menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: N.I.T. Rule Chnages
Page: 1 of 1
rpbobcat
General User
R
Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,661
person
mail
rpbobcat
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 9:19 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Don't know how many people here followed this year's N.I.T.

My wife's a big PSU fan,so I watched their games,and went to the Finals last night.

For this year's tournament the NCAA tried the following rule changes:

1.International 3 point line.

2.4 ten minute quarters

3.20 second shot clock,after an offensive rebound.

The 3 point distance didn't seem to affect any team's game.

Personally,I did like playing 4 quarters and the shorter shot clock after an offensive rebound.

They made several announcements requesting fan feedback.

It will be interesting to see if any of the changes become permanent.
bornacatfan
General User
Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,752
mail
bornacatfan
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 9:34 AM
settings_applications edit_note
KenPom did an analysis

Reader's Digest version.

Scoring was slightly down but not appreciably with longer 3 point line. No of attempts was down and no of makes was down but not as much as suspected.

Wider lane did not change many games with most bigs able to step out and hit 3s. Oddly the number of offensive rebounds was up but he attributed to the small sample size.

Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.

Shot clock going to 20 secs increases number of possession per game but he made a comment on stoppages as timekeepers at the table created a lot more times where the refs had to go over to the table and review and reset shot clocks due to operator error. (Yay. more stoppages)
rpbobcat
General User
R
Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,661
person
mail
rpbobcat
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 11:52 AM
settings_applications edit_note
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.

Shot clock going to 20 secs increases number of possession per game but he made a comment on stoppages as timekeepers at the table created a lot more times where the refs had to go over to the table and review and reset shot clocks due to operator error. (Yay. more stoppages)
No question, quarters speed up the game.
Last night's game was over in a little under 2 hours,and that's with one pretty long injury time out.

As far as stoppages,I think there may have been a "learning curve" at the start of the tournament.

Didn't have any real issues with stoppages for either the semis or finals.
Alan Swank
General User
AS
Member Since: 12/12/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,375
person
mail
Alan Swank
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 11:57 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Would quarters necessitating standing for defense four times instead of 2?
OU_Country
General User
Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,401
mail
OU_Country
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 1:07 PM
settings_applications edit_note
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
KenPom did an analysis

Reader's Digest version.

Scoring was slightly down but not appreciably with longer 3 point line. No of attempts was down and no of makes was down but not as much as suspected.

Wider lane did not change many games with most bigs able to step out and hit 3s. Oddly the number of offensive rebounds was up but he attributed to the small sample size.

Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.

Shot clock going to 20 secs increases number of possession per game but he made a comment on stoppages as timekeepers at the table created a lot more times where the refs had to go over to the table and review and reset shot clocks due to operator error. (Yay. more stoppages)
I really like the shot clock reset to 20 - as long as time clock people get it right.

I read his piece in The Athletic as well, but I didn't note any specifics about speeding up the game other than "it sped up the game". Were there any numbers shown anywhere that show this?
Ohio69
General User
O69
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,123
person
mail
Ohio69
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 1:48 PM
settings_applications edit_note
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.
How did quarters impact free throws again?

Not sure I understand the need for quarters with the existing media timeouts.
OU_Country
General User
Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,401
mail
OU_Country
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 3:13 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.
How did quarters impact free throws again?

Not sure I understand the need for quarters with the existing media timeouts.
There were apparently fewer free throws attempted by 2 or 3 on average per game, and fewer attempts while in the bonus. I'm in the camp that says that halves work just fine, and there's nothing wrong with the current foul shooting rules. Obviously some think too much time is spent at the foul line with the current rules.
Jeff McKinney
Moderator
JM
Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,163
person
mail
Jeff McKinney
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 3:17 PM
settings_applications edit_note
OU_Country wrote:expand_more
Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.
How did quarters impact free throws again?

Not sure I understand the need for quarters with the existing media timeouts.
There were apparently fewer free throws attempted by 2 or 3 on average per game, and fewer attempts while in the bonus. I'm in the camp that says that halves work just fine, and there's nothing wrong with the current foul shooting rules. Obviously some think too much time is spent at the foul line with the current rules.

I agree. The quarters thing may just be a novelty. I think the current halves and foul rules are just fine.

I would like to see the wider NBA lane and the international three point line.
rpbobcat
General User
R
Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,661
person
mail
rpbobcat
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 4:53 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.
How did quarters impact free throws again?

Not sure I understand the need for quarters with the existing media timeouts.
With quarters team fouls "reset" each quarter,so teams aren't in the bonus situation as long.

As I said,quarters do speed up the game.
Last night's Finals clocked in at just under 2 hours.
Alan Swank
General User
AS
Member Since: 12/12/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,375
person
mail
Alan Swank
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 5:12 PM
settings_applications edit_note
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.
How did quarters impact free throws again?

Not sure I understand the need for quarters with the existing media timeouts.
With quarters team fouls "reset" each quarter,so teams aren't in the bonus situation as long.

As I said,quarters do speed up the game.
Last night's Finals clocked in at just under 2 hours.
Most of our games are already under 2 hours. In fact quite a few of the early games were under 1:45.
mcbin
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 951
mail
mcbin
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 9:56 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Would quarters necessitating standing for defense four times instead of 2?
Hell yes!
bobcatsquared
General User
B
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 5,845
person
mail
bobcatsquared
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 10:02 PM
settings_applications edit_note
mcbin wrote:expand_more
Would quarters necessitating standing for defense four times instead of 2?
Hell yes!
What about an overtime game that uses quarters?
UpSan Bobcat
General User
Member Since: 8/30/2005
Location: Upper Sandusky, OH
Post Count: 3,817
mail
UpSan Bobcat
mail
Posted: 3/30/2018 11:24 PM
settings_applications edit_note
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
Quarters were felt to be a love it or hate it proposition. It did speed the games up and number of FTs shot were affected. Instead of being in the bonus for an entire second half the quarter reset sped the games up and results in a corresponding change in attempts.
How did quarters impact free throws again?

Not sure I understand the need for quarters with the existing media timeouts.
With quarters team fouls "reset" each quarter,so teams aren't in the bonus situation as long.

As I said,quarters do speed up the game.
Last night's Finals clocked in at just under 2 hours.
Right, you have 5 fouls before the bonus in a 10-minute quarter as opposed to 7 fouls in a 20-minute half, so that changes things. A team potentially could foul 8 times in a half with no free throws to the other team, as opposed to 6. A big change is there is no one-and-one situation - all two-shot fouls. I personally like the one-and-one as an opportunity for teams down late to have a better shot of coming back if the opponent doesn't make a free throw.
Showing Messages: 1 - 13 of 13
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)