What can be done to improve prep basketball in Arkansas?
Finals schedules, blended conferences, fewer classifications
a private school championship, a shot clock in the last two minutes.
Just throwing out a few of the hot topic issues for intelligent discussion.
We need a shot clock for the whole game in Arkansas not just the last two mins.
Shot Clock....
A frikin shot clock. Stop letting teams take the air out of the ball. That's not basketball in my opinion
Quote from: Redwolves8526 on March 06, 2017, 08:57:13 am
A frikin shot clock. Stop letting teams take the air out of the ball. That's not basketball in my opinion
I don't enjoy watching it either. But that was basketball a lot longer than the shot clock was basketball.
Quote from: Redwolves8526 on March 06, 2017, 08:57:13 am
A frikin shot clock. Stop letting teams take the air out of the ball. That's not basketball in my opinion
The teams need to play some defense and force a turnover. Can't complain about it when you have a way to stop it but won't and just want the clock to stop them for you!
Quote from: Redwolves8526 on March 06, 2017, 08:57:13 am
A frikin shot clock. Stop letting teams take the air out of the ball. That's not basketball in my opinion
So is a football team bleeding the play clock and pounding the ground game not football? Or a soccer team playing a possessive keep-away not soccer?
Shot clock would improve the fan experience, no doubt, would also force coaches to coach better possession management, would give defenses a great advantage...if they rebound well. All in all, it would make the game much more exciting. Those other comments about taking advantage of current rules are moot in my opinion.
However, the original question to this thread was what could be done to improve basketball...
Have senior high coaches take a greater role in supporting and developing the elementary basketball leagues. It's amazing how many large schools have communities that have weak elementary leagues with limited facilities, coaches, and practice time. Then dedicate more time to skills such as shooting and ball handling during the spring-summer-fall.
Shot clock...and basketball officiating workshops
Whose paying to set up shot clock's in each school? I don't even think I can trust some English teacher running one of these in a game. I love the idea and it should be enforced but running a shot clock is tough for people who do it in NBA games sometimes. They have replay to fix it. High school won't.
Quote from: Central AR on March 06, 2017, 07:13:24 pm
Whose paying to set up shot clock's in each school? I don't even think I can trust some English teacher running one of these in a game. I love the idea and it should be enforced but running a shot clock is tough for people who do it in NBA games sometimes. They have replay to fix it. High school won't.
Well, they've managed to overcome that problem in the 8 states that use a shot clock in high school.
Jammin for jackets enforces a shot clock that works smoothly and enables the better team to almost always win (no stall). It's a thing of beauty.
Quote from: BW2015 on March 06, 2017, 09:07:43 am
The teams need to play some defense and force a turnover. Can't complain about it when you have a way to stop it but won't and just want the clock to stop them for you!
For the win!
Quote from: Ice Water on March 06, 2017, 09:18:22 am
So is a football team bleeding the play clock and pounding the ground game not football? Or a soccer team playing a possessive keep-away not soccer?
They have a game clock...you have the opportunity to stop them. In a way that works like a shot clock. In basketball, no matter how well you play defense, if a team passes and moves the ball well, the only way to get the ball back is to foul. You may get lucky and get a turnover or two, but teams that come down and take two minutes off the clock is cowardly to me.
As far as soccer? Have never watched a game in my life. Someone else can figure that one out
Quote from: Grizzlyfan on March 06, 2017, 09:00:23 am
I don't enjoy watching it either. But that was basketball a lot longer than the shot clock was basketball.
Fair point. I just think the game has evolved enough to where high schools should be using them. No one needs to 2-3 minutes to get a bucket
Redwolve makes incredibly valid, logical points. The biggest hurdle would be mounting the shot clock lights on the backboards and paying for it, along with the new remote controls.
I also think Geno was right last year when he was quoted as saying that women's basketball should be playing on 9foot goals like womens volleyball does. However, that would require $$$ to purchase adjustable goals in every gym. Men's and women's VB nets are a foot difference in height; womens 100m hurdles are lower than the 110m mens high hurdles; women's high jump entry height is far lower than mens in track, yet, we complain about women's basketball being boring expecting them to be as athletic and big as the guys...
Quote from: 4real on March 08, 2017, 11:27:50 am
Redwolve makes incredibly valid, logical points. The biggest hurdle would be mounting the shot clock lights on the backboards and paying for it, along with the new remote controls.
I also think Geno was right last year when he was quoted as saying that women's basketball should be playing on 9foot goals like womens volleyball does. However, that would require $$$ to purchase adjustable goals in every gym. Men's and women's VB nets are a foot difference in height; womens 100m hurdles are lower than the 110m mens high hurdles; women's high jump entry height is far lower than mens in track, yet, we complain about women's basketball being boring expecting them to be as athletic and big as the guys...
FWIW: Women's HS net height is 7 ft 4 1/8 inches and men's HS net height is 7 ft 11 5/8 inches.
Quote from: Redwolves8526 on March 08, 2017, 10:25:30 am
They have a game clock...you have the opportunity to stop them. In a way that works like a shot clock. In basketball, no matter how well you play defense, if a team passes and moves the ball well, the only way to get the ball back is to foul. You may get lucky and get a turnover or two, but teams that come down and take two minutes off the clock is cowardly to me.
As far as soccer? Have never watched a game in my life. Someone else can figure that one out
Well, you're certainly missing out.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, if you think you want a shot clock, watch California basketball.
Quote from: arstatechamp13 on March 11, 2017, 10:27:12 am
I've said it before and I'll say it again, if you think you want a shot clock, watch California basketball.
Shot clock is not really a AAA deal.
The cost of the shot clock isn't so bad. It's a one time cost.
The issue is paying someone to do that for every game. That is a singular duty.
;D I think we definitely need a shot clock!!!!!!!!!! it is way too much stalling in games!!!!!!!!
Shot clock is a needed and until it does basketball in Arkansas will continue to suck stalling the ball
Individuals who want to spurn progress instead of restricting it would be a good first step.
Quote from: Ty on March 12, 2017, 01:44:17 am
Individuals who want to spurn progress instead of restricting it would be a good first step.
Define progress.....
I have a serious question for those who want a shot clock. Are you willing to run it if your school has to implement it?
Quote from: BirdCall on March 11, 2017, 06:40:46 pm
Shot clock is a needed and until it does basketball in Arkansas will continue to suck stalling the ball
It doesn't compare to what Skyline in Dallas Texas tried to do this year. They almost made it to the State title game playing stall ball. A team with 3 D1 recruits playing stall ball is a terrifying thing.
That PG Skyline has Marcus Garrett is the truth. Headed to play for the Jayhawks at KU in the fall
Quote from: arstatechamp13 on March 11, 2017, 10:27:12 am
I've said it before and I'll say it again, if you think you want a shot clock, watch California basketball.
Explain
Quote from: businesstron on March 13, 2017, 09:36:23 am
It doesn't compare to what Skyline in Dallas Texas tried to do this year. They almost made it to the State title game playing stall ball. A team with 3 D1 recruits playing stall ball is a terrifying thing.
In what way? If you can't beat them, they must be doing something right.
A team holding the ball for 2 or 3 minutes, also means that the defense is not coming out and guarding them.
Why should we award the defense for sitting in zone packed into the lane with a shot clock, making the offense have to shoot the ball?
Quote from: B.G. on March 11, 2017, 10:33:40 am
The cost of the shot clock isn't so bad. It's a one time cost.
The issue is paying someone to do that for every game. That is a singular duty.
Not just finding someone to do it, but finding someone who can do it properly will be a hassle for some places as well.
Just hire the guy who does play clock for your FB games
Quote from: 4real on March 14, 2017, 04:30:46 pm
Just hire the guy who does play clock for your FB games
Most of the time it's the same guy running the play clock. That won't work for basketball.
Quote from: sevenof400 on March 13, 2017, 04:07:18 pm
In what way? If you can't beat them, they must be doing something right.
This might explain it a little bit...better.
http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/high-school/high-schools/2017/03/04/class-6a-regional-finals-skyline-stymies-potentklein-forest-offense-wins-last-second-layups
Quote from: SUGARTOWN on March 14, 2017, 02:57:11 pm
Not just finding someone to do it, but finding someone who can do it properly will be a hassle for some places as well.
Not a huge fan of having a shot clock but here is my suggestion if it ever happens.
Shot clock would have to be done correctly and with someone who is knowledgeable and it would be a costly addition when you calculate its additional cost every game. My suggestion is to do away with one of the officials and go back to two man crews and use the extra money for a shot clock official. Three man crews are a huge waste of money in my opinion. I think officials did much better with two man crews anyway. Now they spend too much time looking at each other to see who is going to make that block charge call. JMO
Quote from: Oldref on March 16, 2017, 02:16:03 pm
Not a huge fan of having a shot clock but here is my suggestion if it ever happens.
Shot clock would have to be done correctly and with someone who is knowledgeable and it would be a costly addition when you calculate its additional cost every game. My suggestion is to do away with one of the officials and go back to two man crews and use the extra money for a shot clock official. Three man crews are a huge waste of money in my opinion. I think officials did much better with two man crews anyway. Now they spend too much time looking at each other to see who is going to make that block charge call. JMO
That is an interesting take from someone who, I assume, is really an old referee.
Quote from: Grizzlyfan on March 16, 2017, 02:37:15 pm
That is an interesting take from someone who, I assume, is really an old referee.
Yes and heavy emphasis on OLD LOL.
It's a game about coaches and kids. It's not about making fans happy with an uptempo game. No matter how much you don't like a team taking the air our of the ball, that may be their best strategy for winning against a given opponent. It should be that coaches decision based on his players.
Quote from: businesstron on March 15, 2017, 03:54:19 pm
This might explain it a little bit...better.
http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/high-school/high-schools/2017/03/04/class-6a-regional-finals-skyline-stymies-potentklein-forest-offense-wins-last-second-layups
Thanks for that link, Businesstron.
Beautiful execution by Skyline it would seem. That's the beauty of all sports but basketball in particular - in the clash of styles, which team can impose its will?
Quote from: Oldref on March 16, 2017, 02:16:03 pm
Not a huge fan of having a shot clock but here is my suggestion if it ever happens.
Shot clock would have to be done correctly and with someone who is knowledgeable and it would be a costly addition when you calculate its additional cost every game. My suggestion is to do away with one of the officials and go back to two man crews and use the extra money for a shot clock official. Three man crews are a huge waste of money in my opinion. I think officials did much better with two man crews anyway. Now they spend too much time looking at each other to see who is going to make that block charge call. JMO
From a current ref that does both 2 man and 3 man, it would be a mistake to do it this way. Shot clock=more trips up and down the court. The speed of the game is a lot faster than it was 10 years ago.
When I do 2 man crews I always feel I am out of position a lot more on fast breaks when I am going from trail to lead, than I am in a 3 man crew. The other good point of 3 man crews is that you have two sets of eyes on a fast break.
Quote from: blueandwhite on March 17, 2017, 02:02:06 pm
From a current ref that does both 2 man and 3 man, it would be a mistake to do it this way. Shot clock=more trips up and down the court. The speed of the game is a lot faster than it was 10 years ago.
When I do 2 man crews I always feel I am out of position a lot more on fast breaks when I am going from trail to lead, than I am in a 3 man crew. The other good point of 3 man crews is that you have two sets of eyes on a fast break.
That's why I would be against 2-man crews. Speed of the game creates too many problems on the break
Quote from: Longfellow on March 17, 2017, 02:06:54 pm
That's why I would be against 2-man crews. Speed of the game creates too many problems on the break
Just so you know my position......I am not for a shot clock any way shape or form but would not doubt it will happen some day. As for my suggestion for two man crews that was simply my suggestion on how to do it and keep cost down. Now I only worked about two years with three man crews the rest of my days were two man crews. I am sure no current officials would want to go back to that because it would take 1/3 of them off the floor every night. I am just saying I don't think games have automatically been called better since we went to three man crews. I know schools pay more for three but not sure they get a better product. Watched a tournament last two years in Mountain View/ Liberty HS in Missouri that Bay girls played in and won and they used two man crews. Games went fine and were well called games. There is a crisis coming and already here in some places to come up with three good officials every place every night. Lucky to get two good ones most nights. Going back to two would help and actually weed out the weaker ones. Not sure what year everyone went to three but best I can remember is was about 1990. I still think it is not needed most places most nights. Again JMO
I get what you're saying. My only reservation with 2 man crews is that most of the refs we have in our conference are older guys. I don't think they would last in a 2 man system. Wouldn't be a problem if more young guys would get certified
Refs are less likely to get feelings hurt by each other in two man by worrying less about what's in your area vs his. Lot of small conferences were still running two man crews in early 2000s and I never noticed any consistent improvements upon the move to three man crews. The fees for officials go up every few years, thus the costs for families with multiple kids is ridiculous to pay to come watch their own child play
Quote from: nuttinbuthogs on March 16, 2017, 10:38:13 pm
It's a game about coaches and kids. It's not about making fans happy with an uptempo game. No matter how much you don't like a team taking the air our of the ball, that may be their best strategy for winning against a given opponent. It should be that coaches decision based on his players.
Case in point: Booneville vs. Huntsville girls, 2007 regionals 1st round at Clinton. Booneville 10-16 going in and Huntsville as I recall 24-2. In an up and down game Booneville would have had little chance. But the Booneville coach chose to play a very patient game and rely on her defense.
I will say Huntsville played right into their hands by not taking shots on their end that with their given talent they should have made. Instead it comes down to a Booneville possession at the end of the game in which they ran off 41 of the 50 seconds left and converted to win 29-28. Their only lead of the game. Huntsville didn't score in the 4th quarter.
As to the shot clock debate itself I think it would make the game more exciting to watch, but pretty well eliminate chances for even a decent team to spring the surprise of a very good team.
Quote from: 4real on March 17, 2017, 10:05:38 pm
Refs are less likely to get feelings hurt by each other in two man by worrying less about what's in your area vs his. Lot of small conferences were still running two man crews in early 2000s and I never noticed any consistent improvements upon the move to three man crews. The fees for officials go up every few years, thus the costs for families with multiple kids is ridiculous to pay to come watch their own child play
On a side note, you can always become a referee to help better the state, work when your child isn't playing and then you AND your significant other will get into any sporting event you want for "free." (The cost of the membership to referee.) So you would in turn: provide better officiating if you care about knowing the rules, make a few hundred extra dollars a week and still enjoy the benefit of watching your child without the burden of worrying about paying to enter the game.
Also.... You have to actually work games to hold the card. You aren't able to just sign up to referee and never work any games; the state does keep an eye on that.
I used to be anti-shot clock....but watched the hoops for Hunger invitational run the final day playing 16 minute halves aND a 35 second shot clock....and I don't think it would bother me anymore...sped up play...teams could still milk the clock...and forced teams to make plays...just my 2 cents tho
Quote from: Basketball13 on January 08, 2018, 03:43:14 pm
On a side note, you can always become a referee to help better the state, work when your child isn't playing and then you AND your significant other will get into any sporting event you want for "free." (The cost of the membership to referee.) So you would in turn: provide better officiating if you care about knowing the rules, make a few hundred extra dollars a week and still enjoy the benefit of watching your child without the burden of worrying about paying to enter the game.
Also.... You have to actually work games to hold the card. You aren't able to just sign up to referee and never work any games; the state does keep an eye on that.
Not really sure why my quote was in your post. Didn't see many connections there. I was agreeing with a previous post that the change to three man crews did not improve the quality of a game's officiating vs 2 man. My remark about fees going up and tickets to see games is legit. I know too many single moms and grandmas that are raising several kids, working two jobs to Madre's and clothe the kids, and have a hard time coming up with $30-$90 per week to watch all their kids games.
I definitely believe we have dropped the ball on recruiting and retaining fresh fish to be refs. Too many young folks intimidated by the prospect of being yelled at by crazy parents and disgruntled coaches. Too much politics in reffing circles too
Quote from: HorseFeathers on January 08, 2018, 04:12:08 pm
I used to be anti-shot clock....but watched the hoops for Hunger invitational run the final day playing 16 minute halves aND a 35 second shot clock....and I don't think it would bother me anymore...sped up play...teams could still milk the clock...and forced teams to make plays...just my 2 cents tho
the shot clock will do nothing but make games better. Either way you need discipline and execution on offense. HS tournaments who have it have been fun for the teams that participate, small and large.
Biggest obstacle for admin and ADs is buying the set up and getting someone to run the shot clock.
I also agree with Geno that women's basketball should have a 9' goal since women's volleyball doesn't play on the same high net as men, but too many folks would think it sacrilege and ADs wouldn't want I buy the adjustable goals
Biggest part of It for me....no teams stalling with 3 minutes to go only leading by a possession....
Quote from: 4real on March 06, 2017, 11:15:09 am
Shot clock would improve the fan experience, no doubt, would also force coaches to coach better possession management, would give defenses a great advantage...if they rebound well. All in all, it would make the game much more exciting. Those other comments about taking advantage of current rules are moot in my opinion.
However, the original question to this thread was what could be done to improve basketball...
Have senior high coaches take a greater role in supporting and developing the elementary basketball leagues. It's amazing how many large schools have communities that have weak elementary leagues with limited facilities, coaches, and practice time. Then dedicate more time to skills such as shooting and ball handling during the spring-summer-fall.
totally agree here!!
Every time I throw out the idea of a 45 second shot clock just to make sure at least 4 shots are being taken in a 3 minute span most of the posters on here act like I just said the most radical thing they have ever heard..... That is why I say 45 seconds because how often does that even happen that it takes 45 seconds to take a shot? Pretty much only when a team is stalling and it would stop that.
Quote from: Central AR on March 06, 2017, 07:13:24 pm
Whose paying to set up shot clock's in each school? I don't even think I can trust some English teacher running one of these in a game. I love the idea and it should be enforced but running a shot clock is tough for people who do it in NBA games sometimes. They have replay to fix it. High school won't.
I feel pretty confident I could even teach a 6 year old that every time the ball hit the rim to then press a button....
Quote from: 4real on January 08, 2018, 08:49:30 pm
the shot clock will do nothing but make games better. Either way you need discipline and execution on offense. HS tournaments who have it have been fun for the teams that participate, small and large.
Biggest obstacle for admin and ADs is buying the set up and getting someone to run the shot clock.
I also agree with Geno that women's basketball should have a 9' goal since women's volleyball doesn't play on the same high net as men, but too many folks would think it sacrilege and ADs wouldn't want I buy the adjustable goals
Nah, they already use a smaller basketball.
Quote from: beach bum on January 09, 2018, 02:29:13 pm
I feel pretty confident I could even teach a 6 year old that every time the ball hit the rim to then press a button....
But what if it doesn't hit the rim? :D
Quote from: SUGARTOWN on January 09, 2018, 02:35:11 pm
But what if it doesn't hit the rim? :D
Haha... Now then I could see them getting pretty flustered on air balls.
Quote from: SUGARTOWN on January 09, 2018, 02:35:11 pm
But what if it doesn't hit the rim? :D
Add it to ref duties to make that signal to reset the clock...some already like being seen, give em a reason for someone to watch them lol
There are talks of shot clock being implemented state wide. Isn't 7A using it in conference games this year? Or is that next year?
Some coaches, even the ones who like to stall, like the shot clock because it keeps the flow of the game going.
Quote from: beach bum on January 09, 2018, 02:25:32 pm
Every time I throw out the idea of a 45 second shot clock just to make sure at least 4 shots are being taken in a 3 minute span most of the posters on here act like I just said the most radical thing they have ever heard..... That is why I say 45 seconds because how often does that even happen that it takes 45 seconds to take a shot? Pretty much only when a team is stalling and it would stop that.
I agree. 45 seconds would be perfect
Quote from: SUGARTOWN on January 09, 2018, 02:33:53 pm
Nah, they already use a smaller basketball.
. Men's volleyball nets are a foot higher than women's, cause they are smart enough to know Women can't jump as high to spike it. How many more folks would watch women's basketball games if there were legit chances of seeing dunks and more made shots?
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 09, 2018, 09:09:38 pm
There are talks of shot clock being implemented state wide. Isn't 7A using it in conference games this year? Or is that next year?
Some coaches, even the ones who like to stall, like the shot clock because it keeps the flow of the game going.
No shot clocks in 7A this year.
Quote from: 4real on January 09, 2018, 11:01:01 pm
. Men's volleyball nets are a foot higher than women's, cause they are smart enough to know Women can't jump as high to spike it. How many more folks would watch women's basketball games if there were legit chances of seeing dunks and more made shots?
More made shots are what the smaller balls are for. But to answer your question, Not too many IMO. I don't really watch basketball games just to see dunks. You could lower the goal to 9 feet and you still wouldn't see any dunks in Arkansas girls high school basketball.
But on the other topic, I agree, shot clocks should be added. As long we're all ok with them not being reset at the proper times at some places. Volunteers that know the rules are hard to find.
please no shot clocks. takes much of the strategy away from the game, many schools depend on the kids they have and don't recruit therefore strategy and development in important. You will really see some one sided games if this is implemented, best talent wins. Takes away from coaching and kids with lesser talent chance to participate. I know some fans dont care , they just want to be entertained,but it is still about the kids at that school.
Quote from: ballmember on January 10, 2018, 10:59:24 am
please no shot clocks. takes much of the strategy away from the game, many schools depend on the kids they have and don't recruit therefore strategy and development in important. You will really see some one sided games if this is implemented, best talent wins. Takes away from coaching and kids with lesser talent chance to participate. I know some fans dont care , they just want to be entertained,but it is still about the kids at that school.
I can appreciate this POV for sure.
To play devils advocate, wouldn't a 45 second shot clock force coaches to better themselves and their ability to develop a strategy to create a better offensive unit? Honestly, I wonder if anyone has done a study on the average time of possession per possession, and better yet, the average for teams one would consider less talented? Do weak teams really need two minutes per possession to increase their likelihood of making a basket?
I know for fact that some coaches stall when the officiating gets so poor that they have to make the officials a non-factor to protect the lead and/or keep the win. Some officials aren't very good, let's face it. We've all seen it. I know those coaches stall to force officials to make calls because they become so obvious in a stall situation. Also, coaches stall to buy time to keep players in foul trouble protected. If you have the ball on offense, you're less likely to pick up a foul on defense.
There actually is a lot of strategy involved in a stall game. I agree that a shot clock would speed up the pace of the game, but with everything in life, when you add something, something else gets lost. For example, addition of the 3 point line has led to the demise of the mid range game. Just some food for thought. I'll attend games whether the goal gets moved to 9ft or a shot clock gets implemented.
Quote from: iRebound on January 10, 2018, 12:04:53 pm
I know for fact that some coaches stall when the officiating gets so poor that they have to make the officials a non-factor to protect the lead and/or keep the win. Some officials aren't very good, let's face it. We've all seen it. I know those coaches stall to force officials to make calls because they become so obvious in a stall situation. Also, coaches stall to buy time to keep players in foul trouble protected. If you have the ball on offense, you're less likely to pick up a foul on defense.
There actually is a lot of strategy involved in a stall game. I agree that a shot clock would speed up the pace of the game, but with everything in life, when you add something, something else gets lost. For example, addition of the 3 point line has led to the demise of the mid range game. Just some food for thought. I'll attend games whether the goal gets moved to 9ft or a shot clock gets implemented.
I like your arguments...
One thing that we have failed to acknowledge is the amount of ball handling skills that are required of most of the players on the floor when a stall game has been implemented. I would argue that most possessions in HS basketball don't go past the 1 minute mark. The ones that do, are orchestrated not only by a good coaching strategy, but are impossible w/o having a solid PG, and at least two more quality ball handlers. So, when we use the argument that the Little Brothers of the Poor need more time to score... Well, they would have a hard time scoring in a brothel anyway. lol
Of course we know coaches, especially in the small schools, who love a zone, walking the ball up, and keeping the score in the 30's. I get why they like that and how it helps. But, they are also comfortable with that. Having to be innovative can expose one's inadequacies. Ask a coach if he/she thinks that a 45 second shot clock would require them to develop a more creative offense, or if the sky would come falling down.
I've seen one game where true stall ball almost prevailed, and it was actually interesting as a 3rd party viewer. Back when Lonoke boys had Wadoo and won state. They played Clarksville when they had Caleb the amazing PG. Score at halftime was like 8-6 or so, year state was at UofO in clarskville. 2nd half the horses for Lonoke broke the game open.
If you are outmatched, shot clock, no shot clock, you are outmatched no matter the offensive style. But, we choose to play the game anyway because anything can happen. I'm just saying if we had one around 45 seconds, a nice happy medium, it would be good in the long run.
The problem I have with stall game are when teams know they get up on a team they don't have a good shot at beating so they go to stall game to optimize their chances.
I've seen a team get up 8 in the first half on Alma before years ago and go stall game the rest of the game. I thought it was a bit of a joke.
That being said, it's not pertinent to get a shot clock, but I like the idea.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 10, 2018, 07:55:32 pm
The problem I have with stall game are when teams know they get up on a team they don't have a good shot at beating so they go to stall game to optimize their chances.
I've seen a team get up 8 in the first half on Alma before years ago and go stall game the rest of the game. I thought it was a bit of a joke.
That being said, it's not pertinent to get a shot clock, but I like the idea.
Did y'all come out and gaurd them? I see lots of times when the defense LETS them stall by standing out at half court...
Quote from: HorseFeathers on January 10, 2018, 09:08:47 pm
Did y'all come out and gaurd them? I see lots of times when the defense LETS them stall by standing out at half court...
Yes. Alma won the game.
Keep in mind, even big time, nationally ranked and super athletic 7A teams will try to stall with 2 minutes left of a post season game... seen it many times, and it can go either way.
Quote from: VHSCoach2 on March 08, 2017, 06:43:29 pm
Well, you're certainly missing out.
No you aren't. HS soccer in Arkansas is awful
Quote from: 4real on January 09, 2018, 10:58:20 pm
I agree. 45 seconds would be perfect
45 seconds way too long. 30!
Quote from: Neckred on January 12, 2018, 09:54:50 am
45 seconds way too long. 30!
I like it. But in politics, there is this thing called compromise. The better good for the majority and protection of the minority...
Quote from: 4real on January 12, 2018, 10:28:18 am
I like it. But in politics, there is this thing called compromise. The better good for the majority and protection of the minority...
I would say that over 90 percent of possessions already go under 45 seconds so what's the point
Quote from: Neckred on January 12, 2018, 10:33:52 am
I would say that over 90 percent of possessions already go under 45 seconds so what's the point
You may be right
Quote from: 4real on January 08, 2018, 08:49:30 pm
the shot clock will do nothing but make games better. Either way you need discipline and execution on offense. HS tournaments who have it have been fun for the teams that participate, small and large.
Biggest obstacle for admin and ADs is buying the set up and getting someone to run the shot clock.
I also agree with Geno that women's basketball should have a 9' goal since women's volleyball doesn't play on the same high net as men, but too many folks would think it sacrilege and ADs wouldn't want I buy the adjustable goals
You cannot have a 9' goal for women, that would be discriminatory. Shot clock might be good for fans but the fans aren't coaching the game. IMO.
Quote from: nuttinbuthogs on January 12, 2018, 11:43:18 am
You cannot have a 9' goal for women, that would be discriminatory. Shot clock might be good for fans but the fans aren't coaching the game. IMO.
If your argument was based on legal interpretations, then I support making the dang Olympic committees, and NFHS, AAA, and pro women's volleyball all be forced to be equal to men and have their volleyball nets moved up a foot to the equal height to mens so that the women will no longer be discriminated against. I'm telling you, Geno was dead on while he railed on the topic of making improvements to the game to keep it competitive.
How many girls today are playing volleyball, compared to 30 years ago? Look, I am not saying that volleyball is of the devil. But, it is easier, and with their lower than mens nets, they can more easily spike the ball, which is what makes the dang game fun for everyone. Combine that with the fact you don't ever have to run and get into the kind of shape BB demands, and over the years there are more and more girls saying dang, BB is hard, VB is easier, and thus we have the rise of JO VB which is a racket not unlike AAU BB.
Thus, does anyone truly believe that if the girls goal in BB was down at 9', that they would not be able to score more points? Are the girls naturally made equal in upper body strength by our Maker as men? So, which one is discriminatory? Expecting females to physically perform at an equal athletic level as the males, or to make it more appropriate for their differences? After all, if we are the same in our abilities, why not just play coed?
So then lets adjust the goal for teams that have lesser talent in mens games. I think the game is fine and so many of the proposed rule changes are not needed but are more to please the fans. I do understand that, I've sat through some boring games but if you start making the changes you need to start making lots of changes in all sports to make fans happy. Look, the game is good with good players and with lesser players its not as good, men or women.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 10, 2018, 07:55:32 pm
The problem I have with stall game are when teams know they get up on a team they don't have a good shot at beating so they go to stall game to optimize their chances.
I've seen a team get up 8 in the first half on Alma before years ago and go stall game the rest of the game. I thought it was a bit of a joke.
That being said, it's not pertinent to get a shot clock, but I like the idea.
I also like the idea of a shot clock and think it will eventually be added to high school. As far as the stall game... sure it's boring and no one wants to watch a game like that.. but from a strategy perspective it's not a bad idea. Limiting the number of possessions when playing a stronger team does increase your chance to win. I agree that it's not pertinent and wouldn't make a huge difference overall, it is a cool idea. New strategy would come along with it.
Keep in mind that folks like myself enjoy debate and arguing a point of view. It's like sport.
Also, I don't believe many of these perspectives some of us share will happen anytime soon, if ever. There are too many committees that govern such issues that are more concerned with making more rules to make the game less fun and more boring.
However, some of these issues carry some food for thought.
How much do you love the game? Are you willing to fight to keep the "purity" of the game? Are you willing to dare bring new ideas that may inspire a new generation of kids to fall in love with the game? I remember the 3 point line introduction when i was a kid watching Bird, Magic, Dr J, Barkley, Jordan, Stockton to Malone, etc, and thinking man, I'm so glad i'll get to shoot the 3 someday in HS. Man, if my mom had played her 6on6 hoops with a 3 point line, she would've scored so much more, etc.
What is it gonna be for the new generations that makes them fall in love with the game that I have loved since my momma got me my first basketball? Having daughters, I'm afraid that by the time they get in jr and sr high, girls BB will be as important as VB was when my wife and I were growing up in small towns, and our favorite game made us want to skip Sunday night church to go play pick up games in the park or gym. Instead, they are trying to turn VB into the girls equivilant of FB, and my girls will have to wear those dang skimpy outfits VB wears, and I will have to beat the crap out of the perverts staring and making comments to them after their matches. ugh. Sorry, I got on a rant there.
Coaches coach, fans watch, and complain. I don't like the idea of taking certain strategies out of the hands of coaches. If fans don't like it, go watch another team. The coach and the players should have the opportunity to use whatever pace is best for them to allow a chance to win.
Quote from: nuttinbuthogs on January 12, 2018, 12:12:56 pm
Coaches coach, fans watch, and complain. I don't like the idea of taking certain strategies out of the hands of coaches. If fans don't like it, go watch another team. The coach and the players should have the opportunity to use whatever pace is best for them to allow a chance to win.
i'd put $1,000 on it that the majority of arkansas HS coaches would say go for it. Fans don't have a monopoly on complaining...
I'd put $2,000 on it that the teams at the bottom, that lose a lot of games, that don't have great talent would not be for it.
Quote from: nuttinbuthogs on January 12, 2018, 12:25:53 pm
I'd put $2,000 on it that the teams at the bottom, that lose a lot of games, that don't have great talent would not be for it.
lol I love it! Good post! But, you know when you are really bad, sometimes you want mercy, mercy for your kids, and a quickening is good. lol
Quote from: 4real on January 12, 2018, 12:39:20 pm
lol I love it! Good post! But, you know when you are really bad, sometimes you want mercy, mercy for your kids, and a quickening is good. lol
Possibly so but good coaches can push the tempo without a shot clock.
Quote from: nuttinbuthogs on January 12, 2018, 12:12:56 pm
Coaches coach, fans watch, and complain. I don't like the idea of taking certain strategies out of the hands of coaches. If fans don't like it, go watch another team. The coach and the players should have the opportunity to use whatever pace is best for them to allow a chance to win.
ANd most coaches suck from what I've seen
Quote from: Neckred on January 12, 2018, 01:24:37 pm
ANd most coaches suck from what I've seen
why don't you stop sugar coating it... lol Lotta folks today don't know how to ask experienced, respected older coaches for critiques. Constructive criticism is very helpful for coaches, and refs, and players, and our jobs, and our parenting, and my golf game
Quote from: Neckred on January 12, 2018, 01:24:37 pm
ANd most coaches suck from what I've seen
Possibly, but then that's opinion since there is no scoring method. If you take more tools away from them they will get worse.
Quote from: nuttinbuthogs on January 12, 2018, 01:31:25 pm
Possibly, but then that's opinion since there is no scoring method. If you take more tools away from them they will get worse.
The shot clock would help them suck less. THen maybe they wouldnt think their plays were the best in the world and concentrate more on skill development.
Quote from: nuttinbuthogs on January 12, 2018, 12:12:56 pm
Coaches coach, fans watch, and complain. I don't like the idea of taking certain strategies out of the hands of coaches. If fans don't like it, go watch another team. The coach and the players should have the opportunity to use whatever pace is best for them to allow a chance to win.
If you can't draw up a core set of plays to get a shot off in 45 seconds you stink as a coach...... How many dribbles and passes can happen in 45 seconds? A 45 second shot clock still allows you to play whatever pace you want to play. The 45 second clock would essentially just stop stalling. How often does someone even take 45 seconds when they aren't stalling? I am sure almost never. 45 seconds is way more time than needed. When you stall that isn't strategy. That is knowing you aren't as good and they might as well tell their players that cause the players are smart enough to know that is why they are stalling. You can still be a slow paced offense and get your shot off every single time in 45 seconds. I don't think anyone wants a 45 second shot clock to change strategy. Its to stop stalling which is not a strategy. It's knowing you aren't as good and admitting that to your players.
Quote from: Neckred on January 12, 2018, 01:39:10 pm
The shot clock would help them suck less. THen maybe they wouldnt think their plays were the best in the world and concentrate more on skill development.
Lol... Harsh but true.
I would have never wanted to play for a coach that told us to stall.... I would question whether he trusted us and would never have wanted to play for a coach who held us back from competing. If you don't think you can win a game when you step on the court you will never upset a better team. You have already lost it mentally before the ball was even tipped off.
Quote from: beach bum on January 13, 2018, 01:38:59 pm
I would have never wanted to play for a coach that told us to stall.... I would question whether he trusted us and would never have wanted to play for a coach who held us back from competing. If you don't think you can win a game when you step on the court you will never upset a better team. You have already lost it mentally before the ball was even tipped off.
good call
I guess Dean Smith just didn't know what he was doing. Coaches have an obligation to try to win within the rules. If it is to a teams advantage to stall and possibly spread the other team out, the players should buy in. Shorter quicker teams could use this tactic to open the floor up for driving. Winning should be more important to a team then shooting and scoring.
Quote from: SUGARTOWN on January 10, 2018, 09:18:26 am
More made shots are what the smaller balls are for. But to answer your question, Not too many IMO. I don't really watch basketball games just to see dunks. You could lower the goal to 9 feet and you still wouldn't see any dunks in Arkansas girls high school basketball.
But on the other topic, I agree, shot clocks should be added. As long we're all ok with them not being reset at the proper times at some places. Volunteers that know the rules are hard to find.
Yes you would.
Quote from: OlGuyWicker on January 13, 2018, 05:21:24 pm
I guess Dean Smith just didn't know what he was doing. Coaches have an obligation to try to win within the rules. If it is to a teams advantage to stall and possibly spread the other team out, the players should buy in. Shorter quicker teams could use this tactic to open the floor up for driving. Winning should be more important to a team then shooting and scoring.
Well the best player the world has ever seen didn't even average 20 ppg for him....
Does scoring define greatness?
Quote from: Neckred on January 16, 2018, 12:28:10 pm
In basketball pretty much
Unless you are a Dennis Rodman, Bill Russell, John Stockton, Steve Nash
Numbers from 2013-2014 season
Average scores of games without shot clock 60-44.2
Average scores of games with shot clock 58.5-42.9
Average scores in Arkansas 57.6-42.8
So the shot clock really does not have any effect on the game. People who are wanting the shot clock just want to see shooting, and forget about the other facets of the game like ball handling, passing, and playing good defense
Quote from: blueandwhite on January 16, 2018, 02:06:38 pm
Numbers from 2013-2014 season
Average scores of games without shot clock 60-44.2
Average scores of games with shot clock 58.5-42.9
Average scores in Arkansas 57.6-42.8
So the shot clock really does not have any effect on the game. People who are wanting the shot clock just want to see shooting, and forget about the other facets of the game like ball handling, passing, and playing good defense
I guess you just posted without reading the first 100 posts on this topic.... What I took away from reading peoples' posts is they just want to stop the stalling. I don't understand how making sure someone takes a shot in 3/4 of a minute makes the other aspects of the game like dribbling, passing, and defense go away. Last time I checked you couldn't just stand there with the ball for entire 45 seconds. A whole lot of dribbling, passing, and defense goes on in 45 second spans.
beach, are you a proponent of going back to the 5 classification structure? It will never happen, but I like to bring it up every once in awhile. I know NWA and LR are much bigger than the 6A schools, but I just think competition is better with 7A+6A=5A 5A=4A 4A=3A 3A+2A=2A 1A=1A or something of the sort.
At least they are trying to address this in all other sports but football.
I'm ok with a shot clock that forces a team to shoot as long as the following rules are implemented also:
No zone defense
Defensive 3 seconds
A player more than 2" taller than the other team's tallest player must stay at least 8' from the goal at all times.
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 16, 2018, 07:41:33 pm
I'm ok with a shot clock that forces a team to shoot as long as the following rules are implemented also:
No zone defense
Defensive 3 seconds
A player more than 2" taller than the other team's tallest player must stay at least 8' from the goal at all times.
You're trying to make a point, but I don't see it.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 07:48:39 pm
You're trying to make a point, but I don't see it.
My point is HS coaches don't get to pick their players so they have to play a style based on their personnel that gives them the best chance to win. For some the style of play that makes them successful is a delay offense. A shot clock takes their advantage away. If you take their advantage away then there should be a rule that takes a team's height advantage away, or there should be a rule that doesn't allow a team to pack a zone in against a team that doesn't shoot well but penetrates well. If not you're just punishing a certain style of play some fans don't like but it's not about the fans.
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 16, 2018, 08:43:22 pm
My point is HS coaches don't get to pick their players so they have to play a style based on their personnel that gives them the best chance to win. For some the style of play that makes them successful is a delay offense. A shot clock takes their advantage away. If you take their advantage away then there should be a rule that takes a team's height advantage away, or there should be a rule that doesn't allow a team to pack a zone in against a team that doesn't shoot well but penetrates well. If not you're just punishing a certain style of play some fans don't like but it's not about the fans.
It sort of is about the fans in a way, though. Maybe not as much in high school, but fan support is partial funding for these athletic programs.
That said, your examples are nothing like the shot clock.
The shot clock is an institution that is accepted and good thing in all other levels of basketball. None of the ones you mentioned are.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 08:49:08 pm
It sort of is about the fans in a way, though. Maybe not as much in high school, but fan support is partial funding for these athletic programs.
That said, your examples are nothing like the shot clock.
The shot clock is an institution that is accepted and good thing in all other levels of basketball. None of the ones you mentioned are.
Explain how my examples are not like the shot clock? It's an external force that dictates a team's pace of play. The shot clock is good at other levels because other levels choose their players. Apples and oranges.
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 16, 2018, 08:55:20 pm
Explain how my examples are not like the shot clock? It's an external force that dictates a team's pace of play. The shot clock is good at other levels because other levels choose their players. Apples and oranges.
The three point line was adopted by high schools. It was seen as a gimmick.
A 45 second shot clock really shouldn't be too little for "delay offense" style coaches.
It is silly for fans and a team to watch a team dribble and pass a ball around for minutes at a time just to limit possessions. It is not in the spirit of the sport and doesn't even really make for much competition.
A shot clock, a reasonable one, makes for a more competitive game. Not in terms of margin, but in terms of teams intending to score and run an offense to play basketball and not keep away.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 09:10:44 pm
The three point line was adopted by high schools. It was seen as a gimmick.
A 45 second shot clock really shouldn't be too little for "delay offense" style coaches.
It is silly for fans and a team to watch a team dribble and pass a ball around for minutes at a time just to limit possessions. It is not in the spirit of the sport and doesn't even really make for much competition.
A shot clock, a reasonable one, makes for a more competitive game. Not in terms of margin, but in terms of teams intending to score and run an offense to play basketball and not keep away.
You didn't answer my question.
It's a external force that dictates the pace of play. At the high school level players should dictate the pace of play.
Sure I'll answer it:
The shot clock keeps the flow of the game and the spirit of basketball more.
The other rules do not.
Also, the shot clock is a literal external force on pace of play while the others are implied or intended to.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 09:33:54 pm
Sure I'll answer it:
The shot clock keeps the flow of the game and the spirit of basketball more.
The other rules do not.
The spirit of the game is to win. If you don't have the ability to keep a team from running a delay offense without a shot clock do you really deserve to win?
Also, fouls affect the flow of the game. Timeouts affect the flow of the game. Should they be eliminated from the game?
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 16, 2018, 09:48:13 pm
The spirit of the game is to win. If you don't have the ability to keep a team from running a delay offense without a shot clock do you really deserve to win?
No that's the ultimate outcome of the game. The intention of basketball isn't to play keep a way.
If you don't have the ability to score points in the natural flow of a game, do you really deserve a chance to win?
Since high schools can't choose their players, why don't we lower the rims to 8 feet? Why don't we give kids 3 free throws on every shooting foul? Why don't we make it where high school players can take 3 steps and pick up their pivot foot?
Shot clocks have proven good for basketball. This doesn't mean it has to be good for high school basketball, but your reasoning of it takes away a viable strategy doesn't resonate with me.
Why is it good for basketball that a team can dribble around for the last 3 minutes of the game with a few good ballhandlers? It really isn't that hard. Dribble until you are trapped and pass to the open man. Eventually, defensive team that is behind has to foul after 3 minutes. It just isn't good for basketball in my opinion.
Stall strategy is a viable strategy under the current rules, but I don't like watching it and most other fans don't either. Heck, do kids really enjoy playing it?
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 16, 2018, 09:53:29 pm
Also, fouls affect the flow of the game. Timeouts affect the flow of the game. Should they be eliminated from the game?
You've jumped from adding rules to taking away rules. I can't really follow your points.
Tell me how a 45 second shot clock hurts the game of basketball.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 09:55:23 pm
You've jumped from adding rules to taking away rules. I can't really follow your points.
Tell me how a 45 second shot clock hurts the game of basketball.
It's not about adding or subtracting. You want a shot clock to improve the flow of the game. I say take fouls and timeouts away and it helps the flow of the game. That's your goal, right?
A shot clock in high school hurts the game because coaches don't pick their players. Good coaches win by changing their game plan based on their player's talent level and opponent. A shot clock limits that and doesn't give a coach an opportunity to put his/her kids in the best position to win. Do you have a problem with a team that pounds it inside because they have a height advantage or do you consider it a good game plan? Do you have a problem with a team packing a zone in against a team that can't shoot or do you consider it a good game plan? Of course you would say it's a good game plan. So why would you consider a game plan of slowing it down and limiting the touches of a big man that you have trouble guarding a bad game plan? The only reason is because you don't like that style of play. But again, it's not about you.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 07:48:39 pm
You're trying to make a point, but I don't see it.
Alma, you make a good point about his not making a point... lol
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 05:13:42 pm
beach, are you a proponent of going back to the 5 classification structure? It will never happen, but I like to bring it up every once in awhile. I know NWA and LR are much bigger than the 6A schools, but I just think competition is better with 7A+6A=5A 5A=4A 4A=3A 3A+2A=2A 1A=1A or something of the sort.
At least they are trying to address this in all other sports but football.
im not a beach, but I think 5A is all we need... outside of FB. But, it'll never go back. It's gonna be something coaches, parents and admin will gripe about no matter which way you slice the pie
Quote from: 4real on January 16, 2018, 11:24:08 pm
Alma, you make a good point about his not making a point... lol
That's the best you got??
Nope.
We should help you get an IEP for debate class. Let's schedule a meeting for your mother to come meet with the sped teacher, and your regular ed teachers to see if you need modifications for any other classes.
Please forgive me for that, and pray for the pygmies down in papua new guinea
Quote from: 4real on January 17, 2018, 08:05:29 am
Nope.
We should help you get an IEP for debate class. Let's schedule a meeting for your mother to come meet with the sped teacher, and your regular ed teachers to see if you need modifications for any other classes.
Obviously you don't have anything. Your response is 3rd grade stuff. No substance.
I'd be willing to be that if you polled every coach in the state, the majority would favor a shot clock.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 09:54:15 pm
No that's the ultimate outcome of the game. The intention of basketball isn't to play keep a way.
If you don't have the ability to score points in the natural flow of a game, do you really deserve a chance to win?
Since high schools can't choose their players, why don't we lower the rims to 8 feet? Why don't we give kids 3 free throws on every shooting foul? Why don't we make it where high school players can take 3 steps and pick up their pivot foot?
Shot clocks have proven good for basketball. This doesn't mean it has to be good for high school basketball, but your reasoning of it takes away a viable strategy doesn't resonate with me.
Why is it good for basketball that a team can dribble around for the last 3 minutes of the game with a few good ballhandlers? It really isn't that hard. Dribble until you are trapped and pass to the open man. Eventually, defensive team that is behind has to foul after 3 minutes. It just isn't good for basketball in my opinion.
Stall strategy is a viable strategy under the current rules, but I don't like watching it and most other fans don't either. Heck, do kids really enjoy playing it?
Exactly
Quote from: OB11 on January 17, 2018, 08:32:04 am
I'd be willing to be that if you polled every coach in the state, the majority would favor a shot clock.
There would be some that didn't. You know the ones. They call a set play every time down the court guy....
Quote from: Neckred on January 17, 2018, 08:55:02 am
There would be some that didn't. You know the ones. They call a set play every time down the court guy....
IMO adding a shot clock is not that much different than what the AAA did with baseball by instituting the new pitch count rules. It has forced coaches to develop more pitching and not rely on one or two guys for every game.
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 17, 2018, 08:29:51 am
Obviously you don't have anything. Your response is 3rd grade stuff. No substance.
My dad could beat up your dad...
Quote from: Neckred on January 17, 2018, 08:55:02 am
There would be some that didn't. You know the ones. They call a set play every time down the court guy....
And if that wins ballgames for their kids more power to him/her. If your kid could shoot the lights out off a screen but couldn't get their own shot to save their life, you would want the coach to run them off double or triple screens all night.
Definitely not promoting violence here! It was kinda funny in hindsight, that one of my little league coaches, when I was the youngest on the team, and not the best, played me middle infield all year long, when others would've been a better choice, but found out that my dad had whooped the coach in their younger days lol
OK, I am as guilty as anyone, what were the original thoughts in this thread? It was more than just shot clock... We have had fun arguing opposing views on that...
How about the little new rules that are made up each year, just for the sake of having a new "point of emphasis" that doesn't make anything better for anybody? How about a Republican NFHS president who believes in removing restrictive regulations? lol
Can we not let kids dunk in pre game warm ups? Is it really that bad of a sin? Do we have to nit pick the colors of under shirts, head bands, wrist bands, socks, that kids wear? Can we not step on the sideline to take a charge? Can we not wear silver or gold as a home color instead of white, especially when white is not one of your official school colors? Can we not have quality hospitality rooms at tournaments, especially the finals? Can we not smoke a victory cigar on the sidelines and bleachers when victory is imminent?
The no dunking rule in warmups in ridiculous
Why yes Mr Neck, I believe it is quite ridonkulous. Now, if a kid goes out and hangs on it for too long... ok, not good.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 09:54:15 pm
No that's the ultimate outcome of the game. The intention of basketball isn't to play keep a way.
If you don't have the ability to score points in the natural flow of a game, do you really deserve a chance to win?
Since high schools can't choose their players, why don't we lower the rims to 8 feet? Why don't we give kids 3 free throws on every shooting foul? Why don't we make it where high school players can take 3 steps and pick up their pivot foot?
Shot clocks have proven good for basketball. This doesn't mean it has to be good for high school basketball, but your reasoning of it takes away a viable strategy doesn't resonate with me.
Stall strategy is a viable strategy under the current rules, but I don't like watching it and most other fans don't either. Heck, do kids really enjoy playing it?
Again, it's not about what you like or dislike. It's about a coach giving his kids the best opportunity to win. Kids want to win and parents want their kids to win. Whats better? My kid and his/her team won 43-40 or my kid's team lost 62-40? I'd venture to say if your kid was playing for a coach that was losing games playing uptempo with players not capable of doing so you wouldn't say "but gosh it was great to watch em run up and down the floor at a fast pace." You'd want him/her run out of town.
Your quote.......Since high schools can't choose their players, why don't we lower the rims to 8 feet? Why don't we give kids 3 free throws on every shooting foul? Why don't we make it where high school players can take 3 steps and pick up their pivot foot?...This was exactly my argument early on. You are asking for a rule change to benefit teams that can't guard well enough, press well enough, etc. to dictate the pace of play.
If this is fair then.......to your point......and my early point..
Let's make the lane 12' wide and make it 2 seconds in the lane for teams with no height so they don't have to strategize to overcome the height difference. Let's say you don't even shoot free throws to help teams that can't shoot them well. We could go on and on.
This quote....Shot clocks have proven good for basketball. This doesn't mean it has to be good for high school basketball, but your reasoning of it takes away a viable strategy doesn't resonate with me...This makes no sense. What you are saying is you really don't care if it's good or bad, it would just make your viewing pleasure better.
This quote...Why is it good for basketball that a team can dribble around for the last 3 minutes of the game with a few good ballhandlers? It really isn't that hard. Dribble until you are trapped and pass to the open man. Eventually, defensive team that is behind has to foul after 3 minutes. It just isn't good for basketball in my opinion....If you think running a delay offense isn't difficult you've not played the game much. It takes skill and discipline to hold on to the ball for any extended amount of time without turning it over against a team that can guard.
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 17, 2018, 10:14:25 am
Again, it's not about what you like or dislike. It's about a coach giving his kids the best opportunity to win. Kids want to win and parents want their kids to win. Whats better? My kid and his team won 43-40 or my kid's team lost 62-40? I'd venture to say if your kid was playing for a coach that was losing games playing uptempo with players not capable of doing so you wouldn't say "but gosh it was great to watch em run up and down the floor at a fast pace." You'd want him/her run out of town.
Your quote.......Since high schools can't choose their players, why don't we lower the rims to 8 feet? Why don't we give kids 3 free throws on every shooting foul? Why don't we make it where high school players can take 3 steps and pick up their pivot foot?...This was exactly my argument early on. You are asking for a rule change to benefit teams that can't guard well enough, press well enough, etc. to dictate the pace of play.
If this is fair then.......to your point......and my early point..
Let's make the lane 12' wide and make it 2 seconds in the lane for teams with no height so they don't have to strategize to overcome the height difference. Let's say you don't even shoot free throws to help teams that can't shoot them well. We could go on and on.
This quote....Shot clocks have proven good for basketball. This doesn't mean it has to be good for high school basketball, but your reasoning of it takes away a viable strategy doesn't resonate with me....makes no sense.....What you are saying is you really don't care if it's good or bad, it would just make your viewing pleasure better.
This quote...Why is it good for basketball that a team can dribble around for the last 3 minutes of the game with a few good ballhandlers? It really isn't that hard. Dribble until you are trapped and pass to the open man. Eventually, defensive team that is behind has to foul after 3 minutes. It just isn't good for basketball in my opinion....If you think running a delay offense isn't difficult you've not played the game much. It takes skill and discipline to hold on to the ball for any extended amount of time without turning it over against a team that can guard.
This is fake news. most be a CNN reporter...
Quote from: 4real on January 17, 2018, 10:16:45 am
This is fake news. most be a CNN reporter...
Bless your heart.
Maybe he just hates InTowners
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 17, 2018, 10:14:25 am
Again, it's not about what you like or dislike. It's about a coach giving his kids the best opportunity to win. Kids want to win and parents want their kids to win. Whats better? My kid and his/her team won 43-40 or my kid's team lost 62-40? I'd venture to say if your kid was playing for a coach that was losing games playing uptempo with players not capable of doing so you wouldn't say "but gosh it was great to watch em run up and down the floor at a fast pace." You'd want him/her run out of town.
Your quote.......Since high schools can't choose their players, why don't we lower the rims to 8 feet? Why don't we give kids 3 free throws on every shooting foul? Why don't we make it where high school players can take 3 steps and pick up their pivot foot?...This was exactly my argument early on. You are asking for a rule change to benefit teams that can't guard well enough, press well enough, etc. to dictate the pace of play.
If this is fair then.......to your point......and my early point..
Let's make the lane 12' wide and make it 2 seconds in the lane for teams with no height so they don't have to strategize to overcome the height difference. Let's say you don't even shoot free throws to help teams that can't shoot them well. We could go on and on.
This quote....Shot clocks have proven good for basketball. This doesn't mean it has to be good for high school basketball, but your reasoning of it takes away a viable strategy doesn't resonate with me...This makes no sense. What you are saying is you really don't care if it's good or bad, it would just make your viewing pleasure better.
This quote...Why is it good for basketball that a team can dribble around for the last 3 minutes of the game with a few good ballhandlers? It really isn't that hard. Dribble until you are trapped and pass to the open man. Eventually, defensive team that is behind has to foul after 3 minutes. It just isn't good for basketball in my opinion....If you think running a delay offense isn't difficult you've not played the game much. It takes skill and discipline to hold on to the ball for any extended amount of time without turning it over against a team that can guard.
I'm not going to dissect each of you points anymore, but answer this question if you will:
Would you support taking away the 10 second back court violation. Would you support taking away the 5 second engagement rule? And if not, why not?
Also, you do realize other states have implemented the shot clock in high school?
Lastly, no it isn't about "me", but yes it is partially about the fans. Perhaps not in high school as much as other levels of sports, but (when it comes to public schools), guess who pays for the coaches salaries, facilities, and equipment? The taxpayers. Who are the taxpayers? The fans.
We can act like no shot clock is some gimmick that only fans want and they should think of the children first, but that just isn't the case here. Shot clocks only make for a more competitive, well paced game. A 45 second shot clock is not unreasonable, and I challenge you to tell me why a 45 second shot clock is unreasonable specifically.
You'll have to take my word on this because I'm not going to name the coach, but a current basketball coach who has used the stall offense before has told me a shot clock would be an overall positive to the game because in the stall situations, it would let players do what your basketball instincts and competitive instincts tell you to do, which is eventually try to score on a given possession.
Quote from: 4real on January 17, 2018, 09:41:02 am
OK, I am as guilty as anyone, what were the original thoughts in this thread? It was more than just shot clock... We have had fun arguing opposing views on that...
How about the little new rules that are made up each year, just for the sake of having a new "point of emphasis" that doesn't make anything better for anybody? How about a Republican NFHS president who believes in removing restrictive regulations? lol
Can we not let kids dunk in pre game warm ups? Is it really that bad of a sin? Do we have to nit pick the colors of under shirts, head bands, wrist bands, socks, that kids wear? Can we not step on the sideline to take a charge? Can we not wear silver or gold as a home color instead of white, especially when white is not one of your official school colors? Can we not have quality hospitality rooms at tournaments, especially the finals? Can we not smoke a victory cigar on the sidelines and bleachers when victory is imminent?
Not sure about the cigars ever being implemented, 4real, but I did think the dunk warm up rule was changed? I might have made that up. I know it has changed in certain levels of basketball.
I can understand the intent of the super strict uniform rules, but think it is a bit ridiculous. As long as the players choice of wear isn't dangerous to game or hinder it I think it's fine. (for instance, no jewelry makes sense to me. Don't need ears ripped out). I do think we've seen a bit of relaxing on this type of thing in the games I've seen.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 17, 2018, 12:55:43 pm
I'm not going to dissect each of you points anymore, but answer this question if you will:
Would you support taking away the 10 second back court violation. Would you support taking away the 5 second engagement rule? And if not, why not?
Also, you do realize other states have implemented the shot clock in high school?
Lastly, no it isn't about "me", but yes it is partially about the fans. Perhaps not in high school as much as other levels of sports, but (when it comes to public schools), guess who pays for the coaches salaries, facilities, and equipment? The taxpayers. Who are the taxpayers? The fans.
We can act like no shot clock is some gimmick that only fans want and they should think of the children first, but that just isn't the case here. Shot clocks only make for a more competitive, well paced game. A 45 second shot clock is not unreasonable, and I challenge you to tell me why a 45 second shot clock is unreasonable specifically.
You'll have to take my word on this because I'm not going to name the coach, but a current basketball coach who has used the stall offense before has told me a shot clock would be an overall positive to the game because in the stall situations, it would let players do what your basketball instincts and competitive instincts tell you to do, which is eventually try to score on a given possession.
Almatrackster... you obviously read at a higher grade level, and write well, too. That's why your statements make sense.
I wonder if it is a product of nature, or of nurture, that some people cannot understand when a point is valid, or that their own point is not, or that no one else cares? lol
The only people that want no shot clock are these people who had no game or kids have no game or coaches who can't develop players.
Quote from: Neckred on January 17, 2018, 02:40:56 pm
The only people that want no shot clock are these people who had no game or kids have no game or coaches who can't develop players.
Don't sugar coat it.
Also, and this is probably another task in futility as it will never be changed, but does everyone like the setup of how sports happen in the course of the year?
I personally think spring is way too loaded, but I don't know what you'd move. Some states do baseball in the fall.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 17, 2018, 05:25:18 pm
Also, and this is probably another task in futility as it will never be changed, but does everyone like the setup of how sports happen in the course of the year?
I personally think spring is way too loaded, but I don't know what you'd move. Some states do baseball in the fall.
I created a thread on this very topic a while back hoping to spark some discussion about it, but it did not get a good response. I pretty much got bashed for even suggesting this idea be discussed. Guess it was just wrong place, wrong time. Haha.
If you could work around football or even (extreme idea) swap the two sports, it would do both sports well.
I've been saying that for years amongst friends too. But, the football elites will not have any of it. Shame too, then FB could avoid the heat restrictions, and kids would be in great shape from BB season.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 17, 2018, 05:25:18 pm
Also, and this is probably another task in futility as it will never be changed, but does everyone like the setup of how sports happen in the course of the year?
I personally think spring is way too loaded, but I don't know what you'd move. Some states do baseball in the fall.
With soccer growing at a decent clip it certainly has congested basketball(if you make it deep into postseason), baseball, track, and soccer. I would hate to try and be a multi sport athlete in the spring for sure these days.
Quote from: Neckred on January 17, 2018, 02:40:56 pm
The only people that want no shot clock are these people who had no game or kids have no game or coaches who can't develop players.
+1
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 16, 2018, 05:13:42 pm
beach, are you a proponent of going back to the 5 classification structure? It will never happen, but I like to bring it up every once in awhile. I know NWA and LR are much bigger than the 6A schools, but I just think competition is better with 7A+6A=5A 5A=4A 4A=3A 3A+2A=2A 1A=1A or something of the sort.
At least they are trying to address this in all other sports but football.
Hey trackster... Yes in all the sports except football I want the 5 class system back. I think in non football sports the size difference gets negated some so the larger number of schools in a class wouldn't hurt the smaller enrollment teams in a classification. I liked the old 64 teams in 2A and 3A back in the day in basketball.
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 17, 2018, 12:55:43 pm
I'm not going to dissect each of you points anymore, but answer this question if you will:
Would you support taking away the 10 second back court violation. Would you support taking away the 5 second engagement rule? And if not, why not?
Also, you do realize other states have implemented the shot clock in high school?
Lastly, no it isn't about "me", but yes it is partially about the fans. Perhaps not in high school as much as other levels of sports, but (when it comes to public schools), guess who pays for the coaches salaries, facilities, and equipment? The taxpayers. Who are the taxpayers? The fans.
We can act like no shot clock is some gimmick that only fans want and they should think of the children first, but that just isn't the case here. Shot clocks only make for a more competitive, well paced game. A 45 second shot clock is not unreasonable, and I challenge you to tell me why a 45 second shot clock is unreasonable specifically.
You'll have to take my word on this because I'm not going to name the coach, but a current basketball coach who has used the stall offense before has told me a shot clock would be an overall positive to the game because in the stall situations, it would let players do what your basketball instincts and competitive instincts tell you to do, which is eventually try to score on a given possession.
I appreciate how you're not willing to answer my questions but more than happy to ask me more. :)
I fully support the backcourt rule and the closely guarded rule. Why? Because they are only effective if a team presses, traps, plays good man, etc. A team must defend for those rules to impact the game. They are rules that reward good defense.
Hometown fans support coaches and programs that win. Most couldn't care less what offense or tempo a coach uses. Never heard of a coach that won 25 games being fired because he ran a deliberate offense, but I've heard of plenty that won 4 games using a run and gun offense being kicked to the curb.
I don't care that other states have implemented a shot clock. Move to one of them if it means that much to you.
A shot clock is an external factor that forces a team to shoot or give the ball back with no effort from the defense. Teams that want an uptempo game need to earn it.
You can find current coaches that prefer to play uptempo that will tell you they don't want a shot clock.
Quote from: Neckred on January 17, 2018, 02:40:56 pm
The only people that want no shot clock are these people who had no game or kids have no game or coaches who can't develop players.
I would be willing to bet a substantial amount of money i can prove this statement wrong.
Quote from: Outoftownfan on January 17, 2018, 09:27:48 pm
I appreciate how you're not willing to answer my questions but more than happy to ask me more. :)
I fully support the backcourt rule and the closely guarded rule. Why? Because they are only effective if a team presses, traps, plays good man, etc. A team must defend for those rules to impact the game. They are rules that reward good defense.
Hometown fans support coaches and programs that win. Most couldn't care less what offense or tempo a coach uses. Never heard of a coach that won 25 games being fired because he ran a deliberate offense, but I've heard of plenty that won 4 games using a run and gun offense being kicked to the curb.
I don't care that other states have implemented a shot clock. Move to one of them if it means that much to you.
A shot clock is an external factor that forces a team to shoot or give the ball back with no effort from the defense. Teams that want an uptempo game need to earn it.
You can find current coaches that prefer to play uptempo that will tell you they don't want a shot clock.
You're being silly with this quote. It would be quite the story to say "Hey moved here because your high school shot clock rules are better!"
If you can name a coach who uses a stall offense and wins 25 games a year, I'll be shocked. Not deliberate passing of the ball to find an open and good shot, but an offense who's main priority is to limit possessions of the other team (if a team is doing this, they aren't very good probably). That's why you probably haven't heard of a coach being fired under those circumstances. They don't exist.
You haven't asked me any questions lately...I just didn't want to dissect your points because you went back to the same talking points we've discussed earlier.
You have conveniently left out how basketball in Arkansas high schools would be hurt by a 45 second shot clock.
Support for the backcourt and closely guarded rule because it rewards good defense.
But no support for the shot clock that rewards teams with efficient offenses who know how to do the main objective of the game which is score more points than the other team?
Actually a 45 second shot clock rewards good defense! A team's goal should be to stop a team from scoring and not by swiping at the ball or hoping a team throws the ball away, but making that team take a bad shot after they've had time to take it. Let's give them ample time, but let's at least make them shoot it in a reasonable amount of time and keep a flow of a sport. You know...not a game of 3 man weave at the top of the key with no intent to score.
How can you say that a shot clock rewards a team that gives no effort on defense. If they give no effort, go shoot a layup! Your line of reasoning can't be followed.
It seems all your argument lays on the fact that coaches should be allowed to pick their strategy, including a stall offense.
But this offense has been lambasted in all levels of basketball. Change is needed eventually.
Quote from: beach bum on January 17, 2018, 08:43:32 pm
Hey trackster... Yes in all the sports except football I want the 5 class system back. I think in non football sports the size difference gets negated some so the larger number of schools in a class wouldn't hurt the smaller enrollment teams in a classification. I liked the old 64 teams in 2A and 3A back in the day in basketball.
agreed
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 17, 2018, 10:39:53 pm
You're being silly with this quote. It would be quite the story to say "Hey moved here because your high school shot clock rules are better!"
If you can name a coach who uses a stall offense and wins 25 games a year, I'll be shocked. Not deliberate passing of the ball to find an open and good shot, but an offense who's main priority is to limit possessions of the other team (if a team is doing this, they aren't very good probably). That's why you probably haven't heard of a coach being fired under those circumstances. They don't exist.
You haven't asked me any questions lately...I just didn't want to dissect your points because you went back to the same talking points we've discussed earlier.
You have conveniently left out how basketball in Arkansas high schools would be hurt by a 45 second shot clock.
Support for the backcourt and closely guarded rule because it rewards good defense.
But no support for the shot clock that rewards teams with efficient offenses who know how to do the main objective of the game which is score more points than the other team?
Actually a 45 second shot clock rewards good defense! A team's goal should be to stop a team from scoring and not by swiping at the ball or hoping a team throws the ball away, but making that team take a bad shot after they've had time to take it. Let's give them ample time, but let's at least make them shoot it in a reasonable amount of time and keep a flow of a sport. You know...not a game of 3 man weave at the top of the key with no intent to score.
How can you say that a shot clock rewards a team that gives no effort on defense. If they give no effort, go shoot a layup! Your line of reasoning can't be followed.
It seems all your argument lays on the fact that coaches should be allowed to pick their strategy, including a stall offense.
But this offense has been lambasted in all levels of basketball. Change is needed eventually.
your quote about shot clock impact on defense is spot on. It's way easier to convince kids to play hard on defense when they know that in a certain amount of time, they are on a last second defense scenario. The focus it demands on both sides brings a sense of urgency that is exciting. Also, the last 90 seconds of a game can proved the opportunity to choose between fouls and trying to hold to just one shot, during a 1 possession game. Fun stuff. But some out of towners don't get it. He might need some preparation H from getting sore
Another point I was wanting to make, 4real.
I hate end of high school games when it becomes a 5 point lead. I know I'm going to be told it isn't about me, so I'll just agree with you as a matter of personal preference.
I think the shot clock makes for more competitive end of games too.
I think basketball teams should be meant to play basketball with 2 minutes left and a 5 point lead and not "catch me if you can"
Quote from: Almatrackster on January 18, 2018, 07:27:16 pm
Another point I was wanting to make, 4real.
I hate end of high school games when it becomes a 5 point lead. I know I'm going to be told it isn't about me, so I'll just agree with you as a matter of personal preference.
I think the shot clock makes for more competitive end of games too.
I think basketball teams should be meant to play basketball with 2 minutes left and a 5 point lead and not "catch me if you can"
That is probably the most simplistic, yet best way I have ever heard that point in the game explained. That pretty much sums it up.
That scenario alma laid out was well said, and that span is when we really notice a coach' Ability to be effective in managing time and talent. When teams completely try to stop scoring it backfires much of the time
Quote from: beach bum on January 13, 2018, 01:38:59 pm
I would have never wanted to play for a coach that told us to stall.... I would question whether he trusted us and would never have wanted to play for a coach who held us back from competing. If you don't think you can win a game when you step on the court you will never upset a better team. You have already lost it mentally before the ball was even tipped off.
Players who are not very good have to use whatever means possible within the rules. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean its bad strategy. Developing skills can take years and kids that are not naturally athletic, which I see a lot, take even longer. Some never really get good. Some kids can handle the ball ok but cannot shoot worth a dang. Those teams do what they can to compete. A good coach uses what he has to try to be competitive. You are mistaken if you think the stall or slow down does not work.