College Bball Thread

[str8baller]

5 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

It isn't an invitation to anything other than better basketball. It doesn't take away offensive fouls. It just means a defender can't slide in front of a player and get ran over. You can still contest shots without fouling. It doesn't change basketball. Instead of the dude setting themselves to get ran over, they go straight up to contest a shot. Verticality is allowed in basketball. Roy Hibbert made it pretty famous.

If it didn’t change anything they wouldn’t be changing the rule. Lol…i don’t know how you even argue that. 

[str8baller]

14 hours ago, Hardwood83 said:

I'm sure it won't be popular, but I agree with this. Never gonna happen, but it should at least go back to 35.

I wouldn’t mind 35, it favors more sophisticated offenses. The problem is today there aren’t a ton of longer-developing offenses due to the mass transfers and widespread playing of young guys.  So having a longer shot clock just leads to guys dribbling aimlessly for longer before going 1-on-1 at the end of the clock.  Still bad basketball, just 5 more sec of it.   
 

I thought the NBA’s move to 8 sec to advance the past half court was a good move. It incentivizes teams to get the ball up and into their offense sooner and also rewards teams that want to play aggressive defense past the half court line. The college game could implement that pretty easily, imo.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

2 hours ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Then just get rid of every rule since they’ll be missed sometimes.

There isn't a rule missed as much as the charge/block rule. Most inconsistent call in the sport.

[go iu bb]

5 hours ago, BGleas said:

There is no worse officiating in sports than a college basketball ref calling a charge. 

They're absolutely horrendous at it. It's worse than NFL refs trying to figure out what a catch is. 

I'm pretty sure some of them only look to see if the defender is outside of the circle at the time of the collision. If he's outside, it's a charge, if he's not it's a block. They don't even care if he was set or not. This rule change wouldn't really affect that since they already don't care about the timing.

[BGleas]

3 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

I'm pretty sure some of them only look to see if the defender is outside of the circle at the time of the collision. If he's outside, it's a charge, if he's not it's a block. They don't even care if he was set or not. This rule change wouldn't really affect that since they already don't care about the timing.

I dont really think that's it. They were horrible at the charge/block call before the semi circle was introduced in the college game. 

College refs reward the defense way too much for crappy defense. The benefit of the doubt should always go to the offensive player on those bang-bang block/charge calls. But college refs love to call charges. 

[go iu bb]

https://nypost.com/2023/06/10/john-caliparis-kentucky-program-in-complete-disarray/

 

[AZ Hoosier]

2 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

There isn't a rule missed as much as the charge/block rule. Most inconsistent call in the sport.

Unless it's traveling when going for the layup... used to be one step... now it's anywhere between 4 and 5... and shuffling your feet doesn't count...

[Scotty R]

17 minutes ago, AZ Hoosier said:

Unless it's traveling when going for the layup... used to be one step... now it's anywhere between 4 and 5... and shuffling your feet doesn't count...

If you called travel literally to the letter of the law that the euro step and the jump stop is traveling. If you go up in the air with both feet off the floor then come back down that is a travel.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

1 hour ago, AZ Hoosier said:

Unless it's traveling when going for the layup... used to be one step... now it's anywhere between 4 and 5... and shuffling your feet doesn't count...

You're allowed two steps in college, not one. In the NBA it's a "gather" and then two steps you're allowed. The gather is sort of complicated amd seems very inconsistent... As in, if you're not Giannis, Harden, LeBron etc... You ain't getting away with it.

[RaceToTheTop]

5 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

There isn't a rule missed as much as the charge/block rule. Most inconsistent call in the sport.

I'm in favor of actively trying to get it called in a more consistent manner rather than throwing my hands in the air and just giving up on it.  The unintended consequence of getting rid of blocks and charges will result in players playing offense and defense with more pushes and holds, and the charge/block arguments would just change to pushes constitute.  The NCAA's ref issues are fixable IF they are serious about doing it.  As long as they aren't, removal of rules will just result in a more bullish style of play.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

2 hours ago, RaceToTheTop said:

I'm in favor of actively trying to get it called in a more consistent manner rather than throwing my hands in the air and just giving up on it.  The unintended consequence of getting rid of blocks and charges will result in players playing offense and defense with more pushes and holds, and the charge/block arguments would just change to pushes constitute.  The NCAA's ref issues are fixable IF they are serious about doing it.  As long as they aren't, removal of rules will just result in a more bullish style of play.

Y'all are way overthinking it. It doesn't mean there won't be offensive fouls or defensive fouls. A defender just couldn't step in the way with the sole purpose of getting ran over. Everything else stays the same. That player instead contest the shot straight up or not. Then the ref is only deciding on verticality rather than if the defender was set, feet outside the circle, the offensive player wasn't out of control, defender was set on time. It's then just a shooting foul or not a shooting foul and move. On rare occasion, an offensive foul.

[RaceToTheTop]

On 6/10/2023 at 10:50 PM, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Y'all are way overthinking it. It doesn't mean there won't be offensive fouls or defensive fouls. A defender just couldn't step in the way with the sole purpose of getting ran over. Everything else stays the same. That player instead contest the shot straight up or not. Then the ref is only deciding on verticality rather than if the defender was set, feet outside the circle, the offensive player wasn't out of control, defender was set on time. It's then just a shooting foul or not a shooting foul and move. On rare occasion, an offensive foul.

Your response doesn’t address what I posted — you said how it would change how a defensive player would play but ignores how an offensive player can take advantage of the rule.  

[Tasmanian Devil]

On 6/10/2023 at 11:50 PM, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Y'all are way overthinking it. It doesn't mean there won't be offensive fouls or defensive fouls. A defender just couldn't step in the way with the sole purpose of getting ran over. Everything else stays the same. That player instead contest the shot straight up or not. Then the ref is only deciding on verticality rather than if the defender was set, feet outside the circle, the offensive player wasn't out of control, defender was set on time. It's then just a shooting foul or not a shooting foul and move. On rare occasion, an offensive foul.

And you’re under thinking it.

Only have to decide verticality? You REALLY think it’s THAT simple? Oh my dear lord . . . 

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

2 hours ago, Tasmanian Devil said:

And you’re under thinking it.

Only have to decide verticality? You REALLY think it’s THAT simple? Oh my dear lord . . . 

Yes, it is that simple. It turns into the same shot contesting play as usual. Verticality, arms up or down, offensive player pushing off etc. All the things that already exist. Yea.. it's that simple.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

8 hours ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Your response doesn’t address what I posted — you said how it would change how a defensive player would play but ignores how an offensive player can take advantage of the rule.  

How could they take advantage? There would still be offensive fouls.

[RaceToTheTop]

 

3 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Yes, it is that simple. It turns into the same shot contesting play as usual. Verticality, arms up or down, offensive player pushing off etc. All the things that already exist. Yea.. it's that simple.

It isn't that simple.  And all you are doing is exchanging one judgement call for another.  Not sure how you think that refs are magically going to get verticality calls correct when they miss block/charges.

The newly defined charge rule is a step forward.  Refs getting it wrong witht he newly defined rule is a separate issue because the rule establishes that the player must be set before the offensive player leaves his feet.  I'd rather fix the ref issue than get rid of the block/charge rule for another rule that would just be missed.

[RaceToTheTop]

3 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

How could they take advantage? There would still be offensive fouls.

Like the moving screens that were a point of emphasis that never get called anyway?  The issue isn't the block/charge foul.  The issue is in the failure of the NCAA to produce quality officiating.  

[Scotty R]

43 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

 

It isn't that simple.  And all you are doing is exchanging one judgement call for another.  Not sure how you think that refs are magically going to get verticality calls correct when they miss block/charges.

The newly defined charge rule is a step forward.  Refs getting it wrong witht he newly defined rule is a separate issue because the rule establishes that the player must be set before the offensive player leaves his feet.  I'd rather fix the ref issue than get rid of the block/charge rule for another rule that would just be missed.

Some of these young guys would freak out the old charge calls. Before if you shot the ball before the contact on the charge the basket would count if it went in.  If the defending team was in the bonus they would get free throws.

[Tasmanian Devil]

49 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Not sure how you think that refs are magically going to get verticality calls correct when they miss block/charges . . . I'd rather fix the ref issue than get rid of the block/charge rule for another rule that would just be missed.

At least SOMEBODY gets it.

[hoosierbgh]

1 hour ago, RaceToTheTop said:

 

It isn't that simple.  And all you are doing is exchanging one judgement call for another.  Not sure how you think that refs are magically going to get verticality calls correct when they miss block/charges.

The newly defined charge rule is a step forward.  Refs getting it wrong witht he newly defined rule is a separate issue because the rule establishes that the player must be set before the offensive player leaves his feet.  I'd rather fix the ref issue than get rid of the block/charge rule for another rule that would just be missed.

Yes, it ultimately comes down to the quality of the refs.  Eliminating charges and focusing even more on an more subjective call doesn't make a lot of sense. The refs already do a worse job getting the verticality rules correct than charges as it is. Worse, verticality comes into play far more often than charges, nearly every closely defended shot that isn't taken from the 3 point arc is likely to involve a verticality judgement. I doubt Edey would average half the points that he did if BIG refs could get the verticality call correct. Without a major change in the way he plays, he would be lucky to play 15 minutes in a game without fouling out were that rule called correctly.