2020-21 Rules Changes - no shot clock once again

carefree93 said:
If it’s all about winning, Show me the stats on how stalling increases winning percentage? They don’t exist, because the fact is, the team likely to lose still loses, just by 15 instead of 25. This argument that this is some great “strategy” that allows victories is as dumb as your notion that holding the ball and not playing is a style of basketball. Any coach that employs this style almost always ends with the same result - and result is a loss coupled with a lack of appreciation and respect from his/her players.

Getting your assed kicked at least has dignity. Asking your players to refuse to compete to win a game is pathetic. In my playing days, every single one of my teammates would rather take an beating than to lose holding the ball like a little punk. It’s pathetic.
Click to expand...
I agree it's pathetic in the handful of games where it happens - usually in the tourney in a crazy mismatch. As. coach, I wouldn't do it. That said, I sure as hell wouldn't sit back and let another team do it to me if I was that much better. It takes two to tango. Shot clock for these very few games doesn't make any sense.
 
carefree93 said:
If it’s all about winning, Show me the stats on how stalling increases winning percentage? They don’t exist, because the fact is, the team likely to lose still loses, just by 15 instead of 25. This argument that this is some great “strategy” that allows victories is as dumb as your notion that holding the ball and not playing is a style of basketball. Any coach that employs this style almost always ends with the same result - and result is a loss coupled with a lack of appreciation and respect from his/her players.

Getting your assed kicked at least has dignity. Asking your players to refuse to compete to win a game is pathetic. In my playing days, every single one of my teammates would rather take an beating than to lose holding the ball like a little punk. It’s pathetic.
Click to expand...
And thus, attendance is terrible at most games. Way too many beating. Boys scores starting to look like girls scores too often. Shot clock just went off. I’m out of here ?
 
Coaches are paid to coach. Part of that job is putting your team in the best position to win. And part of that is using the rules to your advantage. I would much rather play in a game where we at least had a chance to win at the end than a game where we were down by 50 at half time. And I say that from experience.

If we ever implement a shot clock I would prefer the LAX model where it is triggered by the ref if they do not feel like play is progressing.
 
CedarBuck92 said:
Coaches are paid to coach. Part of that job is putting your team in the best position to win. And part of that is using the rules to your advantage. I would much rather play in a game where we at least had a chance to win at the end than a game where we were down by 50 at half time. And I say that from experience.

If we ever implement a shot clock I would prefer the LAX model where it is triggered by the ref if they do not feel like play is progressing.
Click to expand...
And at the HS level coaches do not get to recruit their talent - they are at the mercy of whomever tries out for the team. Why shouldn't there be more "options" for trying to win the game?

As for the LAX model, it sounds like a cool idea, but I think a similar rule would be disastrous in HS basketball.
 
Most upsets involve controlling tempo. A shot clock makes it harder to do that. Adding a shot clock helps the team with the most talent. Why do something that aids the recruited, AAU team disguised as a high school basketball team? It’s not about entertainment. It’s about kids learning to work as a team, and overcoming adversity is one of the biggest lessons. A lot of people on here need to learn the difference between high school basketball and AAU.
 
TrueEagle said:
Most upsets involve controlling tempo. A shot clock makes it harder to do that. Adding a shot clock helps the team with the most talent. Why do something that aids the recruited, AAU team disguised as a high school basketball team? It’s not about entertainment. It’s about kids learning to work as a team, and overcoming adversity is one of the biggest lessons. A lot of people on here need to learn the difference between high school basketball and AAU.
Click to expand...
Amen. If you prefer to watch manufactured teams and selfish play and lazy coaching, by all means go enjoy your summer AAU tournaments. The high school game will be just fine without you.

It's not the NFHS's or OHSAA's job or mission to help kids get ready to play college basketball.
 
Team A and Team B play twice in one season.

First game Team B plays straight up, Team A wins 90-20.

Second game Team B decides to hold the ball the entire quarter. Team A decides to watch them do it.

Team A gets the jump, scores Team A up 2-0.

Team B holds the ball the entire quarter 1st quarter, last second shot, misses. Team A up 2-0.

Team B get the ball to start the 2nd quarter, holds the ball the entire 2nd quarter, last second shot, misses. Team A up 2-0.

Team A gets the ball to start the 3rd quarter, scores. Team A up 4-0.

Team B holds the ball the entire 3rd quarter, last second shot, misses. Team A up 4-0.

Team B gets the ball to start the 4th quarter, holds the ball the majority of the 4th quarter.

Down by 4 points with a minute to go in the game with a chance to win? As compared to losing by 70 the first game?

Looks like Team B is competing to me.
 
multisportdad said:
Team A and Team B play twice in one season.

First game Team B plays straight up, Team A wins 90-20.

Second game Team B decides to hold the ball the entire quarter. Team A decides to watch them do it.

Team A gets the jump, scores Team A up 2-0.

Team B holds the ball the entire quarter 1st quarter, last second shot, misses. Team A up 2-0.

Team B get the ball to start the 2nd quarter, holds the ball the entire 2nd quarter, last second shot, misses. Team A up 2-0.

Team A gets the ball to start the 3rd quarter, scores. Team A up 4-0.

Team B holds the ball the entire 3rd quarter, last second shot, misses. Team A up 4-0.

Team B gets the ball to start the 4th quarter, holds the ball the majority of the 4th quarter.

Down by 4 points with a minute to go in the game with a chance to win? As compared to losing by 70 the first game?

Looks like Team B is competing to me.
Click to expand...

Beyond pathetic. Even if Team B ends up winning, anyone that takes pride in something like that is the opposite of a competitor.

Real competitors would rather lose than win this way. If you consider this winning and competing, that says a lot about you as a competitive athlete - and by a lot, I mean not much.
 
carefree93 said:
Beyond pathetic. Even if Team B ends up winning, anyone that takes pride in something like that is the opposite of a competitor.

Real competitors would rather lose than win this way. If you consider this winning and competing, that says a lot about you as a competitive athlete - and by a lot, I mean not much.
Click to expand...
Don't go to the games. They won't miss you.
 
Don’t go to the games to not watch them play basketball? What he described isn’t a game.

How can you seriously with a straight face have that response when a poster said competition is holding the ball and staring at each for 99% of the game? And then call me out for it?

Twilight zone level stuff. Complete utter disbelief that people actually seriously have these opinions, and then even try to vehemently defend them. It’s utter nonsense. Cult like stupidity.

And even worse, people start agreeing!!!! It is completely bizarre.
 
carefree93 said:
Don’t go to the games to not watch them play basketball? What he described isn’t a game.

How can you seriously with a straight face have that response when a poster said competition is holding the ball and staring at each for 99% of the game? And then call me out for it?

Twilight zone level stuff. Complete utter disbelief that people actually seriously have these opinions, and then even try to vehemently defend them. It’s utter nonsense. Cult like stupidity.

And even worse, people start agreeing!!!! It is completely bizarre.
Click to expand...

As much as you are belittling the stall ball strategy, I can almost guarantee you were on a more talented team and got beat by a stall ball team and its just eating you up inside and you can't let it go. To not have comprehension why a team would do that is beyond belief. Nobody likes to lose, and to beat a better team with whatever legal tactic is necessary, makes it all the better. Your thought that a team would rather get blown out by "competing" rather than win by stall balling a much better opponent and winning is just plain ridiculous. If you think otherwise you must like your participation trophies. WIN baby WIN!!!! that's why we play the game.
 
toestubber said:
As much as you are belittling the stall ball strategy, I can almost guarantee you were on a more talented team and got beat by a stall ball team and its just eating you up inside and you can't let it go. To not have comprehension why a team would do that is beyond belief. Nobody likes to lose, and to beat a better team with whatever legal tactic is necessary, makes it all the better. Your thought that a team would rather get blown out by "competing" rather than win by stall balling a much better opponent and winning is just plain ridiculous. If you think otherwise you must like your participation trophies. WIN baby WIN!!!! that's why we play the game.
Click to expand...

More complete and utter nonsense. In fact, it’s downright hilarious that you bring up participation trophies as this type of attitude for “competing” falls along the same path as the participation trophy era. You’re the one who’s got it backwards.

Anyone who defends a complete stall tactic (not a slow down game, they are completely different) for a basketball strategy, and then claims they are competitive, is an utter fool. You would and deserve to be laughed off the court.
 
CedarBuck92 said:
If we ever implement a shot clock I would prefer the LAX model where it is triggered by the ref if they do not feel like play is progressing.
Click to expand...

We had a version of this from 1965 to 1991. It was called the lack of action rule. Coaches hated it, players hated it, fans hated it, and officials hated it. Thankfully, it went by the wayside in 1991 because it was essentially replaced by the closely guarded rule (5 second rule).

The 5 second rule places the onus on the defense to force some sort of action. If they choose not to force the action, there's nothing stopping the offense from holding the ball.

The shot clock now places that responsibility on the offense and puts the defense in a position to gain an unintended advantage.

At the end of the day, it's High School Basketball. The disparity in talent from team to team or player to player is greater than it is at the NCAA and NBA levels. We seem for some reason to forget this fact.
 
carefree93 said:
Beyond pathetic. Even if Team B ends up winning, anyone that takes pride in something like that is the opposite of a competitor.

Real competitors would rather lose than win this way. If you consider this winning and competing, that says a lot about you as a competitive athlete - and by a lot, I mean not much.
Click to expand...

Again, you are wrong, kids want to win , plain and simple. They play to win. No one feels good getting blown out even if they were trying to play competitive. They would rather play stall ball - which is perfectly legal - and win, or keep it close. These are high school kids and most won't play after high school. They would rather have a memory of keeping it close against a better team or beating them.

You for some reason want to make sure the better team always wins, if they are better go out and play defense on the team that is stalling. Just because you don't like the strategy doesn't mean it isn't one. You need to let that loss from the stall ball team go. In 50 years of watching high school basketball I've only seen outright stalling a few times. It doesn't happen that much - go play defense. That's what the 5 second rule is for.
 
toestubber said:
Again, you are wrong, kids want to win , plain and simple. They play to win. No one feels good getting blown out even if they were trying to play competitive. They would rather play stall ball - which is perfectly legal - and win, or keep it close. These are high school kids and most won't play after high school. They would rather have a memory of keeping it close against a better team or beating them.

You for some reason want to make sure the better team always wins, if they are better go out and play defense on the team that is stalling. Just because you don't like the strategy doesn't mean it isn't one. You need to let that loss from the stall ball team go. In 50 years of watching high school basketball I've only seen outright stalling a few times. It doesn't happen that much - go play defense. That's what the 5 second rule is for.
Click to expand...

They play to win? Well, in the situation described in the post above, they weren’t even playing. In that case, they were NOT playing to win, and that’s a travesty.

I have zero issue with a team playing a slow down style if they think that’s their best chance to win. Have at it. That happens at every level of basketball and it can be a useful strategy.

But don’t even begin to parallel that with the situation described above or the situation we saw numerous times in Ohio this year of both teams deciding not to compete at all and let quarters or more of clock run without doing anything. Under no scenario should that be tolerated. Both coaches should have been given consequences. All it is is a junk swinging contest between the two coaches to see who will give in first. It has nothing to do with winning and nothing to do with the kids. It’s pathetic. There are zero kids that would choose that tactic. None. It’s nothing but a coach ego trip.
 
Last edited:
toestubber said:
Again, you are wrong, kids want to win , plain and simple. They play to win. No one feels good getting blown out even if they were trying to play competitive. They would rather play stall ball - which is perfectly legal - and win, or keep it close. These are high school kids and most won't play after high school. They would rather have a memory of keeping it close against a better team or beating them.

You for some reason want to make sure the better team always wins, if they are better go out and play defense on the team that is stalling. Just because you don't like the strategy doesn't mean it isn't one. You need to let that loss from the stall ball team go. In 50 years of watching high school basketball I've only seen outright stalling a few times. It doesn't happen that much - go play defense. That's what the 5 second rule is for.
Click to expand...

I see upsets all the time when teams use a slower pace to beat a more athletic team. Happens every week. I have zero issue with it.

I have NEVER seen a situation where an obviously overmatched team held the ball for most of the game and won. It just doesn’t happen. This tactic of complete stalling doesnt work. Yet everyone keeps saying “it’s about winning”. These teams never win lol. You make no sense.

You’re the one that obviously can’t separate the two completely different scenarios.
 
carefree93 said:
The misnomer is the shot clock improves scoring. That’s not the intent. The intent of a shot clock is to improve flow. Has nothing to do with points scored, shots attempted, or shots made. Those that continue to make this argument don’t truly understand the need for change.

coaches don’t want it changed because it limits their control. Ultimately, until the coaches realize they are simply a vessel for kids to enjoy and improve on the game, and not the main show, it will never change. The players are most important, and the players would love it.

why do they never poll the players?
Click to expand...
We have this argument all the time on here. It would improve the flow and it would force kids to improve their ball skills but you will find that a lot of people on here believe that it is ok for the less talented, less fit team to have a chance. So we pass the ball around for two minutes, run sets, can't score off the ball, grab and hold on the cuts. I used to go to GCL games. Cannot do it anymore. Way, way overcoached. Used to play in the 80's. Did not have a shot clock. Never saw a need. Went into the service in the 90's came back in the 2000's. Totally different game. I think with the NBA trying to provide a minor league type opportunity, you will see two different games develop. Those that have asperations to be Pros anywhere (a friend my son's graduated high school early and went to play professionally in the Phillipines) and those that love the game and want to play in high school and college.
 
Last edited:
S
carefree93 said:
They play to win? Well, in the situation described in the post above, they weren’t even playing. In that case, they were NOT playing to win, and that’s a travesty.

I have zero issue with a team playing a slow down style if they think that’s their best chance to win. Have at it. That happens at every level of basketball and it can be a useful strategy.

But don’t even begin to parallel that with the situation described above or the situation we saw numerous times in Ohio this year of both teams deciding not to compete at all and let quarters or more of clock run without doing anything. Under no scenario should that be tolerated. Both coaches should have been given consequences. All it is is a junk swinging contest between the two coaches to see who will give in first. It has nothing to do with winning and nothing to do with the kids. It’s pathetic. There are zero kids that would choose that tactic. None. It’s nothing but a coach ego trip.
Click to expand...
Seriously, let it go. By the way, how does a team run more than a quarter of clock? Hold it in their huddle during the break? purple font here
 
BASESWIMPARENT said:
We have this argument all the time on here. It would improve the flow and it would force kids to improve their ball skills but you will find that a lot of people on here believe that it is ok for the less talented, less fit team to have a chance. So we pass the ball around for two minutes, run sets, can't score off the ball, grab and hold on the cuts. I used to go to GCL games. Cannot do it anymore. Way, way overcoached. Used to play in the 80's. Did not have a shot clock. Never saw a need. Went into the service in the 90's came back in the 2000's. Totally different game. I think with the NBA trying to provide a minor league type opportunity, you will see two different games develop. Those that have asperations to be Pros anywhere (a friend my son's graduated high school early and went to play professionally in the Phillipines) and those that love the game and want to play in high school and college.
Click to expand...

agreed - I think the biggest reason for this slow down style is because of coach control. They’re more concerned about their jobs than developing basketball players. Players today have the same amount of skills, you could argue even better with the addition of so much specialized training, they’re just not allowed to use it.
 
carefree93 said:
They play to win? Well, in the situation described in the post above, they weren’t even playing. In that case, they were NOT playing to win, and that’s a travesty.

I have zero issue with a team playing a slow down style if they think that’s their best chance to win. Have at it. That happens at every level of basketball and it can be a useful strategy.

But don’t even begin to parallel that with the situation described above or the situation we saw numerous times in Ohio this year of both teams deciding not to compete at all and let quarters or more of clock run without doing anything. Under no scenario should that be tolerated. Both coaches should have been given consequences. All it is is a junk swinging contest between the two coaches to see who will give in first. It has nothing to do with winning and nothing to do with the kids. It’s pathetic. There are zero kids that would choose that tactic. None. It’s nothing but a coach ego trip.
Click to expand...

two questions.

1st? what do you consider to be a slow down style? I think it is a team that continues to look for the shots that they want, moving/passing, probing. if we essentially agree, then we can also agree that this type of play may require holding on the ball for a minute or more. A shot clock takes away that teams ability to employ the strategy that they want to play.

2nd? Why is it ok for a team to play a slow down style if they think it is their best chance to win, but it isn't ok for a team to hold the ball for entire quarters if they think that is their best chance to win?
 
multisportdad said:
two questions.

1st? what do you consider to be a slow down style? I think it is a team that continues to look for the shots that they want, moving/passing, probing. if we essentially agree, then we can also agree that this type of play may require holding on the ball for a minute or more. A shot clock takes away that teams ability to employ the strategy that they want to play.

2nd? Why is it ok for a team to play a slow down style if they think it is their best chance to win, but it isn't ok for a team to hold the ball for entire quarters if they think that is their best chance to win?
Click to expand...

If you seriously don’t see the difference between strategically slowing the game down vs. not even playing the game, then I can’t help you. Again, just being obtuse and argumentative for the sake of being obtuse and argumentative. You can’t have rational dialogue with people who do that.
 
carefree93 said:
If you seriously don’t see the difference between strategically slowing the game down vs. not even playing the game, then I can’t help you. Again, just being obtuse and argumentative for the sake of being obtuse and argumentative. You can’t have rational dialogue with people who do that.
Click to expand...
Finally we agree. You are being obtuse and argumentative. Have an awesome day - try to relax ion these trying times.
 
Again, just because you label standing there and staring at each other as competing and a style of basketball doesn’t make it so. There’s literally no logical, rational, or accurate reason for saying or believing it, yet you continue to do so and think it’s accurate.

As I said, those that have that level of out of touch sense of reality cannot function in a legitimate conversation.
 
Please document one occurrence last year that a team held the ball the entire contest, offering no attempt to score.

I know of one contest that a team held the ball for 7:41 of the third quarter. That team was ahead and the opponent chose not to pressure their opponent because it afforded them a better opportunity to win.

Saying a shot clock will eliminate teams holding the ball is a solution to a non-existent problem. (Roughly 9,000 regular season contests, 18,000 when you factor girls' varsity, 36,000 when you add boys and girls JV, 54,000 when you factor Freshman games)
 
AllSports12 said:
Please document one occurrence last year that a team held the ball the entire contest, offering no attempt to score.

I know of one contest that a team held the ball for 7:41 of the third quarter. That team was ahead and the opponent chose not to pressure their opponent because it afforded them a better opportunity to win.

Saying a shot clock will eliminate teams holding the ball is a solution to a non-existent problem. (Roughly 9,000 regular season contests, 18,000 when you factor girls' varsity, 36,000 when you add boys and girls JV, 54,000 when you factor Freshman games)
Click to expand...

They held the ball for the entire quarter, and the opposing team was losing and stood and watched, then said it was in their best interest to win the game, then lost the game. LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Then the losing coach came out after the game and said it was the right decision to do nothing to win the game, after they lost the game. And then people defended him. LOLOLOLOLOL

You can’t make this lunacy up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top