http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22597009/longer-3-point-line-experimental-rules-used-nit
1. Longer three point line (international distance)
2. Wider lane
3. Four 10 minutes quarters
4. Shot clock is 20 instead of 30 off of an offensive rebound.
Does the NIT provide the court for the tournament. Seems a bit much to get teams to scramble with 3 point lines and wider lines on such short notice.
No problem with trying new stuff for the NIT. Biggest potential concern is it sounds like there's no more Bonus, only straight to Double Bonus. Shouldn't effect us though because of our terrible free throw D.
I like the idea of trying new things in the NIT. If nothing else, it may get a few more eyes on the TV.
Not a fan of going straight to Double Bonus though. Having to hit the front end of a late game one-and-one brings some extra excitement to a close game.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on February 27, 2018, 03:49:19 PM
I like the idea of trying new things in the NIT. If nothing else, it may get a few more eyes on the TV.
Not a fan of going straight to Double Bonus though. Having to hit the front end of a late game one-and-one brings some extra excitement to a close game.
Well, if we're in the NIT our opponents are usually long into the double bonus by the time the late and close situations arise.
Better get the boys to start attempting them longer threes. Only two weeks to prepare, eh?
Quote from: chapman on February 27, 2018, 04:14:38 PM
Better get the boys to start attempting them longer threes. Only two weeks to prepare, eh?
Think our team might be readier for that than just about any team in the country.
Almost FIBA rules. Maybe add 5 steps before traveling is called, and bring back the hand Check!!!
Sorry. Missed the earlier thread.
The women already have the 4 quarters, bonus at 5 fouls per quarter. I think it's a good change. Reset halfway through the half is less of a burden to foul prone teams like MU.
I agree that we are probably better prepared than most for these changes.
Good work NIT.
Quote from: CTWarrior on February 27, 2018, 03:39:15 PM
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22597009/longer-3-point-line-experimental-rules-used-nit
1. Longer three point line (international distance)
2. Wider lane
3. Four 10 minutes quarters
4. Shot clock is 20 instead of 30 off of an offensive rebound.
Does the NIT provide the court for the tournament. Seems a bit much to get teams to scramble with 3 point lines and wider lines on such short notice.
Why 4 10 minute quarters? Is that like an extra time out for commercials?
Quote from: Its DJOver on February 27, 2018, 03:44:22 PM
No problem with trying new stuff for the NIT. Biggest potential concern is it sounds like there's no more Bonus, only straight to Double Bonus. Shouldn't effect us though because of our terrible free throw D.
Just like the women's game.
I dislike the one and one. Foul is on the defense. Why do you have to make the first free throw to get the 2nd attempt.
Even if we don't kill opponents with threes from the longer line, opponents wil have to come out there to guard us given the success Rowsey and Howard can have from there resulting in a stretched out defense.
I like how these last 3 years they've been experimenting with the NIT rules. Last year they did quarters, right? 2 years ago they went to the shorter shot-clock and back-court times. I like the longer 3.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on February 27, 2018, 05:36:56 PM
Why 4 10 minute quarters? Is that like an extra time out for commercials?
I would hope that they would eliminate at least one of the normal media timeouts. Those make the game choppy enough as it is without adding another one between the under 12 and under 8 timeouts. Just make the break in between quarters longer to make up.
In televised women's games I think there is one media timeout per quarter plus the break in between quarters.
I think the women have a media timeout at the first deadball under 5 minutes of each quarter.
Quote from: CTWarrior on February 27, 2018, 03:39:15 PM
Does the NIT provide the court for the tournament. Seems a bit much to get teams to scramble with 3 point lines and wider lines on such short notice.
I'm all for trying new things, but this is the one I wonder about. I have no idea what it takes to get new lines all over a court, but my recollection is that the NIT games often start as soon as a couple days after the bids go out. Seems like the second coat of paint would still be drying....
Quote from: CTWarrior on February 27, 2018, 03:39:15 PM
Does the NIT provide the court for the tournament. Seems a bit much to get teams to scramble with 3 point lines and wider lines on such short notice.
I would think the court issue would be a big deal. I mean .. you find out you're hosting an NIT game on Sunday night, by Tuesday, you need to paint your court?
20 second shot clock after a offensive rebound is dumb. Same with going straight to the double bonus.
All for extending the 3 point line though.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on February 28, 2018, 08:57:16 AM
I would think the court issue would be a big deal. I mean .. you find out you're hosting an NIT game on Sunday night, by Tuesday, you need to paint your court?
They'll use tape. Any painting is done under a sealant so that won't be possible.
Quote from: ChitownHagans on February 28, 2018, 09:01:46 AM
20 second shot clock after a offensive rebound is dumb. Same with going straight to the double bonus.
All for extending the 3 point line though.
I love the move to a 20-second shot clock in offensive rebound situations. I'd say the same should go for defensive non-shooting fouls and any other resets where the ball starts anywhere from half-court on up. That's more than enough time to reset once you're in the offensive half and helps prevent teams like Wisconsin from bleeding 60-90 seconds on offensive possessions. It will encourage more offensive play and free flow of play.
The one and one is just weird. The penalty is on the defense. So, why do you have to make the first free-throw, too get the second free throw. Glad the women's game got rid of that rule. Plus, the fouls reset after the quarter. Less free-throws to watch.
Quote from: Mr. Nielsen on February 28, 2018, 09:33:54 AM
The one and one is just weird. The penalty is on the defense. So, why do you have to make the first free-throw, too get the second free throw. Glad the women's game got rid of that rule. Plus, the fouls reset after the quarter. Less free-throws to watch.
Makes games more exciting, get more people to watch, make more money.
Quote from: Its DJOver on February 28, 2018, 09:36:24 AM
Makes games more exciting, get more people to watch, make more money.
So, a weird rule makes the game more exciting when the foul is on the defense. It makes the game exciting watching guys shot free-throws? I don't think any one is watching men's hoops because of the one and one.
The women's game has much better flow than the men's game. Fouls reset after each 10 minute quarter. You shot two after the 5th foul. The final 10 to 14 minutes of the game is not a free-throw contest.
Quote from: CTWarrior on February 27, 2018, 03:39:15 PM
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22597009/longer-3-point-line-experimental-rules-used-nit
1. Longer three point line (international distance)
Obviously a desperate attempt to Warrior-proof the NIT!
Although to Rowsey-proof it, they'd have to extend it to half court.
Quote from: Mr. Nielsen on February 28, 2018, 10:05:16 AM
So, a weird rule makes the game more exciting when the foul is on the defense. It makes the game exciting watching guys shot free-throws? I don't think any one is watching men's hoops because of the one and one.
The women's game has much better flow than the men's game. Fouls reset after each 10 minute quarter. You shot two after the 5th foul. The final 10 to 14 minutes of the game is not a free-throw contest.
People don't watch just because of the 1 and 1, but it does make games more exciting, which causes more people to watch. There's no way to quantify how much of an effect it has so it all come down to opinion. Personally, I'm a fan of the 1 and 1.
Quote from: Its DJOver on February 28, 2018, 10:26:48 AM
People don't watch just because of the 1 and 1, but it does make games more exciting, which causes more people to watch. There's no way to quantify how much of an effect it has so it all come down to opinion. Personally, I'm a fan of the 1 and 1.
Back in the day, when you were in a bonus situation in the NBA, you got 3 attempts to make 2 free throws on a shooting foul, and 2 attempts to make 1 with an "and one." They got rid of those because there were too many free throws.
I do understand what Mr. Nielson is saying though. With the advent of the double bonus, there are only three occasions per half where the one and one comes into play - non-shooting fouls that are the 7th, 8th and 9th fouls of the half.
So why even have it at all?
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 28, 2018, 09:12:42 AM
I love the move to a 20-second shot clock in offensive rebound situations. I'd say the same should go for defensive non-shooting fouls and any other resets where the ball starts anywhere from half-court on up. That's more than enough time to reset once you're in the offensive half and helps prevent teams like Wisconsin from bleeding 60-90 seconds on offensive possessions. It will encourage more offensive play and free flow of play.
I assume the ball still must make contact with the rim to reset the clock; not recovering the ball that just makes contact with the back board.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on February 28, 2018, 10:52:55 AM
I assume the ball still must make contact with the rim to reset the clock; not recovering the ball that just makes contact with the back board.
Yeah. Just like now. It would simply reset to 20 instead of 30.
Quote from: #bansultan on February 28, 2018, 10:41:25 AM
Back in the day, when you were in a bonus situation in the NBA, you got 3 attempts to make 2 free throws on a shooting foul, and 2 attempts to make 1 with an "and one." They got rid of those because there were too many free throws.
I do understand what Mr. Nielson is saying though. With the advent of the double bonus, there are only three occasions per half where the one and one comes into play - non-shooting fouls that are the 7th, 8th and 9th fouls of the half.
So why even have it at all?
Fair point. That's why we have the NIT to test this kind of stuff. Unless we're in it, I doubt I'll watch any NIT to see how it works, don't seeing it having a huge effect on outcomes.
Quote from: brewcity77 on February 28, 2018, 09:12:42 AM
I love the move to a 20-second shot clock in offensive rebound situations. I'd say the same should go for defensive non-shooting fouls and any other resets where the ball starts anywhere from half-court on up. That's more than enough time to reset once you're in the offensive half and helps prevent teams like Wisconsin from bleeding 60-90 seconds on offensive possessions. It will encourage more offensive play and free flow of play.
Didn't they change the rule this year to reset to 20 on non-shooting fouls in the front court, and on kicking violations?
The other night Georgetown had an inbounds under their basket with 14 on the shot clock. Markus kicked the inbound pass and the clock was reset to 20 instead of 30.
Quote from: Its DJOver on February 28, 2018, 11:02:11 AM
That's why we have the NIT to test this kind of stuff. Unless we're in it, I doubt I'll watch any NIT to see how it works, don't seeing it having a huge effect on outcomes.
I love the NIT! heck, I watch the CBI and CIT on CBSSN as well. I need college hoops to watch on Tuesday & Wednesday nights. ;D
Quote from: Mr. Nielsen on February 28, 2018, 11:23:11 AM
I love the NIT! heck, I watch the CBI and CIT on CBSSN as well. I need college hoops to watch on Tuesday & Wednesday nights. ;D
No Vegas 16?
Quote from: #bansultan on February 28, 2018, 10:41:25 AM
Back in the day, when you were in a bonus situation in the NBA, you got 3 attempts to make 2 free throws on a shooting foul, and 2 attempts to make 1 with an "and one."
The head coach of the HS team for which I am an assistant is 31 years old. I happened to mention this to him just the other day and he couldn't believe it. I had to google it and show it to him.
"So the best players in the world got an extra free throw when they missed, but high school players didn't? That's crazy talk!"
You haven't lived until you've done an NIT bracket pool.
Quote from: MU82 on February 28, 2018, 02:33:03 PM
The head coach of the HS team for which I am an assistant is 31 years old. I happened to mention this to him just the other day and he couldn't believe it. I had to google it and show it to him.
"So the best players in the world got an extra free throw when they missed, but high school players didn't? That's crazy talk!"
Until 1969, a basket after a missed free throw was only 1 point in the NBA, crazy!
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on February 28, 2018, 02:08:10 PM
No Vegas 16?
They got rid of it after year one. One eight schools played.
Quote from: Waldo Jeffers on February 28, 2018, 03:46:44 PM
Until 1969, a basket after a missed free throw was only 1 point in the NBA, crazy!
That was a bit insane. The guy misses a free throw, a teammate tips it in, scores as one point and the shooter gets credit for a made FT.
Quote from: #bansultan on February 28, 2018, 10:41:25 AM
Back in the day, when you were in a bonus situation in the NBA, you got 3 attempts to make 2 free throws on a shooting foul, and 2 attempts to make 1 with an "and one." They got rid of those because there were too many free throws.
I can still remember the Arena PA guy announcing that some player was at the line for "3 to make 2." Crazy.
If yall think the 3 for 2 is weird, there was a time when a player who gets subbed out is disqualified from reentering the game, like baseball.