Rule changes

S

SJU61982

Well-known member
ESPN reporting on their college hoops facebook page, that the following changes will take effect next year:

- 30 second shot clock

- restricted arc (aka, the no-charge circle) extended to 4 ft from basket (was at 3 ft).

- 1 team timeout in the second half eliminated

- experimentation on 6 personal fouls before a player fouls out (postseason only)

No link yet, but this was on their facebook page.
 
Big East experimented with 6 personal fouls in league play during the Malik Sealy years
Click to expand...

Yes. Robert Werdann would still foul out often, if I can recall. I'm sure every team had somebody like that.

Paultzman has a very detailed link about this in the "NCAA Rule Changes" thread. Highly recommended.
 
I'm not sure if they changed this (believe they did), but the #1 problem with the game was when coaches called a TO under TV timeout time. So that after the break, there would be another timeout 20 seconds later after a dead ball. I find that so irritating and it made the game unwatchable at times. Put a stop from these coaches killing the game with their over coaching. Take 4 timeouts away from them and stop the double coinciding TO nonsense
 
That was a bad experiment because they played 6 fouls for the Big East season and then 5 in the NCAA's
Click to expand...

It was total failure for the BE. Fouls galore; game slowed down; ugly basketball. The idea of having six fouls is to keep the "stars" in the game who would otherwise foul out ... and, needless to say, it can change the outcome of a game considerably. I recall Dick Vitale advocating to do away with fouling out altogether in order to keep stars on the court. Sorry, but if a big-name player's weakness is fouling, so be it. (What next, giving poor FT shooters extra shots to make up for their weakness?)
 
I'm not sure if they changed this (believe they did), but the #1 problem with the game was when coaches called a TO under TV timeout time. So that after the break, there would be another timeout 20 seconds later after a dead ball. I find that so irritating and it made the game unwatchable at times. Put a stop from these coaches killing the game with their over coaching. Take 4 timeouts away from them and stop the double coinciding TO nonsense
Click to expand...

Sirvoo, looks like Chris Mullin goes to Jerry Garcia's tailor.
 
I'm not sure if they changed this (believe they did), but the #1 problem with the game was when coaches called a TO under TV timeout time. So that after the break, there would be another timeout 20 seconds later after a dead ball. I find that so irritating and it made the game unwatchable at times. Put a stop from these coaches killing the game with their over coaching. Take 4 timeouts away from them and stop the double coinciding TO nonsense
Click to expand...

That is gone, per the NCAA proposal:

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources...tee-recommends-package-proposals-improve-game

Adjusting the media timeout procedures to allow a timeout called within 30 seconds of a break (e.g., 16:30) or at any time after the scheduled media timeout becomes the media timeout.


Of course, the problem here is, you'll have more timeouts that will be charged as :30 TOs, extended to full TOs, so time-wise, things may not be THAT different.
 
That was a bad experiment because they played 6 fouls for the Big East season and then 5 in the NCAA's
Click to expand...

It was total failure for the BE. Fouls galore; game slowed down; ugly basketball. The idea of having six fouls is to keep the "stars" in the game who would otherwise foul out ... and, needless to say, it can change the outcome of a game considerably. I recall Dick Vitale advocating to do away with fouling out altogether in order to keep stars on the court. Sorry, but if a big-name player's weakness is fouling, so be it. (What next, giving poor FT shooters extra shots to make up for their weakness?)
Click to expand...

Yes, and it also resulted in a lot of ejections for fighting.
 
Like most people, I like the idea of a 30 second clock. Way too much time is wasted in halfcourt offense standing around, burning clock, before starting an offense. The second bonus of a 30 second clock is that now the final 4 minutes will have a minimum of 8 possessions, as opposed to just under 7 possessions. This could have an impact on how the last few minutes are played, where mere seconds can have an impact on the outcome.

I also hate the five foul rule in college basketball. The game this season where D'Angelo was called for 2 quick fouls in the first minutes of the game put him on the bench for an entire half, and effectively took him out of the game, period. In college bball, most of the time a second foul in the first half puts you on the bench, and an early 3rd foul in the second half does the same. A team with a short bench (like SJU last season) cannot reasonably compete with a deeper team under the present scenario. A couple of touch fouls and you had Christian Jones or JDR as your interior force, or lost your best scorer. Throw in bad refereeing, and 5 fouls changes outcomes dramatically for some squads but not others. Kentucky and Duke for example, with deeper rosters, can withstand foul trouble vs. lesser opponents. Villanova, for example, beat us at the Garden only when they took the ball right at CO, initiated contact, and put him on the bench with fouls.
 
Like most people, I like the idea of a 30 second clock. Way too much time is wasted in halfcourt offense standing around, burning clock, before starting an offense. The second bonus of a 30 second clock is that now the final 4 minutes will have a minimum of 8 possessions, as opposed to just under 7 possessions. This could have an impact on how the last few minutes are played, where mere seconds can have an impact on the outcome.

I also hate the five foul rule in college basketball. The game this season where D'Angelo was called for 2 quick fouls in the first minutes of the game put him on the bench for an entire half, and effectively took him out of the game, period. In college bball, most of the time a second foul in the first half puts you on the bench, and an early 3rd foul in the second half does the same. A team with a short bench (like SJU last season) cannot reasonably compete with a deeper team under the present scenario. A couple of touch fouls and you had Christian Jones or JDR as your interior force, or lost your best scorer. Throw in bad refereeing, and 5 fouls changes outcomes dramatically for some squads but not others. Kentucky and Duke for example, with deeper rosters, can withstand foul trouble vs. lesser opponents. Villanova, for example, beat us at the Garden only when they took the ball right at CO, initiated contact, and put him on the bench with fouls.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a 6 foul rule?
 
Like most people, I like the idea of a 30 second clock. Way too much time is wasted in halfcourt offense standing around, burning clock, before starting an offense. The second bonus of a 30 second clock is that now the final 4 minutes will have a minimum of 8 possessions, as opposed to just under 7 possessions. This could have an impact on how the last few minutes are played, where mere seconds can have an impact on the outcome.

I also hate the five foul rule in college basketball. The game this season where D'Angelo was called for 2 quick fouls in the first minutes of the game put him on the bench for an entire half, and effectively took him out of the game, period. In college bball, most of the time a second foul in the first half puts you on the bench, and an early 3rd foul in the second half does the same. A team with a short bench (like SJU last season) cannot reasonably compete with a deeper team under the present scenario. A couple of touch fouls and you had Christian Jones or JDR as your interior force, or lost your best scorer. Throw in bad refereeing, and 5 fouls changes outcomes dramatically for some squads but not others. Kentucky and Duke for example, with deeper rosters, can withstand foul trouble vs. lesser opponents. Villanova, for example, beat us at the Garden only when they took the ball right at CO, initiated contact, and put him on the bench with fouls.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a 6 foul rule?
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure what a 6 foul rule will yield in the long run, but I also know that 5 fouls in the current system ruins many games. Maybe refs need to refrain from calling touch fouls 45 feet from the basket. I just know that something is wrong when a second foul call early in the first half sends a player to the bench for 18 minutes. Maybe those calls far from the basket should result in a team foul but not a personal foul, or some other creative thinking.
 
Like most people, I like the idea of a 30 second clock. Way too much time is wasted in halfcourt offense standing around, burning clock, before starting an offense. The second bonus of a 30 second clock is that now the final 4 minutes will have a minimum of 8 possessions, as opposed to just under 7 possessions. This could have an impact on how the last few minutes are played, where mere seconds can have an impact on the outcome.

I also hate the five foul rule in college basketball. The game this season where D'Angelo was called for 2 quick fouls in the first minutes of the game put him on the bench for an entire half, and effectively took him out of the game, period. In college bball, most of the time a second foul in the first half puts you on the bench, and an early 3rd foul in the second half does the same. A team with a short bench (like SJU last season) cannot reasonably compete with a deeper team under the present scenario. A couple of touch fouls and you had Christian Jones or JDR as your interior force, or lost your best scorer. Throw in bad refereeing, and 5 fouls changes outcomes dramatically for some squads but not others. Kentucky and Duke for example, with deeper rosters, can withstand foul trouble vs. lesser opponents. Villanova, for example, beat us at the Garden only when they took the ball right at CO, initiated contact, and put him on the bench with fouls.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a 6 foul rule?
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure what a 6 foul rule will yield in the long run, but I also know that 5 fouls in the current system ruins many games. Maybe refs need to refrain from calling touch fouls 45 feet from the basket. I just know that something is wrong when a second foul call early in the first half sends a player to the bench for 18 minutes. Maybe those calls far from the basket should result in a team foul but not a personal foul, or some other creative thinking.
Click to expand...

I don't like the idea of the 6 foul rule at all. The only benefit it may have is that it more aligns with the NBA game, which could help like the 1% of players who get drafted. Other than that, all is does is allow players to be more undisciplined on defense.

As far as the fouls taking players out of the game early on and ruining the game. The solution is simple: tell the players to stop fouling! You don't like the touch fouls being called 45 feet away from the basket? Tell the player to stop committing touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket. If you don't call touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket, are you going to call the same foul when it occurs 5 feet away from the hoop?

In the end, a foul is a foul, regardless of where at on the court it happens, and it should be called as such. It's not the system that needs to change/adjust.....it's the players.
 
Like most people, I like the idea of a 30 second clock. Way too much time is wasted in halfcourt offense standing around, burning clock, before starting an offense. The second bonus of a 30 second clock is that now the final 4 minutes will have a minimum of 8 possessions, as opposed to just under 7 possessions. This could have an impact on how the last few minutes are played, where mere seconds can have an impact on the outcome.

I also hate the five foul rule in college basketball. The game this season where D'Angelo was called for 2 quick fouls in the first minutes of the game put him on the bench for an entire half, and effectively took him out of the game, period. In college bball, most of the time a second foul in the first half puts you on the bench, and an early 3rd foul in the second half does the same. A team with a short bench (like SJU last season) cannot reasonably compete with a deeper team under the present scenario. A couple of touch fouls and you had Christian Jones or JDR as your interior force, or lost your best scorer. Throw in bad refereeing, and 5 fouls changes outcomes dramatically for some squads but not others. Kentucky and Duke for example, with deeper rosters, can withstand foul trouble vs. lesser opponents. Villanova, for example, beat us at the Garden only when they took the ball right at CO, initiated contact, and put him on the bench with fouls.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a 6 foul rule?
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure what a 6 foul rule will yield in the long run, but I also know that 5 fouls in the current system ruins many games. Maybe refs need to refrain from calling touch fouls 45 feet from the basket. I just know that something is wrong when a second foul call early in the first half sends a player to the bench for 18 minutes. Maybe those calls far from the basket should result in a team foul but not a personal foul, or some other creative thinking.
Click to expand...

I don't like the idea of the 6 foul rule at all. The only benefit it may have is that it more aligns with the NBA game, which could help like the 1% of players who get drafted. Other than that, all is does is allow players to be more undisciplined on defense.

As far as the fouls taking players out of the game early on and ruining the game. The solution is simple: tell the players to stop fouling! You don't like the touch fouls being called 45 feet away from the basket? Tell the player to stop committing touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket. If you don't call touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket, are you going to call the same foul when it occurs 5 feet away from the hoop?

In the end, a foul is a foul, regardless of where at on the court it happens, and it should be called as such. It's not the system that needs to change/adjust.....it's the players.
Click to expand...

First off, many touch fouls far from the basket are just that - incidental contact, and not an overt act - the ref can let some of those slide as they are often discretionary.

Second, the 5 foul rule benefits programs that go 10-12 deep. Get through SJU's first five or 6, and there has always been a dropoff. Get through Kentucky or Duke's first 5, and there are 5 guys ranked higher than our starting five. So in effect, five fouls benefit deeper teams who can take out an Okafor and replace him with a Plumlee, etc.
 
Love the 30 second shot clock. Do not at all understand why they want to eliminate a time out in second half. That seems like a revenue killer. i.e. less commercial time for broadcast games.
 
Like most people, I like the idea of a 30 second clock. Way too much time is wasted in halfcourt offense standing around, burning clock, before starting an offense. The second bonus of a 30 second clock is that now the final 4 minutes will have a minimum of 8 possessions, as opposed to just under 7 possessions. This could have an impact on how the last few minutes are played, where mere seconds can have an impact on the outcome.

I also hate the five foul rule in college basketball. The game this season where D'Angelo was called for 2 quick fouls in the first minutes of the game put him on the bench for an entire half, and effectively took him out of the game, period. In college bball, most of the time a second foul in the first half puts you on the bench, and an early 3rd foul in the second half does the same. A team with a short bench (like SJU last season) cannot reasonably compete with a deeper team under the present scenario. A couple of touch fouls and you had Christian Jones or JDR as your interior force, or lost your best scorer. Throw in bad refereeing, and 5 fouls changes outcomes dramatically for some squads but not others. Kentucky and Duke for example, with deeper rosters, can withstand foul trouble vs. lesser opponents. Villanova, for example, beat us at the Garden only when they took the ball right at CO, initiated contact, and put him on the bench with fouls.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a 6 foul rule?
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure what a 6 foul rule will yield in the long run, but I also know that 5 fouls in the current system ruins many games. Maybe refs need to refrain from calling touch fouls 45 feet from the basket. I just know that something is wrong when a second foul call early in the first half sends a player to the bench for 18 minutes. Maybe those calls far from the basket should result in a team foul but not a personal foul, or some other creative thinking.
Click to expand...

I don't like the idea of the 6 foul rule at all. The only benefit it may have is that it more aligns with the NBA game, which could help like the 1% of players who get drafted. Other than that, all is does is allow players to be more undisciplined on defense.

As far as the fouls taking players out of the game early on and ruining the game. The solution is simple: tell the players to stop fouling! You don't like the touch fouls being called 45 feet away from the basket? Tell the player to stop committing touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket. If you don't call touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket, are you going to call the same foul when it occurs 5 feet away from the hoop?

In the end, a foul is a foul, regardless of where at on the court it happens, and it should be called as such. It's not the system that needs to change/adjust.....it's the players.
Click to expand...

First off, many touch fouls far from the basket are just that - incidental contact, and not an overt act - the ref can let some of those slide as they are often discretionary.

Second, the 5 foul rule benefits programs that go 10-12 deep. Get through SJU's first five or 6, and there has always been a dropoff. Get through Kentucky or Duke's first 5, and there are 5 guys ranked higher than our starting five. So in effect, five fouls benefit deeper teams who can take out an Okafor and replace him with a Plumlee, etc.
Click to expand...

First off, incidental or not, a foul is a foul. Whether you actually try to foul or not is irrelevant. If incidental contact causes you to commit a foul, it should be called. If you are playing that close 45feet away that there is incidental contact, maybe you should back off on defense a little. And I do see alot of the refs let that stuff go....but it's like any sport, some things are going to get called, and others aren't.

Secondly, you want to change the rules because some teams are better than others? Like I said before, it's not the system, it's the individuals/teams. It's not the NCAA's or the game of basketball's fault that some teams can't recruit 10 solid players. What you are talking about is an unbalance in recruiting, which has nothing to do with the number of fouls given per game. Five fouls do benefit deeper teams, the same way that the 3pt line benefits teams that can shoot better, or the same way a zone benefits a team that can't play man to man defense. It's part of the game of basketball.
 
Like most people, I like the idea of a 30 second clock. Way too much time is wasted in halfcourt offense standing around, burning clock, before starting an offense. The second bonus of a 30 second clock is that now the final 4 minutes will have a minimum of 8 possessions, as opposed to just under 7 possessions. This could have an impact on how the last few minutes are played, where mere seconds can have an impact on the outcome.

I also hate the five foul rule in college basketball. The game this season where D'Angelo was called for 2 quick fouls in the first minutes of the game put him on the bench for an entire half, and effectively took him out of the game, period. In college bball, most of the time a second foul in the first half puts you on the bench, and an early 3rd foul in the second half does the same. A team with a short bench (like SJU last season) cannot reasonably compete with a deeper team under the present scenario. A couple of touch fouls and you had Christian Jones or JDR as your interior force, or lost your best scorer. Throw in bad refereeing, and 5 fouls changes outcomes dramatically for some squads but not others. Kentucky and Duke for example, with deeper rosters, can withstand foul trouble vs. lesser opponents. Villanova, for example, beat us at the Garden only when they took the ball right at CO, initiated contact, and put him on the bench with fouls.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a 6 foul rule?
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure what a 6 foul rule will yield in the long run, but I also know that 5 fouls in the current system ruins many games. Maybe refs need to refrain from calling touch fouls 45 feet from the basket. I just know that something is wrong when a second foul call early in the first half sends a player to the bench for 18 minutes. Maybe those calls far from the basket should result in a team foul but not a personal foul, or some other creative thinking.
Click to expand...

I don't like the idea of the 6 foul rule at all. The only benefit it may have is that it more aligns with the NBA game, which could help like the 1% of players who get drafted. Other than that, all is does is allow players to be more undisciplined on defense.

As far as the fouls taking players out of the game early on and ruining the game. The solution is simple: tell the players to stop fouling! You don't like the touch fouls being called 45 feet away from the basket? Tell the player to stop committing touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket. If you don't call touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket, are you going to call the same foul when it occurs 5 feet away from the hoop?

In the end, a foul is a foul, regardless of where at on the court it happens, and it should be called as such. It's not the system that needs to change/adjust.....it's the players.
Click to expand...

First off, many touch fouls far from the basket are just that - incidental contact, and not an overt act - the ref can let some of those slide as they are often discretionary.

Second, the 5 foul rule benefits programs that go 10-12 deep. Get through SJU's first five or 6, and there has always been a dropoff. Get through Kentucky or Duke's first 5, and there are 5 guys ranked higher than our starting five. So in effect, five fouls benefit deeper teams who can take out an Okafor and replace him with a Plumlee, etc.
Click to expand...

First off, incidental or not, a foul is a foul. Whether you actually try to foul or not is irrelevant. If incidental contact causes you to commit a foul, it should be called. If you are playing that close 45feet away that there is incidental contact, maybe you should back off on defense a little. And I do see alot of the refs let that stuff go....but it's like any sport, some things are going to get called, and others aren't.
Click to expand...


You're acting like a ref has never made an incorrect call before. Basketball is a contact sport.

6 fouls will help players adjust to inconsistent refs. One game you can have a ref who calls nothing, next game you have a stingy ref that calls everything. With 6 fouls you can get used to the stingy ref without sitting an entire half and costing your team.

It's not always on the players. The inconsistency of refs needs to be talked about here.
 
Like most people, I like the idea of a 30 second clock. Way too much time is wasted in halfcourt offense standing around, burning clock, before starting an offense. The second bonus of a 30 second clock is that now the final 4 minutes will have a minimum of 8 possessions, as opposed to just under 7 possessions. This could have an impact on how the last few minutes are played, where mere seconds can have an impact on the outcome.

I also hate the five foul rule in college basketball. The game this season where D'Angelo was called for 2 quick fouls in the first minutes of the game put him on the bench for an entire half, and effectively took him out of the game, period. In college bball, most of the time a second foul in the first half puts you on the bench, and an early 3rd foul in the second half does the same. A team with a short bench (like SJU last season) cannot reasonably compete with a deeper team under the present scenario. A couple of touch fouls and you had Christian Jones or JDR as your interior force, or lost your best scorer. Throw in bad refereeing, and 5 fouls changes outcomes dramatically for some squads but not others. Kentucky and Duke for example, with deeper rosters, can withstand foul trouble vs. lesser opponents. Villanova, for example, beat us at the Garden only when they took the ball right at CO, initiated contact, and put him on the bench with fouls.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a 6 foul rule?
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure what a 6 foul rule will yield in the long run, but I also know that 5 fouls in the current system ruins many games. Maybe refs need to refrain from calling touch fouls 45 feet from the basket. I just know that something is wrong when a second foul call early in the first half sends a player to the bench for 18 minutes. Maybe those calls far from the basket should result in a team foul but not a personal foul, or some other creative thinking.
Click to expand...

I don't like the idea of the 6 foul rule at all. The only benefit it may have is that it more aligns with the NBA game, which could help like the 1% of players who get drafted. Other than that, all is does is allow players to be more undisciplined on defense.

As far as the fouls taking players out of the game early on and ruining the game. The solution is simple: tell the players to stop fouling! You don't like the touch fouls being called 45 feet away from the basket? Tell the player to stop committing touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket. If you don't call touch fouls 45 feet away from the basket, are you going to call the same foul when it occurs 5 feet away from the hoop?

In the end, a foul is a foul, regardless of where at on the court it happens, and it should be called as such. It's not the system that needs to change/adjust.....it's the players.
Click to expand...

First off, many touch fouls far from the basket are just that - incidental contact, and not an overt act - the ref can let some of those slide as they are often discretionary.

Second, the 5 foul rule benefits programs that go 10-12 deep. Get through SJU's first five or 6, and there has always been a dropoff. Get through Kentucky or Duke's first 5, and there are 5 guys ranked higher than our starting five. So in effect, five fouls benefit deeper teams who can take out an Okafor and replace him with a Plumlee, etc.
Click to expand...

First off, incidental or not, a foul is a foul. Whether you actually try to foul or not is irrelevant. If incidental contact causes you to commit a foul, it should be called. If you are playing that close 45feet away that there is incidental contact, maybe you should back off on defense a little. And I do see alot of the refs let that stuff go....but it's like any sport, some things are going to get called, and others aren't.

Secondly, you want to change the rules because some teams are better than others? Like I said before, it's not the system, it's the individuals/teams. It's not the NCAA's or the game of basketball's fault that some teams can't recruit 10 solid players. What you are talking about is an unbalance in recruiting, which has nothing to do with the number of fouls given per game. Five fouls do benefit deeper teams, the same way that the 3pt line benefits teams that can shoot better, or the same way a zone benefits a team that can't play man to man defense. It's part of the game of basketball.
Click to expand...

Agree completely with your 2nd paragraph.

Disagree with pretty much all of your first. I think refs have to be given some discretion when making calls. A bump on the hip at half court is not the same as a bump on the hip while shooting a layup. What really kills the game, IMO, is the head jerk that guards use at every little bit of contact. Just whip your head back when you take a bump and get yourself a couple ft's. Seems so blatantly obvious to me while watching on TV but perhaps its a bit tougher to gauge for the refs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top