Women in Big East Championship

[brewcity77]

I only saw the fourth quarter, but it was immediately evident how much they missed Davenport. DePaul was dominating the glass, especially on our defensive end. Sucks, guessing this means a 5-seed and playing on the road next week.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Preach. I don't understand how that rule was ever created.

It creates more excitement at the end of games. 

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I don’t understand how form 98% of the game it is a territorial game of advancing the ball past half court and shooting a basketball, but the last two minutes if you have a timeout, all of that is thrown away. 

For no other reason to make it exciting, but you have just disadvantaged the other team as a result.  We ‘re putting excitement over the fundamental aspect of the game they just played the other 38 minutes.  Getting to advance a ball not because you did anything athletic, or even anything at all except call a timeout.  Ugh.  Bad bad bad

OK maybe you should calm down a little.  Sports are entertaining.  This makes it more so.  Don't overthink it.

Sports do this all the time.  College football overtime.  Changes in NFL timing rules the last five minutes of the game.  NHL shootouts. 

In fact, I think this rule makes more sense because a team can advance the ball on a timeout after a made basket at anypoint of a game.  It isn't clock dependent. 

[skianth16]

It creates more excitement at the end of games.

It would also be more exciting if they implemented pop-a-shot rules and all baskets were worth 2x at the end of a game, but I don't see that happening any time soon.

I can't think of any other sports that have gone this far to create offense with a rule change. Can you imagine the NFL advancing the ball for a called TO? Or the MLB offering a batter an extra strike or advancing a runner for a TO?

The rules of the game should be about improving the game, not the fans' experience, IMO. Bryce Harper commented on this topic this week and said something to the effect of "if you don't like the game, don't come watch it" when asked about proposed/planned rule changes intended to make the game faster to improve the fan experience.

[Bocephys]

It would also be more exciting if they implemented pop-a-shot rules and all baskets were worth 2x at the end of a game, but I don't see that happening any time soon.

I can't think of any other sports that have gone this far to create offense with a rule change. Can you imagine the NFL advancing the ball for a called TO? Or the MLB offering a batter an extra strike or advancing a runner for a TO?

The rules of the game should be about improving the game, not the fans' experience, IMO. Bryce Harper commented on this topic this week and said something to the effect of "if you don't like the game, don't come watch it" when asked about proposed/planned rule changes intended to make the game faster to improve the fan experience.

Does Bryce realize he doesn't get $300 million if no one comes?  Do you realize that?

[MU82]

I don’t understand how form 98% of the game it is a territorial game of advancing the ball past half court and shooting a basketball, but the last two minutes if you have a timeout, all of that is thrown away. 

For no other reason to make it exciting, but you have just disadvantaged the other team as a result.  We ‘re putting excitement over the fundamental aspect of the game they just played the other 38 minutes.  Getting to advance a ball not because you did anything athletic, or even anything at all except call a timeout.  Ugh.  Bad bad bad

Well, for 38 minutes, the refs can't look at replays. In the last 2 minutes, they can and do look at a bazillion replays, interrupting the flow of the game, giving teams free time-outs.

In the NFL, the clock runs after the ball goes out of bounds or incomplete passes ... until the last 5 minutes, when it is stopped after each of those plays.

In the PGA, the golfers play 18 straight holes. If it's tied after that, depending on the event, they play No. 18 and then go to No. 16 and then go who knows where to break the tie.

In the NHL, they play 5-on-5 ... until OT, when they go to 3-on-3 and ultimately to penalty shots. Except in the playoffs, where they just keep going 5-on-5.

In college football, overtime only vaguely resembles what took place during the first 60 minutes.

All kinds of examples of rules that "change" near the end of games. You might not like any of those rules and think they're all bad bad bad, but it's pretty common to have "different" rules for end-of-game situations.

And advancing the ball with timeouts in the last 2 minutes certainly hasn't hurt the NBA product. Many would argue it has enhanced it.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

It would also be more exciting if they implemented pop-a-shot rules and all baskets were worth 2x at the end of a game, but I don't see that happening any time soon.

I can't think of any other sports that have gone this far to create offense with a rule change. Can you imagine the NFL advancing the ball for a called TO? Or the MLB offering a batter an extra strike or advancing a runner for a TO?

The rules of the game should be about improving the game, not the fans' experience, IMO. Bryce Harper commented on this topic this week and said something to the effect of "if you don't like the game, don't come watch it" when asked about proposed/planned rule changes intended to make the game faster to improve the fan experience.

The NFL stops the clock in situations during the last five minutes of the game when they don't otherwise do so.  The NFL also creates an extra timeout at the end of games.  Both of these help the offense.

And the NBA to halfcourt rule actually pre-dates both.  In doing research on the rule, it actually has been on the NBA books for decades.  At least 50 years.  So it is an integral part of the NBA game.

And if you don't like it, don't watch it.  Stick with baseball and its 3.5 hour games.  Enjoy!

[MU82]

Can you imagine the NFL advancing the ball for a called TO? Or the MLB offering a batter an extra strike or advancing a runner for a TO? 

Well, I can imagine the NFL someday going to a rule similar to college football, where the ball is "advanced" to the 25-yard line (or some other yard line) in OT.

And I can imagine MLB someday starting extra innings with a runner on second base. Indeed, they are talking about doing just that. Might never happen, but it's under consideration.

[Cheeks]

It creates more excitement at the end of games.

Excitement over logic and rules that govern the game the first 95% of the action...... incredibly illogical.

Next week the NFL will say any kickoff received in the last two minutes, if you have a timeout you get to take the ball at the 50 yard line for doing absolutely nothing.  Just because we want it exciting. 

[Cheeks]

OK maybe you should calm down a little.  Sports are entertaining.  This makes it more so.  Don't overthink it.

Sports do this all the time.  College football overtime.  Changes in NFL timing rules the last five minutes of the game.  NHL shootouts. 

In fact, I think this rule makes more sense because a team can advance the ball on a timeout after a made basket at anypoint of a game.  It isn't clock dependent.

Sports is also about competition and this stupid rule literally penalizes a team for scoring late in the game vs scoring any other time in the game.

College football overtime gives BOTH teams access, this dumb basketball rule benefits the team with the ball and a timeout, not both teams equally...it is fundamentally unfair on that premise alone.

Pro football timing changes does not give you a territorial advantage, that is the key so again your example is poor.  Football, basketball, they are games largely dictated by territory.  It is easier to score closer to rim than farther away...when you allow advancement of territory at no cost, that is a huge advantage.

Third attempt...NHL example...again poor.  Both teams are in same situation like college football OT.  Not the case with this basketball rule in which ONLY one team benefits based on possession and time. 

The NBA rule says only last two minutes can this rule be applied if I recall correctly.  I’d love to know what the sham version is for the NCAA. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Not the case with this basketball rule in which ONLY one team benefits based on possession and time. 

I don't have a strong opinion either way on this, but I don't believe this is correct. Both teams can take advantage of this rule in the last two minutes.

[CTWarrior]

This is the style they play with and it has venefitted them greatly for tge last two years. Dont come on here and say u dont watch them n the criticize tgeir style if play.  Makes u sound like a total idiot.  They lost the game by missing FTs.  Missed both on a tech n all 3 on a foul on a 3.  Additionally they lost their center and a top all time rebounding girl in Davenport.  Van klunen is very poor and Anderson should get more time imo.  Depaul doesnt control tge paint like that with Davenport in the game.  Natisha is POY but Davenport may have been their MVP

I've watched maybe 8-10 times in the last three years and I get that impression every time, including the times they won by 30.  I obviously don't watch as much as many others like Marquette Fan, but their offense seems to be beat the other team down the court and failing that break them down one on one and take the first shot you can get without searching for a better one.  Its an effective style when you have superior talent (last night when DePaul was coming back MU made some very tough 2s early in the shot clock which is why it feels like they are very reliant on their talent), but no so much when the talent is more even, IMO.  Just giving my impressions fully realizing I may be wrong.  But I've never watched them and thought otherwise.

They reminded me of those super athletic Tennessee teams when Pearl coached.

[Cheeks]

The NFL stops the clock in situations during the last five minutes of the game when they don't otherwise do so.  The NFL also creates an extra timeout at the end of games.  Both of these help the offense.

And the NBA to halfcourt rule actually pre-dates both.  In doing research on the rule, it actually has been on the NBA books for decades.  At least 50 years.  So it is an integral part of the NBA game.

And if you don't like it, don't watch it.  Stick with baseball and its 3.5 hour games.  Enjoy!

In all your silly examples BOTH teams are equally impacted.  In this dumb rule you love, one team is negatively impacted.  That’s the difference.  The two dumbest rules in all of sports are because they aren’t fair rules...

NFL OT and the NBA advance the  ball past the half.  In both cases a team is out at a disadvantage for doing nothing wrong....losing a coin flip (NFL) or in the NBA situation, having the audacity to score late in a game by going FULL COURT and being rewarded for that so the other team only has to go half court to respond...think about how unnatural carnal knowledgeing stupid that is.

[CTWarrior]

In all your silly examples BOTH teams are equally impacted.  In this dumb rule you love, one team is negatively impacted.  That’s the difference.  The two dumbest rules in all of sports are because they aren’t fair rules...

NFL OT and the NBA advance the  ball past the half.  In both cases a team is out at a disadvantage for doing nothing wrong....losing a coin flip (NFL) or in the NBA situation, having the audacity to score late in a game by going FULL COURT and being rewarded for that so the other team only has to go half court to respond...think about how unnatural carnal knowledgeing stupid that is.

I agree with Cheeks on this one.  It is a rule change designed to increase excitement, but it definitely puts one team at a disadvantage.  A rule that is intentionally unfair probably shouldn't be a rule.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

In all your silly examples BOTH teams are equally impacted.  In this dumb rule you love, one team is negatively impacted.  That’s the difference.

That’s not true. In both cases the rules are changed to benefit the offense over the defense.

[MU82]

Thirty seconds left. I call time-out. My team gets to advance the ball.

We score with 11 seconds left. The opponent calls time-out. They get to advance the ball.

Way more fair than the NFL's OT rule, in which the team that loses the coin flip might never touch the football.

But I think if one of us screams like Bill Walton how HORRIBLE the rule is, it will probably get changed.

[Marquette Fan]

I've watched maybe 8-10 times in the last three years and I get that impression every time, including the times they won by 30.  I obviously don't watch as much as many others like Marquette Fan, but their offense seems to be beat the other team down the court and failing that break them down one on one and take the first shot you can get without searching for a better one.  Its an effective style when you have superior talent (last night when DePaul was coming back MU made some very tough 2s early in the shot clock which is why it feels like they are very reliant on their talent), but no so much when the talent is more even, IMO.  Just giving my impressions fully realizing I may be wrong.  But I've never watched them and thought otherwise.

They reminded me of those super athletic Tennessee teams when Pearl coached.

For what it's worth, I thought Hiedeman jacked up some of her 3's a little too quickly last night.  But part of that may be because she was kind of off last night - if a number of those shots go in, I don't really think about how quickly those shots are put up.

[Cheeks]

Thirty seconds left. I call time-out. My team gets to advance the ball.

We score with 11 seconds left. The opponent calls time-out. They get to advance the ball.

Way more fair than the NFL's OT rule, in which the team that loses the coin flip might never touch the football.

But I think if one of us screams like Bill Walton how HORRIBLE the rule is, it will probably get changed.

3 seconds left, your team scores to go up one point.  You had to go 94 feet, you ran a play, it was successful. You've played this way for the entire game, but now we decide your opponent can call a timeout and not have to go 94 feet, instead they have to go about 28 feet, meaning one pass and a legitimate shot. 

The rule, according to the NCAA, only applies in the last 59.9 seconds.  So for 97.5% of the game, you have to go 94 feet to score, but for the last 59.9 seconds through no competitive action of your own, no athletic play, not even inbounding the ball...you get to move up territory by 67 feet, or otherwise stated...a 70% territorial advantage for doing what?  Calling a timeout.

Note, you can't do this at the end of the first quarter, not the end of the half, not the end of the third quarter...only the 4th quarter or overtime.

Mike,your team had to go 94 feet and succeeded.  You should be rewarded as you have the entire game from a defensive perspective in making them go 94 feet to respond, but now they have only 28 feet to go.  Only because they had a timeout.  That's the only reason. It's a scam for "exciting" finishes, and changed the dynamic of which the game was played for the first 39 minutes. A total scam.

Preposterous rule that is not equitable and harms one team. 

"During the last 59.9 seconds of the game (fourth period or any extra period) when the team in control of the ball, or the team who is to be awarded a throw-in in their backcourt, is granted a timeout, the team will have the option to move the throw-in spot to the 28-foot line in the frontcourt on the same side of the playing court as the scorers’ table."

[Cheeks]

I don't have a strong opinion either way on this, but I don't believe this is correct. Both teams can take advantage of this rule in the last two minutes.

Yes, both can take advantage of it, but that's not how it is used in game settings. That's my point.  Why do we say after every made bucket or defensive rebound in the first 39 minutes you need to dribble or pass it up the length of the court, but only the last 59.9 seconds you don't?  It's a scam. I pray they don't bring this sad rule to men's college hoops. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Why do they only use replay in the last few minutes? Why does the clock run after incomplete passes in the NFL except at the end of a half? The "rule is different the rest of the game" argument doesn't sway me much. Neither does the "it only benefits one team" argument since unless one team controls the ball for the last two minutes, both teams can take advantage of the rule.

Again, I don't have a strong feeling either way. Overtime in the NFL? Strong feeling. Fumble in the end zone goes to the defending team? Strong feeling. This I could take or leave.

[MU82]

Mike,your team had to go 94 feet and succeeded.

And I knew the rule going in. And maybe next time I will benefit from it.

I don't get bent out of shape about something I can't control. Kind of the way Davidson couldn't control Buzz getting a free time out while the refs looked at replays with a few seconds left in the 2013 NCAAs. We were out of time-outs but Buzz got to take his time and draw up the winning play. One team benefited at the expense of the other. That's life in the big city. Don't like it, go be an undertaker, a nuclear physicist or a bible salesman.

But I do appreciate your concern for my team, chicos.

[Bocephys]

3 seconds left, your team scores to go up one point.  You had to go 94 feet, you ran a play, it was successful. You've played this way for the entire game, but now we decide your opponent can call a timeout and not have to go 94 feet, instead they have to go about 28 feet, meaning one pass and a legitimate shot. 

The rule, according to the NCAA, only applies in the last 59.9 seconds.  So for 97.5% of the game, you have to go 94 feet to score, but for the last 59.9 seconds through no competitive action of your own, no athletic play, not even inbounding the ball...you get to move up territory by 67 feet, or otherwise stated...a 70% territorial advantage for doing what?  Calling a timeout.

Note, you can't do this at the end of the first quarter, not the end of the half, not the end of the third quarter...only the 4th quarter or overtime.

Mike,your team had to go 94 feet and succeeded.  You should be rewarded as you have the entire game from a defensive perspective in making them go 94 feet to respond, but now they have only 28 feet to go.  Only because they had a timeout.  That's the only reason. It's a scam for "exciting" finishes, and changed the dynamic of which the game was played for the first 39 minutes. A total scam.

Preposterous rule that is not equitable and harms one team. 

"During the last 59.9 seconds of the game (fourth period or any extra period) when the team in control of the ball, or the team who is to be awarded a throw-in in their backcourt, is granted a timeout, the team will have the option to move the throw-in spot to the 28-foot line in the frontcourt on the same side of the playing court as the scorers’ table."

All game, you get 30 full seconds to get off a shot, but, at the end of the game, sometimes they turn that clock off and make one team adhere to a completely different clock!  It's inequitable and not fair.