I don't like this part of your idea at all. Some schools because of the nature of the roads in the communities have several snow days. Forcing them to take 5 days of spring break here could push their last day of school into June which now interferes with summer school for those teachers that are required to be finishing up their masters or working on their rank I.

 

It could also mess with seniors who want to get a jumpstart on their college career and start in the summer.

 

It could also mess with the local economies that rely on students for summer work.

 

This year we have 2 days for spring break, not 5.

 

 

Ok. Take the 2 days that week.

 

 

 

 

 

I think you should not be able to play AAU ball unless with a high school team from the 2nd week of May until the dead period.

 

 

The point about girls not getting exposure. I disagree. Exposure would be greater IMHO and can you imagine the girls playing in RUPP after the boys title game? HUGE crowds.

Absolutely nothing. I love this game. Its better than the pros and right there with College ball. As long as Kentucky has talent, like this year, everything will be fine.

35 second shot clock. High schools need to do the same thing as college.

Since this thread was lifted from the other one in the girls' forum, I'll go ahead and pull this post over as well.

 

So California and states alike don't see higher scores on average?I find that hard to believe.I could see that it could hurt some of the teams that just can't get any talent at there particular school but the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages in regards to the rest of the schools in the state.It would prepare kids for any college career whether it be at Union or Kentucky.I think it is just the traditionalist or coaches who are afraid to have to learn how to teach a new offense that are the most opposed to this.I would bet that 80% of the kids and there parents would prefer a 45 second shot clock.But as far as the poster who talked about the struggle for teams to run a offense in that amount of time.......Well whoever is coaching those teams might want to reconsider careers if they cant run a offense in 45 seconds.

Why the timeout rule...I'm curious??

Puts more responsibility, back in the hands of the Players and eliminates those timeouts, when a player is trapped/double-teamed and is about to commit a turnover, but the Coach calls a TO.

So California and states alike don't see higher scores on average?I find that hard to believe.I could see that it could hurt some of the teams that just can't get any talent at there particular school but the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages in regards to the rest of the schools in the state.It would prepare kids for any college career whether it be at Union or Kentucky.I think it is just the traditionalist or coaches who are afraid to have to learn how to teach a new offense that are the most opposed to this.I would bet that 80% of the kids and there parents would prefer a 45 second shot clock.But as far as the poster who talked about the struggle for teams to run a offense in that amount of time.......Well whoever is coaching those teams might want to reconsider careers if they cant run a offense in 45 seconds.

 

 

It will hurt scoring, especially in the weak regions.

 

Why?

 

Coaches will work the clock for 40 secs., giving each team around 24 possessions a game. Avg. score would go to the 30's.

 

Would only hurt the game.

35 second shot clock. High schools need to do the same thing as college.

Who's going to run the shot clocks? Many schools have enough trouble just training and keeping a good scoreboard person. Same thing for the scorebook. I know, as a former AD at a small school. I've been down that road.

It will hurt scoring, especially in the weak regions.

 

Why?

 

Coaches will work the clock for 40 secs., giving each team around 24 possessions a game. Avg. score would go to the 30's.

 

Would only hurt the game.

 

I also think it might hurt the pace of the game. Why press aggressively and take the risk of giving up an easy basket when you can press, take 5-6-7 seconds off the shot clock with a patient press and then only have to play defense for another 25-26 seconds while watching the other team force a horrible shot in the last 4-5 seconds of the shot clock.

 

I would think you could see even more individual play as players think they have to create a shot and go one on one instead of working as a team to get a shot.

 

In addition, kids will hoists 3's more as they realize with 10 seconds left on the shot clock, that might end up being the best shot they get.

Who's going to run the shot clocks? Many schools have enough trouble just training and keeping a good scoreboard person. Same thing for the scorebook. I know, as a former AD at a small school. I've been down that road.

 

 

For varsity games, it might not be hard.

But for freshmen games, you would now need 3 volunteers to run clock, shot clock and book. That is very hard to find.

On is it fair to girls'/boys'. No it is not for the simple reason, the girls would not nearly receive the coverage by radio/television/print if the boys' tournament is going on at the same time.

 

At least when they are the only show, the newspapers put the stories on the front page of the sports. Run the boys' at the same time and they will be pushed to the back.

 

This is very sad but equally true.

35 seconds not 45. I agree 45 would be counterproductive. Would teams hold it for 35, probably but better than 1-2 minutes that I have seen.

No shot clock, period.

 

I also like the idea of only players being able to call timeouts when the ball is in play.

35 seconds not 45. I agree 45 would be counterproductive. Would teams hold it for 35, probably but better than 1-2 minutes that I have seen.

 

 

If a team is holding it for 2 minutes then the team they are playing needs some extra help on the defensive end..............

It will hurt scoring, especially in the weak regions.

 

Why?

 

Coaches will work the clock for 40 secs., giving each team around 24 possessions a game. Avg. score would go to the 30's.

 

Would only hurt the game.

 

I still don't see how it could hurt scoring though.If these teams you talk about would work the clock for the 40 seconds you talk about then how are they going to score more points when they can hold it the whole half right now if they wish?Like I said,if a coach couldn't get no more then 30 points with a shot clock then he needs to do something else other than coaching.Now will the weak teams in weak regions get clobbered even worse by the upper level teams?Yes.But if you lose by 25 or 45,you still got clobbered and shouldn't have scheduled them anyway.You take the usual weak regions(16th,12th,13th,ect.)and all the teams in those given regions are about always close to each other in talent with the exception of a team or two in each region,so it equals out.Now when it comes to the sweet sixteen the best team is going to come out of each region.Will some teams still be at a disadvantage talent wise in the touney?Maybe but that is a issue for the classification debaters.But really, if it would hurt scoring then why does college and pros and some high schools use it?(I am anticipating this reply.lol)

The college and pros use it because the players are advanced enough in terms of talent, experience and decision-making ability to be able to run offenses and get off good shots in that short period of time.

 

HS players are not as advanced and don't have the experience, talent or decision-making skills to overcome the added pressure of a shot clock. If I were guessing, HS shooting percentages across the board in all Ky high schools, girls and boys, would be lucky to crack 40 percent. Adding a shot clock would cause FG pct. to plummet across the board to about 35 percent or less.

 

And as I've said before: Most teams are getting shots off in a reasonable amount of time. They're just missing them, and that's why scoring is low.