SpencerFilibuster Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I'm convinced that if most college basketball fans had an NBA team to root for they'd also be fans of the NBA. But when you don't have anyone to call for you naturally become disinterested and make statements like "I hope college basketball doesn't try to be like the NBA" NBA basketball is really really good if you actually watch it. Ok...but the NBA isn't NCAA. I don't think it needs to be. There are (30x15) ~450 NBA players. There are (351x13) ~4500 NCAA D1 scholarship athletes. The skill level isn't going to be the same, so the game isn't going to be the same. The NBA players are the best of the best. The style and format in which the NBA plays has evolved into something that works well with the type of ultra-skilled and ultra-long athletes that are playing in it. It doesn't mean that all levels of play should strive to be like the NBA or that the NBA is 'better' basketball. The advocates pushing for this change seem to think that it is a fact that pace and high-scoring is 'better' and more 'exciting' basketball. Would they please define what 'better' basketball means? Why can't college basketball exist how it is? The viewing #'s for March Madness keep breaking records. Many conferences have tv contracts; there's more in-season CBB games on tv than ever before. NBA players can take (and make) shots off the dribble, perform well in isolation plays and put balls through the hoop that most would deem poor shot selection. (MOST) College players aren't at this level. My personal opinion is that if you start taking time off the shot clock, there will be more 'bad' shots from the college players, and fg% will do down. There will be less touches, less passes, more early-in-the-shot-clock shots, and less opportunity to set up. I believe that the NCAA tournament is the heartbeat and backbone of NCAA college basketball. There are so many things to love about it. One of the main things I love about it, is that any of the 351 teams have a chance to doing something great in a particular season. When you start changing the game, it could potentially affect the tournament, positively or negatively. If you change the rules of the game enough, to where it is more closely resembles the NBA rules, there will be consequences. I'm not claiming to know what those could be, but I can speculate. One thing I love about CBB is the variety of strategies across the board. You have multiple different kinds of zone defense, you have tons of traps, full court pressure, defensive scheme changes in the middle of plays. You have princeton offense, dribble-drive, motion, flex...etc etc. You have coaches with different recruiting strategies, trying to figure out how to succeed. Right now, in the current format, there is enough flexibility in the rules for the 'little' guy to work with, in order to have a shot. I appreciate that as well. If the rules keep changing, and some of those things I love (variety of strategies, upset potential, offensive efficiency, NCAA tournament) are affected for the sake of having higher scores and a faster pace, I'll be disappointed. Obviously I don't know what will happen, or could happen, or how the game would change...but I'm in the camp of not wanting to find out. I don't think anything is 'broken'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Ok...but the NBA isn't NCAA. I don't think it needs to be. There are (30x15) ~450 NBA players. There are (351x13) ~4500 NCAA D1 scholarship athletes. The skill level isn't going to be the same, so the game isn't going to be the same. The NBA players are the best of the best. The style and format in which the NBA plays has evolved into something that works well with the type of ultra-skilled and ultra-long athletes that are playing in it. It doesn't mean that all levels of play should strive to be like the NBA or that the NBA is 'better' basketball. The advocates pushing for this change seem to think that it is a fact that pace and high-scoring is 'better' and more 'exciting' basketball. Would they please define what 'better' basketball means? Why can't college basketball exist how it is? The viewing #'s for March Madness keep breaking records. Many conferences have tv contracts; there's more in-season CBB games on tv than ever before. NBA players can take (and make) shots off the dribble, perform well in isolation plays and put balls through the hoop that most would deem poor shot selection. (MOST) College players aren't at this level. My personal opinion is that if you start taking time off the shot clock, there will be more 'bad' shots from the college players, and fg% will do down. There will be less touches, less passes, more early-in-the-shot-clock shots, and less opportunity to set up. I believe that the NCAA tournament is the heartbeat and backbone of NCAA college basketball. There are so many things to love about it. One of the main things I love about it, is that any of the 351 teams have a chance to doing something great in a particular season. When you start changing the game, it could potentially affect the tournament, positively or negatively. If you change the rules of the game enough, to where it is more closely resembles the NBA rules, there will be consequences. I'm not claiming to know what those could be, but I can speculate. One thing I love about CBB is the variety of strategies across the board. You have multiple different kinds of zone defense, you have tons of traps, full court pressure, defensive scheme changes in the middle of plays. You have princeton offense, dribble-drive, motion, flex...etc etc. You have coaches with different recruiting strategies, trying to figure out how to succeed. Right now, in the current format, there is enough flexibility in the rules for the 'little' guy to work with, in order to have a shot. I appreciate that as well. If the rules keep changing, and some of those things I love (variety of strategies, upset potential, offensive efficiency, NCAA tournament) are affected for the sake of having higher scores and a faster pace, I'll be disappointed. Obviously I don't know what will happen, or could happen, or how the game would change...but I'm in the camp of not wanting to find out. I don't think anything is 'broken'. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 NBA games are 48 minutes. NCAA games are 40 minutes. Both work out to a foul per 8 minutes. I don't see the need to change that. I like the other changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 The foul issue could be solved on its own if coaches wouldn't sit players for huge stretches because they have two fouls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 If they called everything that was actually a foul, I might be ok with the 6 fouls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlebill Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 If they called everything that was actually a foul, I might be ok with the 6 fouls. That would slow down the game a lot. I personally wouldn't mind it, but that's the opposite of what the rest of the other rules are trying to accomplish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Ok...but the NBA isn't NCAA. I don't think it needs to be. There are (30x15) ~450 NBA players. There are (351x13) ~4500 NCAA D1 scholarship athletes. The skill level isn't going to be the same, so the game isn't going to be the same. The NBA players are the best of the best. The style and format in which the NBA plays has evolved into something that works well with the type of ultra-skilled and ultra-long athletes that are playing in it. It doesn't mean that all levels of play should strive to be like the NBA or that the NBA is 'better' basketball. The advocates pushing for this change seem to think that it is a fact that pace and high-scoring is 'better' and more 'exciting' basketball. Would they please define what 'better' basketball means? Why can't college basketball exist how it is? The viewing #'s for March Madness keep breaking records. Many conferences have tv contracts; there's more in-season CBB games on tv than ever before. NBA players can take (and make) shots off the dribble, perform well in isolation plays and put balls through the hoop that most would deem poor shot selection. (MOST) College players aren't at this level. My personal opinion is that if you start taking time off the shot clock, there will be more 'bad' shots from the college players, and fg% will do down. There will be less touches, less passes, more early-in-the-shot-clock shots, and less opportunity to set up. I believe that the NCAA tournament is the heartbeat and backbone of NCAA college basketball. There are so many things to love about it. One of the main things I love about it, is that any of the 351 teams have a chance to doing something great in a particular season. When you start changing the game, it could potentially affect the tournament, positively or negatively. If you change the rules of the game enough, to where it is more closely resembles the NBA rules, there will be consequences. I'm not claiming to know what those could be, but I can speculate. One thing I love about CBB is the variety of strategies across the board. You have multiple different kinds of zone defense, you have tons of traps, full court pressure, defensive scheme changes in the middle of plays. You have princeton offense, dribble-drive, motion, flex...etc etc. You have coaches with different recruiting strategies, trying to figure out how to succeed. Right now, in the current format, there is enough flexibility in the rules for the 'little' guy to work with, in order to have a shot. I appreciate that as well. If the rules keep changing, and some of those things I love (variety of strategies, upset potential, offensive efficiency, NCAA tournament) are affected for the sake of having higher scores and a faster pace, I'll be disappointed. Obviously I don't know what will happen, or could happen, or how the game would change...but I'm in the camp of not wanting to find out. I don't think anything is 'broken'. Agreed. That's what I don't like about these rules changes. They are primarily being pushed by the blue bloods, who are hoping to gain an edge... as if they don't have enough already. The motivation is not really an effort to make the game better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 That would slow down the game a lot. I personally wouldn't mind it, but that's the opposite of what the rest of the other rules are trying to accomplish I believe it would have the opposite affect as the players would adopt and quit fouling so much which would create more space between the man and the defender. If all fouls were called SLU's defense would have been different the last few years. You just can't guard that close and physical without fouling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 The foul issue could be solved on its own if coaches wouldn't sit players for huge stretches because they have two fouls. I agree. Somewhere in the last 30 years this has changed. It use to be 3 fouls in the first half before you sat. Some coaches won't let a player [sodie} foul out for fear they won't play hard defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doowop Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 I agree. Somewhere in the last 30 years this has changed. It use to be 3 fouls in the first half before you sat. Some coaches won't let a player [sodie} foul out for fear they won't play hard defense.I believe it started with coach Chaney at Temple. I never saw it before he started doing it. He had an outstanding freshman and he started sitting his players that year. I believe that is when it started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.