Tony Yates sucks, he is the reason I hate UC. I didn't mind when he used the 4 corner to try to beat UK, but when he used it to prevent the game from being a blow out, he crossed the line. For that reason the shot clock was put into play in college. Colleges thrive on making money and selling tickets. As does the NBA. People pay to see points scored. that is why shot clocks are used.

Seldom in high school sports do you see a team stall. I've watched teams that use half court sets and run and reset until they get the shot they want. I call that disciplined. Some fans don't like it, but when it results in a layup or a good shot, it is a thing of beauty.

I love when teams are losing and drop into a zone, that is good reason for a team to pull out and wait for the defense to come out and play the game.

The cost of the lights and the cost to add a shot clock keeper would also be prohibitive for some smaller schools.

No shot clock needed for me in high school ball.

I like the idea of a :45 second shot clock. Doesn't change the average game much, IMO, but requires both teams to play offense and defense the entire game. Not just who is the best at keep away.

Shooting the ball in 5-10 seconds or in 1-2 minutes it is strategy used to win. I don't like a team that olds the ball but if they feel it is the best way to win so be it.

IIRC, Lexington Catholic experimented with a 1:00 shot clock in the 5th/3rd around 2001 or so. It didn't seem to be an issue for most teams trying to run their offense or anything like that. While I'm for a shot clock, I don't think it should be much more than a formality that keeps one team from completely stalling.

Anybody remember when the Britt brothers were playing for Warren East back in the late 90's? Jeremy and Brian. I think it was against Greenwood in the 98 region tourney when they held the ball bc Greenwood just couldn't' get the ball from them. What those two did with their ball handling skills was amazing, Brian in particular.

 

My memory is foggy on the year, but I believe it was one of the two years they won the region tourney back during that time.

I see it's that time of year again where the debate comes up. My feelings have been largely echoed above.

 

Would I like one? Sure. I believe 45 seconds to a minute would suffice and as said above that's merely as a deterrent against taking all the air out of the ball.

 

Will it ever happen. HELL NO. I'm sorry, it's just never going to happen. Some schools (and I'm including mine in this) seem like they can barely get a functioning scoreboard. A shot clock is just more wiring and another thing to fail. Who is going to pay for that to be installed? And that's before you get to the scorekeeper that is going to be relied on to reset the clock. Guarantee there's a game where a failure to reset properly would come into play.

 

For a lot of schools finding a bookkeeper and a clockkeeper is difficult. Finding someone to operate a shot clock would be very hard. Another volunteer needed that would really need to know the game even more so than the clockkeeper. A large challenge for most schools. Boys games, girls games, JV games, freshmen games -- I don't think many realize the challenge of finding enough folks needed to do just the basics to play a game. Adding another even more difficult job would be tough for a lot of schools. I know this is not the intention of the thread but a consideration none the less.

 

The above posts kind of sum the whole argument up in the initial phase. Cost is a factor at many schools state wide. It's going to cost to install the clocks, and it's going to be an on-going cost (or on-going headache) to either pay someone to operate the clock or find a volunteer willing to do it.

 

I'm not sure how they handle the logistics of it in NY, but I did see someone post that the referee could reset the clock. I don't think that's feasible, because the referee with the remote could be out of position to see the ball hit the rim as often as he is in position to see it. And, a wireless set up would add to the initial cost as well.

 

Shot clock or no shot clock really doesn't matter to me. But, as with any new idea, the first thing you need to do is find out if it is even possible.

 

I don't think this idea ever gets past the feasibility study level.

Anybody remember when the Britt brothers were playing for Warren East back in the late 90's? Jeremy and Brian. I think it was against Greenwood in the 98 region tourney when they held the ball bc Greenwood just couldn't' get the ball from them. What those two did with their ball handling skills was amazing, Brian in particular.

 

My memory is foggy on the year, but I believe it was one of the two years they won the region tourney back during that time.

99.9% sure that the 4th Region Champs breaks down like this:

 

1996-1997: Warren East (1998 was first year I went that I can really remember and they were on the cover of the program, so they'd made it the year before... aside from being a small kid at Rupp and seeing the hot air balloon that was in the entrance or a trip to Louisville where we lost in the opener or at least the first game I saw/only game I remember both times, but I wouldn't really count that).

 

1997-1998: Russellville (played Lex Cath in opener)

 

1998-1999: Barren County (played Scott Co. in opener)

The above posts kind of sum the whole argument up in the initial phase. Cost is a factor at many schools state wide. It's going to cost to install the clocks, and it's going to be an on-going cost (or on-going headache) to either pay someone to operate the clock or find a volunteer willing to do it.

 

I'm not sure how they handle the logistics of it in NY, but I did see someone post that the referee could reset the clock. I don't think that's feasible, because the referee with the remote could be out of position to see the ball hit the rim as often as he is in position to see it. And, a wireless set up would add to the initial cost as well.

 

Shot clock or no shot clock really doesn't matter to me. But, as with any new idea, the first thing you need to do is find out if it is even possible.

 

I don't think this idea ever gets past the feasibility study level.

 

 

That's what I was thinking. And a remote to put on the belt of the head official probably wouldn't be very expensive, or at least as expensive as some people are thinking, especially considering that the company doing it would be producing a product in bulk for all the schools in the state and that there'd be bidding to do it.

 

I'd imagine that $40-50 would cover the cost of the remote if every school HAD to have it and HAD to have the same brand/manufacturer (or even if each school could go out on their own and find the lowest price online if they wished, so long as it worked).

 

Don't know about the cost of installing a separate shot clock at each gym, but would imagine that this would vary according to the location, installation process, etc. Different schools would want different things and would spend different amounts on that according to their budget. Lexington Catholic had video boards at the Republic Bank Classic, so I'm guessing they wouldn't mind splurging while another school might get the cheapest, most basic set-up possible.

 

Honestly, I wouldn't even think it would be a huge deal if it were left up to the schools whether or not they installed them, just that each school that wanted to host region had one. I'm sure that when it comes to schools wanting to do something like that, the ones who are typically capable of hosting wouldn't mind that extra expense at all, especially if it meant a competitive advantage of having it throughout the year and being used to it.

 

When Lexington Catholic tried it years ago, it didn't have much of an effect on the game at all in the sense that there were few, if any, shot clock violations during the games. Generally, if you don't get a shot that hits the rim in a 1:00 period, it's probably an anomaly, or, more likely, because you are purposefully holding the ball.

I'm surprised more heavily overmatched teams don't stall in district tourneys. If it gives your team a chance to win, I'm all for it.

Anybody remember when the Britt brothers were playing for Warren East back in the late 90's? Jeremy and Brian. I think it was against Greenwood in the 98 region tourney when they held the ball bc Greenwood just couldn't' get the ball from them. What those two did with their ball handling skills was amazing, Brian in particular.

 

My memory is foggy on the year, but I believe it was one of the two years they won the region tourney back during that time.

 

I believe you might be thinking of Warren East's district tournament game against Bowling Green two years after they won region, in 1998/99. Bowling Green entered undefeated and had beaten them by a score of 62-27 in their most recent meeting. East sat on the ball all night and nearly pulled it off, losing 17-15.

Part of my reasoning for having the shot clock in postseason play is that is has little effect on the regional tournament games, as most have already moved to arenas equipped with one anyway.

 

I know this isn't the same as schools who can host the district tournament having one though.

 

I just think holding the ball and causing a game to be decided by two scores in the teens or below is Busch League. It really goes against the spirit of the game, and, in the end, is bad for the game as it turns off fans.

I'm surprised more heavily overmatched teams don't stall in district tourneys. If it gives your team a chance to win, I'm all for it.

 

It's not like it's easy to stall. These teams who might consider it do so for a reason - they're outmatched. That same reason is why it's difficult to stall. D with bigger and better athletes turns up the heat and forces the stalling team to get going.

 

It's why I had no sympathy for NDA a few years ago when Highlands decided to hold the ball. NDA LET them hold the ball. It almost bit them in the rear end.

Can't say I have overly strong feelings either way on the matter, however I don't have a problem with the way it is now.

 

If a team doesn't want to be put in that position then they need to fight harder not to allow the other team to gain the lead giving them the option.

 

If the team not with the lead needs to turn up their pressure in an attempt to force a turnover, then so be it, and if they have to resort to fouling to disrupt the ball hogging then tough. It's all just strategy and what you might have to do to react to it.

 

As long as officiating is fair and sound not letting one team gain the edge giving them this option, then it is what is.

 

Making a team foul you is just a nice strategy to put a hurt on them, and is very much apart of the game that some teams can forget to employ, and having to foul in some situations might be the only option, and many times the smart option.

 

Seems like when pre-high school players are in development there's a notion that fouling is bad, and although they learn otherwise when they mature into the game, some players may have trouble shaking that notion.

 

It's all about learning the game and understanding strategy, and using whatever tricks you have in your bag depending on your opponent or the circumstances.

 

If an extremely talented team faces an extremely weaker team, then the weaker team should be able to use whatever strategy they legally can to give themselves a chance in an otherwise inevitable losing endeavor. If this option is not available, then why even schedule the game to begin with knowing going in that it's no doubt gonna be a blow out if this trick can't be an option? You take this away from them, (example CovCath vs CovLatin), then Latin might as well just hang it up and stay home, or plan a team field trip to a museum or something.

 

As I began this post thinking that I didn't have strong feeling either way, I've just convinced myself that I do, and if I were a coach I'd want to have every trick in the bag available to me. Why not? If the stronger team can't work around the obstacle then tough darts, perhaps their not as smart as they think they are.

Under no circumstances should a team be forced to shoot the ball with a lead. Understand, I am not condoning holding the ball, I've never been a fan of Four Corners offense or the like, but the team with the ball and the lead should have the opportunity to work through their offense to get the highest percentage shot possible (a lay-up), no matter how long it takes. I would have a hard time being involved with high school basketball with the existence of a shot clock, JMO.

Disagree.

It works in college and in the NBA. No reason not to use it it high school.