NCAA Proposed Rule Changes | The Boneyard

NCAA Proposed Rule Changes

navery12

navery12

Joined
May 27, 2015
Messages
16,369
Reaction Score
111,923


Some interesting ones here, the 6 foul change I can get on board with. Same with the team declining FTs and taking the ball out on a foul under 2 minutes
 
I thought the "5 seconds closely guarded" rule was already eliminated? Am I wrong?
 
Rules should be streamlined - instead of limiting number of timeouts under a certain time left in the game, give each team 2 or 3 TO's per half. Make them worthwhile.
Go to 6 fouls to combat bad officiating
 
So why not make it easy and just make it four 10 minute quarters?

So, if a team has four fouls and commits the fifth foul with 10:01 remaining in the half, it's two FT's. But if they commit the same foul 2 seconds later at 9:59 remaining it's a throw in??
 
-LOL the 2nd proposed rule (foul reset at 10:00 mark) is basically splitting the game into 4 quarters without actually doing that procedurally. I think it works great in the WBB games so I would 100% endorse that.

-I don't know if I like the declining FTs rule as it was shown. Still won't stop the excessive intentional fouling by defense to try and make up points when desperately behind near end of the game. I'd endorse something like: Offense has the option to either shoot 2 FTs, or gets 1 automatic point plus the ball. And I'd even endorse something where the Offense didn't have to do an in-bounds play. Give the ball to offensive player 3 feet beyond 3pt arc and defense has to start the play no closer than ~5 feet from the offensive player.
 
.-.
Lane to 16 feet will help teams that don't rely on the 3pt shot.

I agree the foul and TO rules are too complicated. Most players are taken out in the first half if the get two fouls and all sit with 3 so this makes no sense. Resetting team fouls at 10:00 is just playing 4 quarters so do that like the women's game. I'm fine with eliminating the 1 and 1, that really only affects one or two fouls per half as most fouls are shooting fouls anyway.

TO's can be 2 plus 1 30 sec use or lose in each half for a max of 4. There are enough TV timeouts already.

I don't like the goaltending rule, it allows, well, goaltending for any shot that isn't a swish Technically, it would allow blocking such shots back through the bottom of the rim.

I also don't like the elimination of the 10 backcourt rule, if you want to allow advancing the ball on a TO, that's fine. You need to allow some way for the defense to catch up at the end of games.

I am all for eliminating the end of game parade to the FT line, but you would lose the variance associated with good vs poor FT shooting teams. Kentucky might have actually had a chance in 2014 with this rule on place.
 
SubbaBub said:
Lane to 16 feet will help teams that don't rely on the 3pt shot.

I agree the foul and TO rules are too complicated. Most players are taken out in the first half if the get two fouls and all sit with 3 so this makes no sense. Resetting team fouls at 10:00 is just playing 4 quarters so do that like the women's game. I'm fine with eliminating the 1 and 1, that really only affects one or two fouls per half as most fouls are shooting fouls anyway.

TO's can be 2 plus 1 30 sec use or lose in each half for a max of 4. There are enough TV timeouts already.

I don't like the goaltending rule, it allows, well, goaltending for any shot that isn't a swish Technically, it would allow blocking such shots back through the bottom of the rim.

I also don't like the elimination of the 10 backcourt rule, if you want to allow advancing the ball on a TO, that's fine. You need to allow some way for the defense to catch up at the end of games.

I am all for eliminating the end of game parade to the FT line, but you would lose the variance associated with good vs poor FT shooting teams. Kentucky might have actually had a chance in 2014 with this rule on place.
Expand ...
The foul rule would stop coaches from sitting players with 2 fouls in the first half. I wish all coaches didn't do that automatically already, but if this is what it takes to make it stop then I'll take it
 
navery12 said:
The foul rule would stop coaches from sitting players with 2 fouls in the first half. I wish all coaches didn't do that automatically already, but if this is what it takes to make it stop then I'll take it
Expand ...

Yes. You play them up to the third foul and then they sit the half (or risk fouling out for the whole game)
 
Chin Diesel said:
So why not make it easy and just make it four 10 minute quarters?

So, if a team has four fouls and commits the fifth foul with 10:01 remaining in the half, it's two FT's. But if they commit the same foul 2 seconds later at 9:59 remaining it's a throw in??
Expand ...
This is so dumb and they should just go to quarters.

You're going to get lengthy reviews anytime a team in the bonus has a foul committed on them around 10:01-9:59 left.
 
SubbaBub said:
Lane to 16 feet will help teams that don't rely on the 3pt shot.

I agree the foul and TO rules are too complicated. Most players are taken out in the first half if the get two fouls and all sit with 3 so this makes no sense. Resetting team fouls at 10:00 is just playing 4 quarters so do that like the women's game. I'm fine with eliminating the 1 and 1, that really only affects one or two fouls per half as most fouls are shooting fouls anyway.

TO's can be 2 plus 1 30 sec use or lose in each half for a max of 4. There are enough TV timeouts already.

I don't like the goaltending rule, it allows, well, goaltending for any shot that isn't a swish Technically, it would allow blocking such shots back through the bottom of the rim.

I also don't like the elimination of the 10 backcourt rule, if you want to allow advancing the ball on a TO, that's fine. You need to allow some way for the defense to catch up at the end of games.

I am all for eliminating the end of game parade to the FT line, but you would lose the variance associated with good vs poor FT shooting teams. Kentucky might have actually had a chance in 2014 with this rule on place.
Expand ...
Lane to 16 feet will have the opposite effect and will make the college game even more like the NBA. The NBA and college both have to do things to encourage less threes and encourage more post play.
 
.-.
SubbaBub said:
Lane to 16 feet will help teams that don't rely on the 3pt shot.

I agree the foul and TO rules are too complicated. Most players are taken out in the first half if the get two fouls and all sit with 3 so this makes no sense. Resetting team fouls at 10:00 is just playing 4 quarters so do that like the women's game. I'm fine with eliminating the 1 and 1, that really only affects one or two fouls per half as most fouls are shooting fouls anyway.

TO's can be 2 plus 1 30 sec use or lose in each half for a max of 4. There are enough TV timeouts already.

I don't like the goaltending rule, it allows, well, goaltending for any shot that isn't a swish Technically, it would allow blocking such shots back through the bottom of the rim.

I also don't like the elimination of the 10 backcourt rule, if you want to allow advancing the ball on a TO, that's fine. You need to allow some way for the defense to catch up at the end of games.

I am all for eliminating the end of game parade to the FT line, but you would lose the variance associated with good vs poor FT shooting teams. Kentucky might have actually had a chance in 2014 with this rule on place.
Expand ...
The goaltending rule was only for offensive basket interference.

Basically, you can do a put-back dunk even if it's on the cylinder.
 
"Yeah, lets split the half into two equal sections! Is there a name for that? And let's really muddy up the flow of the game with all these strange qualifications on when and how a player fouls out! We're so innovative."
-The NCAA, probably
 
JakeTheDog said:
"Yeah, lets split the half into two equal sections! Is there a name for that? And let's really muddy up the flow of the game with all these strange qualifications on when and how a player fouls out! We're so innovative."
-The NCAA, probably
Expand ...
 
I don't know that I like rule changes regarding number of fouls only because I saw a good amount of inconsistency out of refs this year and some games the refs flat out stunk. It's been debated here whether or not the refs like Dan Hurley and we saw Mcdermott whispering sweet nothings into one ref's ear so other than making it 6 fouls and you're out, any other rule changes regarding fouls may hurt us unless I'm missing something. Which is probable...

IMO college sports should move to follow more closely to pro rules. Three point distances and number of fouls, wood bats in baseball, etc.
 
.-.
Excuse me.

I’m just here to dunk on the part about traveling on page 2.

This is a clear admission I was correct about the euro step in college game.

It officially makes college more like the NBA rather than just having incompetent refs
 
I cannot describe how bad of an idea it is to widen the lane even more.

The lane should be narrowed to increase incentives for more post play
 
I'm big on declining fouls in the 2nd half. End the intentional foul apocalypse.
 
navery12 said:
The foul rule would stop coaches from sitting players with 2 fouls in the first half. I wish all coaches didn't do that automatically already, but if this is what it takes to make it stop then I'll take it
Expand ...
I'm on the other end of the spectrum. Having 5 fouls forces coaches to make decisions and other players to step up. It's not often that someone fouls out. With 6 it'll never happen. At that point why even count (sarcasm)? And with all those extra fouls, the game may even slow down a bit, especially in the late 2nd half.
 
I didn't realize basketball was so broken that it needed all these fixes.

Leave the fouls alone. The current situation is not a problem.

Coaches should be allowed to have tablets on the sideline.

I am fine with quarters, although I don't think they are necessary.
 
Love the proposed 6 foul rule, but no more than 4 per half. It would stop the instant benching at 2 fouls we current see in the first half. Takes too many good players off the court, sometimes on very weak calls.

I have long called for the declining FT rule. If a team prefers possession, which is a lesser penalty, why shouldn't they be able to choose that? They still need to inbound the ball without having it stolen. That isn't always easy. It would also allow you to play someone who may be a key player, but who isn't a strong FT shooter.
 
.-.
the Q said:
Excuse me.

I’m just here to dunk on the part about traveling on page 2.

This is a clear admission I was correct about the euro step in college game.

It officially makes college more like the NBA rather than just having incompetent refs
Expand ...
Preach. The number of sub-college level players, coaches, and parents that think all spin moves are legal because they don't call it in college or the NBA is infuriating. The high school rules are clear: lift your pivot foot and put it back down, it's a travel. They just choose to not call it in college because those plays are entertaining to watch. In the NBA, it's a legal move. Explaining this to players, coaches, and parents is like talking to a wall.
 
uchuskies2009 said:
Preach. The number of sub-college level players, coaches, and parents that think all spin moves are legal because they don't call it in college or the NBA is infuriating. The high school rules are clear: lift your pivot foot and put it back down, it's a travel. They just choose to not call it in college because those plays are entertaining to watch. In the NBA, it's a legal move. Explaining this to players, coaches, and parents is like talking to a wall.
Expand ...

Yes. Which means that no ref is final four worthy. Because they all choose to ignore it.

It’s become too much of a made for tv spectacle than a real sport

But yes, at the sub college level it is a nightmare.

The NBA changed the rule in like 2009 because it was getting so bad.
 
the Q said:
Yes. Which means that no ref is final four worthy. Because they all choose to ignore it.

It’s become too much of a made for tv spectacle than a real sport

But yes, at the sub college level it is a nightmare.

The NBA changed the rule in like 2009 because it was getting so bad.
Expand ...
Try reffing an AAU game where they try attempting a spin move 🙄.

I've been told by several college officials that their assignors specifically tell them to not make those calls, so saying they aren't final four worthy isn't entirely fair, though I get what you're saying. College basketball is a business with next to no cost of labor, so they're going to dictate what gets called and what doesn't because it's all about making money.
 
uchuskies2009 said:
Try reffing an AAU game where they try attempting a spin move 🙄.

I've been told by several college officials that their assignors specifically tell them to not make those calls, so saying they aren't final four worthy isn't entirely fair, though I get what you're saying. College basketball is a business with next to no cost of labor, so they're going to dictate what gets called and what doesn't because it's all about making money.
Expand ...

That is abhorrent.

Shame on them.

Literally changing the rule just because people don’t want to follow the rules...is a choice you could make, I guess.
 
With the style of defense we play we should be heavily lobbying for an increase to 6 fouls.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,214
Messages
4,557,439
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom