Any chance for a shot-clock yet?

Doublehelix said:
They've also run this by some refs as well. You obviously didn't make the cut.
Click to expand...
Nice try. We get this type of thing sent to us every year in our NFHS survey, just for starters. I voiced my opionion, just as I have voiced my opinion in those meetings I noted in a prior post. (the ones you admitted that you've never been in room for)
Doublehelix said:
But you're an all-knowing ref, so I'm sure you knew that already.
Click to expand...
The difference between you and me is, I don't engage in subjects I have no working knowledge of. You on the other hand do and lie about each and every aspect that you discuss.
 
I'm only insulting you because you have zero ability to look outside of your ref lens, like most refs.

You can't engage in meaningful dialogue with a ref about basketball because they think that because they enforce the rules, they're experts on everything basketball.

You can't even fathom a normal shot clock discussion with progressive points, and frankly, ideas that are 100% being used to sell the inevitable change. As I said, you're entitled to your opinion, but in this case, your opinion is shallow, status quo, and without vision.

That's why refs get surveys and deeper thinkers get conversations. You'll keep saying I'm lying, go for it. But the proof will be in the pudding, and you will still say that I'm lying. You can't have meaningful dialogue with people that act like that.

So keep spouting and saying you're right, when reality proves you're wrong. Whatever.
 
Doublehelix said:
I'm only insulting you because you have zero ability to look outside of your ref lens, like most refs.

You can't engage in meaningful dialogue with a ref about basketball because they think that because they enforce the rules, they're experts on everything basketball.

You can't even fathom a normal shot clock discussion with progressive points, and frankly, ideas that are 100% being used to sell the inevitable change. As I said, you're entitled to your opinion, but in this case, your opinion is shallow, status quo, and without vision.

That's why refs get surveys and deeper thinkers get conversations. You'll keep saying I'm lying, go for it. But the proof will be in the pudding, and you will still say that I'm lying. You can't have meaningful dialogue with people that act like that.

So keep spouting and saying you're right, when reality proves you're wrong. Whatever.
Click to expand...
You are an adult male that obsesses (thousands upon thousands of posts) on a high school sports forum (to the point that you keep changing user names after being kicked out) over how a high school manages their business and sports program. You lie repeatedly about who you are, where you are from, and whether or not you have any allegiance to said high school....... you engage in the same methods when posting on other issues.....

When called on it, you play the babe in the woods routine.....

Somehow, you think that's how a normal adult male should act.

Take a second, read this aloud while looking in a mirror...... Many people with common sense and a conscious would say, "wow..... I need help".... Many would take it as a slap in the face and say, "what the hell is wrong with me?"

You won't, you'll just change usernames and keep on lying.

I'm done with you...... make sure you get a few more "insults" in :ROFLMAO:
 
AllSports12 said:
I'm done with you
Click to expand...
Typically what happens when you see the light and realize insults don't work on me.

And for what it's worth, you said you were done with me 50x in all of the other shot clock threads. Yet here you are.

If I didn't hit a nerve of truth, you wouldn't feel the need to continue to respond to my every post on this topic, just like the Elder "fans".

More lies I guess...
 
Yappi said:
A star basketball player and a star football player both probably run an offense like they will play in college. It is the non-star players in football that can run the wing-t that virtually no one sees in college but can be very difficult to stop in HS. I don't want to take away basketball creativity that can let lesser athletic teams hang with teams that are off the charts athletically.

Basketball already rewards height and athleticism more than any other sport. The shot clock reinforces that.
Click to expand...
I get it, however I will say in my opinion that slowing the game down has become way too common of a strategy. So many of these great postseason matchups are now total slogs, great athletes playing a Wisconsin (sorry Badgers) style of ball to win 40-35. You can win with great fundamentals, but so often it seems more important that kids are running the offense correctly than how good of shooters, dribblers & passers they are.
 
Doublehelix said:
This is a good point.

The best coaches have a structured approach, but also will allow their talent some freedom.

I think the best example of this currently in Ohio is Brook Cupps. He ran awesome sets, had awesome plays, but also gave his players the power to make a play if they could. I love that balance. If most coaches had this balance, I would probably change my stance on the shot clock.

But most coaches are scared to death of giving kids more freedom, and double-down on more control.

You are right about kids wanting some of that freedom. Not only does it develop them better, it's honestly more fun to play with that freedom. Kids are jacked to play in that type of environment.
Click to expand...
Agreed 100%. It's the biggest problem I have personally with the game today, kids are completely controlled on the court. I was far from great, but at least I had the freedom to take 3's and be a little improvisational on offense. It's obvious these days they cannot be at all
 
smurfyeah19 said:
Agreed 100%. It's the biggest problem I have personally with the game today, kids are completely controlled on the court. I was far from great, but at least I had the freedom to take 3's and be a little improvisational on offense. It's obvious these days they cannot be at all
Click to expand...
And to add to that, kids are much more skilled as well. There has never been a point in time where more kids are working to get stronger, more athletic and have better skills.

For most teams, you never even know the talent these kids have because it's hidden being robots.

I can't stand it when people blame the kids for the "lack of getting better" - this is BS. You just don't know they're good because all they do is set screens and run motion.

This is a coach created scenario where kids are being blamed and being called lazy. It's a farce.
 
Last edited:
I predict when they finally put up a shot clock (it will eventually happen) the reaction will be similar to the pitch clock in the MLB. People will be upset before it gets implemented then will be pleasantly surprised.
 
CantonAnon said:
I predict when they finally put up a shot clock (it will eventually happen) the reaction will be similar to the pitch clock in the MLB. People will be upset before it gets implemented then will be pleasantly surprised.
Click to expand...
The pitch clock in baseball sped the game up which was needed. The shot clock won't speed the game up. It will end up happening at some point and my prediction people will not notice much of a difference beyond inevitable errors by the operators because the average possession is already less than the 30-35 seconds that will be on the shot clock.
 
winbypin said:
It will end up happening at some point and my prediction people will not notice much of a difference
Click to expand...
Right on cue - Walking contradiction you are.

It won't be much of a difference because a shot clock ISN'T much of a difference! That's the whole point you seem to want to continue to ignore.

The naysayers are saying how disruptive a shot clock will be and it's all hyperbole and myth. All of it. It's not meant to be a big difference, and that's what all of the intelligent people in this argument have said.

It provides a consistent pace to the game - that's it. That's all it does. But by doing that, it prevents stall tactics, dictates more freedom to players, and empowers more kids to use basketball instincts. Those are facts. All which are for the betterment of the high school game, and that, at the end of the day, is the most important aspect for adoption, and what the decision-makers are looking at when making this recommendation.

Everything else is a scare tactic for self-serving purposes, whether that's refs that don't want to adapt, coaches that want to keep control, or administrators that don't want the extra work.
 
Last edited:
And then the same people will say, just like the two know-it-alls, "see, it did nothing". All the while not even understanding the true intent for it in the first place.

All the "you want entertainment", "I can't imagine the terrible shots to be taken", "you just want more points", "that's your preferred style of up-tempo play", "HS basketball isn't to prepare for college", "bad teams won't be able to compete" have absolutely no idea what they're talking about, yet think they are king s**t.
 
Last edited:
Doublehelix said:
Right on cue - Walking contradiction you are.

It won't be much of a difference because a shot clock ISN'T much of a difference! That's the whole point you seem to want to continue to ignore.

The naysayers are saying how disruptive a shot clock will be and it's all hyperbole and myth. All of it. It's not meant to be a big difference, and that's what all of the intelligent people in this argument have said.

It provides a consistent pace to the game - that's it. That's all it does. But by doing that, it prevents stall tactics, dictates more freedom to players, and empowers more kids to use basketball instincts. Those are facts. All which are for the betterment of the high school game, and that, at the end of the day, is the most important aspect for adoption, and what the decision-makers are looking at when making this recommendation.

Everything else is a scare tactic for self-serving purposes, whether that's refs that don't want to adapt, coaches that want to keep control, or administrators that don't want the extra work.
Click to expand...
Where is my contradiction?

The pace of play is already faster than what the shot clock is supposed to force. Prevents stalling? Cool. Less than 5% of the games are like that. Probably even less. If you think coaches are too controlling now you don't think they will continue to control each possession even if it's 30 seconds. That's very naive. We won't see a noticeable difference in the game. The better teams will generally win. The better players will still find their way to the next level.

Everything else you say will happen is purely subjective. More freedom? Empowerment to use basketball instincts? How are you going to measure that?

Just admit you're hoping the outcome is a game that is more entertaining to you and your preference to the style of play.

I hope your JV season is a good one.
 
winbypin said:
Where is my contradiction?

The pace of play is already faster than what the shot clock is supposed to force. Prevents stalling? Cool. Less than 5% of the games are like that. Probably even less. If you think coaches are too controlling now you don't think they will continue to control each possession even if it's 30 seconds. That's very naive. We won't see a noticeable difference in the game. The better teams will generally win. The better players will still find their way to the next level.

Everything else you say will happen is purely subjective. More freedom? Empowerment to use basketball instincts? How are you going to measure that?

Just admit you're hoping the outcome is a game that is more entertaining to you and your preference to the style of play.

I hope your JV season is a good one.
Click to expand...
Do you not know what consistent pace of play means? Seriously?

It means it evens the playing field on both ends of the floor in terms of time allotted for offense (and defense). That's what a shot clock does, that's all a shot clock does, and it's indisputable.

It's not subjective. By the nature of each possession having a definitive end, it 100% eliminates too much coach control and the constant re-cycling of sets over and over and over again (unless they keep getting offensive rebounds). That's not subjective, it's truth.
 
Last edited:
Doublehelix said:
Do you not know what consistent pace of play means? Seriously?

It means it evens the playing field on both ends of the floor in terms of time allotted for offense (and defense). That's what a shot clock does, that's all a shot clock does, and it's indisputable.

It's not subjective. By the nature of each possession having a definitive end, it 100% eliminates too much coach control and the constant re-cycling of sets over and over and over again (unless they keep getting offensive rebounds). That's not subjective, it's truth.
Click to expand...
If someone is holding the ball....go guard them. That will help your pace of play or stalling complaints.

Coaches will still control the game. It's silly to think they won't. All of your "improvements" are indeed subjective.
 
winbypin said:
I don't have any problems with the game.
Click to expand...
Unless it involves adopting a shot clock.

And who cares. Because you believe that means it's universal to the game? How arrogant.

What else should we be ok with because you believe it? Talk about blatant narcissism.
 
Doublehelix said:
Unless it involves adopting a shot clock.

And who cares. Because you believe that means it's universal to the game? How arrogant.

What else should we be ok with because you believe it? Talk about blatant narcissism.
Click to expand...
First....the shot clock isn't part of the game today. So by definition I can't have a problem with something that isn't part of the game.

Second....I don't know what you're attempting to say here.

Third....you're making stuff up now. And Fourth....name calling. That's when we know you have given up.
 
winbypin said:
First....the shot clock isn't part of the game today. So by definition I can't have a problem with something that isn't part of the game.

Second....I don't know what you're attempting to say here.

Third....you're making stuff up now. And Fourth....name calling. That's when we know you have given up.
Click to expand...
First...I didn't call you a name, I described you as something, which is an adjective.

If I said you were an arrogant idiot, then I would have called you a name.
 
CDRam84 said:
Here is a novel concept….instead of us old heads getting all worked up…why don’t we ask THE PLAYERS? It is their game…they train…they play…without them where would we get our popcorn Friday nights?
Click to expand...
This is the best idea yet.

The players voices should absolutely be heard and taken into consideration with this decision.

We all know what their preference would be.
 
winbypin said:
Great idea. While we are at it we should ask 15-19 year olds what their HS curriculum should be. Because, you know, teenagers always know what is best for themselves.
Click to expand...
Shocking this would be your response. Can't function without control.

They most definitely should have input into the process. Not absolute input, but input.

You act like we're talking about pre-schoolers. Varsity basketball players would probably have a great perspective on it. Have a little faith in our youth, for cryin out loud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top