqb said: Could a side effect (is that the right term?) of awarding 2 shots for 7 team fouls, instead of a 1-1, be.... the game is a little less physical/defenders are more aware of fouling? And... that lead to more entertainment/intrigue.... anyways? Has nothing to do with the amount of free throws that determine how physical the game is. That comes down to the style of play that teams run. The NBA always had two shots and in tbe 90's it didn't stop the game from being physical. Actually the NBA use to have 3 to make 2 free throws. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.