Welcome Guest! Create an Account login email: password: remember me: BASKETBALL Latest News News Archive Schedule/Results Multi-Media Recruiting FOOTBALL Latest News News Archive Schedule/Results Multi-Media Recruiting MESSAGE BOARD Message Home - Ohio Basketball - Ohio Basketball Recruiting - The O Zone - Ohio Football - Ohio Football Recruiting - Ohio Volleyball - Ohio Baseball - Ohio Olympic Sports... - General OU Discussion... - Website Feedback... - Posting Policy Edit My Profile Private Messages Logout CHAT LINKS site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp Message Board BobcatAttack.com Message Board Ohio Basketball Topic:  30 second shot clock and other changes approved Topic:  30 second shot clock and other changes approved Author Message OU_Country General User Member Since: 12/6/2005 Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County Post Count: 8,320 Status: Offline     30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/9/2015 9:33:57 AM  I'm interested to know what others think in regards to the changes in rules for the upcoming season. I'm not a fan of the 30 second clock because I don't think it will really improve scoring. I don't see what removing one coaches timeout is going to do for pace of the game either. We're talking about a max of 5 minutes here. I like the other rules, including the larger arc under the basket, and the intent of allowing more movement -- which I'll believe when it actually happens and "sticks" with regard to how referees consistently call a game. The best change of all of them in terms of simple logic to me is the movement to a media TO when a coach calls a TO within 30 seconds of a media TO. This should have been done a long time ago in my opinion. I might even consider making it within 60 seconds of the media time out. http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college... Back to Top OUVan General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Bethesda, MD Post Count: 5,580 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/9/2015 11:24:45 AM  OU_Country wrote: The best change of all of them in terms of simple logic to me is the movement to a media TO when a coach calls a TO within 30 seconds of a media TO. This should have been done a long time ago in my opinion. I might even consider making it within 60 seconds of the media time out. It makes sense but I'm surprised that the networks will be so willing to give up an extra spot or two. I'm all for emphasizing fouls away from the ball to help free up offensive flow but they keep making it tougher to take a charge which further emphasizes driving to contact which I'm not a fan of. The shortening of the shot clock will further emphasize one-on-one play so IMO we are going to see fewer passes and more drives. That also means more time spent at the free throw line because it will be tough to stop. Back to Top OU_Country General User Member Since: 12/6/2005 Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County Post Count: 8,320 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/9/2015 11:54:20 AM  Here's some additional info from ESPN on this topic: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/130... Noted in here is that coaches now aren't allowed to call live ball time outs. Back to Top Jeff McKinney Moderator Member Since: 11/12/2004 Post Count: 6,047 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/9/2015 6:49:37 PM  As I've said elsewhere, I do NOT favor reducing the shot clock to 30 seconds. I agree with Van that this will lead to more individual play, slashing and bad shots as the shot clock runs out. I even think we'll see more isolation offense. Coaches will be recruiting more athletic slashers who can get to the bucket and draw fouls rather than emphasizing overall basic basketball skills. It's amazing that the people who supposedly know a lot more about hoops than me who are making these decisions can't see this. I'm in favor of reducing the number of stops in action. Something has to be done to get a better flow going. I watched a youtube of an NCAA championship game from the early 70s. There wasn't a stop in action until about the 13 minute mark. Back to Top BillyTheCat General User Member Since: 10/6/2012 Post Count: 9,480 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 1:55:01 AM  Jeff McKinney wrote: As I've said elsewhere, I do NOT favor reducing the shot clock to 30 seconds. I agree with Van that this will lead to more individual play, slashing and bad shots as the shot clock runs out. I even think we'll see more isolation offense. Coaches will be recruiting more athletic slashers who can get to the bucket and draw fouls rather than emphasizing overall basic basketball skills. It's amazing that the people who supposedly know a lot more about hoops than me who are making these decisions can't see this. I'm in favor of reducing the number of stops in action. Something has to be done to get a better flow going. I watched a youtube of an NCAA championship game from the early 70s. There wasn't a stop in action until about the 13 minute mark. +1 Back to Top OU_Country General User Member Since: 12/6/2005 Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County Post Count: 8,320 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 9:25:14 AM  Jeff McKinney wrote: As I've said elsewhere, I do NOT favor reducing the shot clock to 30 seconds. I agree with Van that this will lead to more individual play, slashing and bad shots as the shot clock runs out. I even think we'll see more isolation offense. Coaches will be recruiting more athletic slashers who can get to the bucket and draw fouls rather than emphasizing overall basic basketball skills. It's amazing that the people who supposedly know a lot more about hoops than me who are making these decisions can't see this. I'm in favor of reducing the number of stops in action. Something has to be done to get a better flow going. I watched a youtube of an NCAA championship game from the early 70s. There wasn't a stop in action until about the 13 minute mark. Agreed on improving the flow Jeff. I'm hopeful that the shot clock change and emphasis on calling excessive physical play won't turn the game into what you, and Van fear in your posts. In the last couple days, there have also been some who have suggested going to quarters would be good for the game. I personally like have the halves as something that's different in the college game. Back to Top Deciduous Forest Cat General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Ohio Post Count: 4,306 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 12:02:09 PM  This change makes perfect sense! I mean, everyone is always saying let's make the college game more like the NBA! Back to Top OUVan General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Bethesda, MD Post Count: 5,580 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 1:32:14 PM  Deciduous Forest Cat wrote: This change makes perfect sense! I mean, everyone is always saying let's make the college game more like the NBA! Ugh. Let's make it like the NBA but without the NBA players. That would be like a bad D-League game and if you have ever seen a D-League game you know that it would be unwatchable. Back to Top OU_Country General User Member Since: 12/6/2005 Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County Post Count: 8,320 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 2:41:32 PM  OUVan wrote: Deciduous Forest Cat wrote: This change makes perfect sense! I mean, everyone is always saying let's make the college game more like the NBA! Ugh. Let's make it like the NBA but without the NBA players. That would be like a bad D-League game and if you have ever seen a D-League game you know that it would be unwatchable. I agree with Van here. I don't need the college game to be like the NBA at all. I personally like it mostly just the way it is. When it comes to "improving scoring", I think a fair portion of the issues with scoring are the number of college players that aren't very good at shooting the mid range shots. Back to Top Andrew Ruck General User Member Since: 12/22/2004 Location: Columbus, OH Post Count: 4,699 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 2:42:52 PM  I like all the changes. I love reducing the timeouts to 4...I hate all the timeouts. 10 timeouts is insane. I love that the coach can't call a timeout during live action, that always seemed weird to me. Also a big fan of enforcing the set time allotted coming out of timeouts. I love converting the called TO to a media TO. I don't think it hurts the networks because they don't take a break with all timeouts anyway, now they probably will. I imagine the amount of commercials will be nearly identical, it will just be the down time of being on air with players huddled up and standing around waiting for the whistle to blow that will go away. All good things. Baseball did similar efforts this season when they realized how much unnecessary dead time there was. The commercial breaks were 2:05 but the average time between innings was over 3 minutes. They cleaned it up and games are now about 10 minutes shorter without sacrificing any commercials. I'll be honest, I like the shot clock mostly because 30 is a nice round number. I don't think it will have as much of an effect as some think. There is a lot of bringing the ball up the court very slowly, or just standing at the top of the key. I look at it as cutting down on that stuff more than I do increasing the individual play. 30 is a lot more than 24, still far away from the NBA. Andrew Ruck B.B.A. 2003 Back to Top giacomo General User Member Since: 11/20/2007 Post Count: 2,624 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 5:15:52 PM  I think it was Bobby Knight who said, years ago when the shot clock was being debated, "why not go to 20 seconds?". Back to Top giacomo General User Member Since: 11/20/2007 Post Count: 2,624 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 5:26:02 PM  This is what many of you have been saying: Bobby Knight and the Game of Basketball ˆ@March 21, 2008‡ýSports Bobby Knight recently argued against the three-point line and the use of a shot clock in college basketball. For this he was oft condemned and run through the meat grinder of various internet boards, including ones that support my beloved Louisville Cards (Beat Boise!). These people considered Knight obsolete or just an old fogy with nothing left to add to the game¡Va man, like Denny Crum, who has been passed by. Of course, I disagree with those assessments¡Vexcept, maybe for the last one, which I¡¦ll get to in a moment. Bobby Knight, like Crum, and like John Wooden before them both, knows what the hell he¡¦s talking about (Wooden is, of course, another ¡§old hack¡¨ of a coach who says he no longer enjoys the game of college basketball because of what it has become). These three coaches have 15 National Championships between them. They know a little bit. None of them are very happy with the current game. For the record, here is a link to the excerpt of Knight¡¦s point of view. Of course, this is not Knight, or Crum, of Wooden¡¦s blog, so I want to talk a little about the subject, and what it means to me. The last few weeks I¡¦ve spent quite a bit of time watching chunks of old games. Two of my favorites are: Dream Game End Dream Game OT Watch these clips. Sure, they¡¦re great because the represent what I consider the best moment in the history of UL/UK basketball. But mostly I want you to watch the game flow itself¡Vlook at the way defense was played on the inside. It¡¦s all about intelligence and positioning. It¡¦s about quickness and athletic grace. Now, go watch any modern clip. Watch the game inside the paint. Nasty, eh? Today¡¦s game of college basketball is just a mini-version of the pro game. It¡¦s a wrestling scrum. Also, watch the offense. See how patient everything feels. There is no shot clock beating in the back ground. The guard sets things up. His team mates move where they are supposed to. Realize that if a shot clock existed in this game, it never would have buzzed¡Vso it wasn¡¦t needed in order to speed up the game itself. The mere existence of the clock, however, would have changed the feel of the game. Don¡¦t want to see a Louisville game? Well, how about Villanova¡¦s run to the 1985 championship? Villanova was an 8-seed who used a strategy that primarily consisted of running their offense until they got a great shot, no matter how long it took. They won 66-64. Though they did not often ¡§hold the ball,¡¨ several of their possessions ran over 50 seconds. They shot 78%, mostly due to intelligent shot selection. Their strategy is no longer available, of course, since the 35 second shot clock would make them speed up their offense. Here¡¦s a really interesting clip of that game. Watch the whole thing. Pay attention. End ¡V First Half I love this clip because it directly shows how the defense really should be the one initiating the action. Watch how the game is flowing so gloriously, watch how the open inside game allows for athletic alley oops and slicing drives. Then come the final two minutes and see how Rollie Massimino out-coaches John Thompson and gives his kids an edge by using the fact that Georgetown won¡¦t play defense to his advantage. Making the other team play defense the way you wanted them to was once a really useful strategy. These days, a coach really can¡¦t force an opponent out of a zone¡Vespecially if his guys struggle to hit a few shots. In the old days, there were ways to attack things assuming you could take your time. In a recap of the situation, Harold Pressley, Villanova¡¦s star, said: We had lost those two (regular-season) games because they got us to play their tempo,¡¨ Pressley said. ¡§They forced us into quick shots ¡V not bad shots, but quick shots. Once you started doing that you were doomed.¡¨ Think about that quote. See how it plays with Knight¡¦s opinions. Consider what it means to have a ¡§basketball IQ.¡¨ For me, the shot clock and the three point line have fundamentally changed the game of basketball, and in a terrible, terrible way. Those two rules make the game one-dimensional. They change the goal of an offense from ¡§get a great look close to the basket,¡¨ to ¡§get an open look with your toes on the three-point line.¡¨ Defensively, it means that you have to extend yourself. Your guards and outside presence need to be able to put intense pressure on the ball when it¡¦s 20-feet from the bucket. Yes, this would logically open the inside¡Kexcept, of course, that coaches then adjusted and begin driving their big guys to get more physical in their approach to shutting down the inside game. This is about when the term ¡§Good No Call¡¨ entered our lexicon, and then became uttered about 10 times a game. I hate a ¡§Good No Call.¡¨ It¡¦s a bad phrase and a misguided rule of operation. The reason it¡¦s a bad deal is that the rules also say a player is able to break the rules four times and remain in the game. Railing against referees is always fun, but I¡¦ll refrain from going to far on it today except to say that even with the 3-pointer and shot clock, the game would be more open if the referees just called all the fouls all the time. Players would foul out for a few games, but they would adjust. This all ties into the 3-pointer and the shot clock because the two ideas have fueled a massive movement to a single style of play¡Vthat being one that seeks athletic defenders who then mill around in a quick-minded offense that looks for either a dunk or a 20-foot-shot. Gone are Bobby Knights glorious movement offense and the Wooden/Crum approach of inverting your guards (because you really don¡¦t want outside shooters down on the blocks any more). The dribble drive is now practiced well by only a few guys who are both quick enough to get around their perimeter defenders and strong enough to hold their own against the thugs who await them in the paint¡Vmost inside/outside play is now about the entry pass, very much like the NBA. Going to the hole now requires a warrior rather than an athlete. Or, perhaps, the term ¡§athlete¡¨ itself has changed to be overwhelmed by the warrior flavor over the poetic. In addition, interior passing¡Va staple of the high-low game favored by Crum and Wooden in particular¡Vis on the decline due to the ruggedly physical nature of game in the paint. It can still work if you have the right players in there¡VLouisville¡¦s David Padgett is all-the-rave about his passing, but you don¡¦t see it nearly as much as you once did. Actually, I suggest we have had several point centers in just Louisville¡¦s history (Rodney McCray being perhaps the best of my personal memory), but they were so prevalent across the world of basketball that they didn¡¦t stand out as particularly odd or noteworthy. I view the fact that Padgett stands out in today¡¦s game is a measure of how this part of the overall game of college basketball has degraded. Finally, this also means defenses have it relatively easy in today¡¦s game. They really just need to be able to play hard for 20-25 seconds at a time. Or, actually, if they are playing a team that panics or isn¡¦t mature, they can play 10-15 seconds of good defense and then let the shot clock force their opponent into a cruddy shot. So the defensive Xs and Os that guys like Knight, Crum, and Wooden once laid down are also very different. Coaches teach maximum intensity for short bursts now. In the old days, a Villanova-type offensive strategy would feel this pressure, and run the offense for 40-50 seconds. Eventually, if their ball security skills were good enough, the defensive intensity would fail and a lay-up or alley¡Voop might well present itself. In all of these ways, the game has ¡§passed by¡¨ these older coaches, though I struggle to use that term since it suggests the game has gotten more sophisticated or better in some fashion that these guys couldn¡¦t possibly understand when in reality it has become far less dynamic and not nearly as athletically beautiful as it once was. The ability to shoot the 12-15 foot shot has gone by the wayside because it is now the worst possible shot to take (and hence the shot that most defenses are geared to try to force). The use of the lob pass is a relic because it¡¦s really rare that a guy can run free through the lane without getting a forearm shiver that stops his momentum. For my money, this change is bad. When I was a kid I used to love coming home late at night and turning on that fledgling station known as ESPN and seeing delayed broadcasts of teams that ran tons of weird systems¡VIvy League games with their myriad of screens and hundreds of passes, the fanciful strategies of the Dale Browns of the world, the Cincinnatis who tried to actually hold the ball all game to get UK out of their zone and lost something like 24-15 because Joe B Hall wouldn¡¦t play man-to-man to force the action. I thought the 4-corners was a fascinating offense, and caused most teams who ran it a lot more trouble than benefit. I was almost always happy to see someone go to it when they were ahead of us. But it was a great, great offense for a team like UNC when they had someone of Phil Ford¡¦s talent run it. To me, that was something that made college basketball fascinating. The game today loses something because it is one-size fits all. The best offensive strategy is obvious¡Vshoot the uncontested three. The defensive strategy is also obvious¡Vhard pressure for 25 seconds. The refereeing has morphed over time to an NBA-like approach. Everything is pointed to the team with the most athletic/strongest players winning almost all the time (not every time, of course, but a lot more times than it used to be when the game was more about quickness and grace than about speed and muscle). Obviously, there are those who think it¡¦s a great game. And of course, I still watch it. I mean, what¡¦s a guy supposed to do in March? But I admit I feel bad for the kids who have no memory of what basketball was like in the 70s and 80s. For me, that will always be how the game was meant to be played. Back to Top Lande71 General User Member Since: 9/19/2010 Post Count: 271 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/10/2015 7:16:13 PM  Giacomo, I couldn't have said it better myself. This is exactly, imo, what is wrong with college basketball today. Many of the great basketball players today can get passed over by the monstrous athlete in today's game. Just watch some of the horrendous free throw shooters today. Do they have basketball skills? I used to say that basketball players needed the highest set of skills to effectively play the game. Baseball is the other game requiring a lot of skills. Basketball has lost its luster because we don't see enough skilled players to play the game! Great written info Giacomo! Back to Top Jeff McKinney Moderator Member Since: 11/12/2004 Post Count: 6,047 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/11/2015 3:00:26 AM  OU_Country wrote: Jeff McKinney wrote: As I've said elsewhere, I do NOT favor reducing the shot clock to 30 seconds. I agree with Van that this will lead to more individual play, slashing and bad shots as the shot clock runs out. I even think we'll see more isolation offense. Coaches will be recruiting more athletic slashers who can get to the bucket and draw fouls rather than emphasizing overall basic basketball skills. It's amazing that the people who supposedly know a lot more about hoops than me who are making these decisions can't see this. I'm in favor of reducing the number of stops in action. Something has to be done to get a better flow going. I watched a youtube of an NCAA championship game from the early 70s. There wasn't a stop in action until about the 13 minute mark. Agreed on improving the flow Jeff. I'm hopeful that the shot clock change and emphasis on calling excessive physical play won't turn the game into what you, and Van fear in your posts. In the last couple days, there have also been some who have suggested going to quarters would be good for the game. I personally like have the halves as something that's different in the college game. While I don't like reducing the shot clock, I'm in favor of the refs calling fouls closer. Re giacomos quote, I agree that the three point shot has been bad for the game overall. But most fans become completely incensed when someone proposes getting rid of it. Back to Top Jeff McKinney Moderator Member Since: 11/12/2004 Post Count: 6,047 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/11/2015 3:18:06 AM  Watch some games from the 1970s. A good example is UCLA vs Kentucky 1975. Back to Top giacomo General User Member Since: 11/20/2007 Post Count: 2,624 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/11/2015 5:24:20 PM  look at the current NBA finals. When they replay a drive into the paint in slow motion, you can see all the mayhem involved. Back to Top Lande71 General User Member Since: 9/19/2010 Post Count: 271 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/11/2015 10:11:40 PM  Watching the Cleveland/Golden State game. I can't believe that is basketball! Who can beat the hell out of who and get away with it! I will not be watching the second half. Sorry to say it, but I'm afraid all of basketball is headed this way. Back to Top OU_Country General User Member Since: 12/6/2005 Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County Post Count: 8,320 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/12/2015 8:53:39 AM  Lande71 wrote: Watching the Cleveland/Golden State game. I can't believe that is basketball! Who can beat the hell out of who and get away with it! I will not be watching the second half. Sorry to say it, but I'm afraid all of basketball is headed this way. I wouldn't say all basketball, but I would say all basketball in the U.S. As a culture these days, we seem to like sports more when they're more physical/violent. Back to Top OUVan General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Bethesda, MD Post Count: 5,580 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/12/2015 10:11:54 AM  OU_Country wrote: I wouldn't say all basketball, but I would say all basketball in the U.S. As a culture these days, we seem to like sports more when they're more physical/violent. Was just at an AAU tournament in Delaware a couple of weeks ago and the refs were essentially playing advantage like in soccer. There was a fast break in the court next to ours and a player literally tackled the kid from behind as he was going up for a shot. The shooter's trailing teammate got the rebound and put-back so the ref didn't call a foul but all I could think is that they are going to get someone seriously injured or killed. But the allowance of physical play also has a side effect of kids not getting fundamentally sound on defense. When you are allowed to grab the kid you are guarding (see Andre Iguodala on LeBron James in game 2) you don't need to learn to defend using your feet. Last Edited: 6/12/2015 10:12:50 AM by OUVan Back to Top giacomo General User Member Since: 11/20/2007 Post Count: 2,624 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/12/2015 11:28:41 AM  That's true. Also, the kids will emulate what they see the NBA guys doing. Back to Top Casper71 General User Member Since: 12/1/2006 Post Count: 2,895 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/12/2015 1:23:53 PM  As has been pointed out, the NBA games now are really hard to watch. Not sure what the answer is but watching foul, foul, foul and hold, hold, hold is not fun. It is just plain ugly to watch. Who wants to emulate that? Back to Top UpSan Bobcat General User Member Since: 8/30/2005 Location: Upper Sandusky, OH Post Count: 3,792 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/12/2015 2:42:04 PM  Casper71 wrote: As has been pointed out, the NBA games now are really hard to watch. Not sure what the answer is but watching foul, foul, foul and hold, hold, hold is not fun. It is just plain ugly to watch. Who wants to emulate that? But I'm sure it's hard to play clean defense when the offensive player can take 3 or more steps without dribbling. Back to Top OhioCatFan General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 14,016 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/12/2015 6:28:56 PM  Lande71 wrote: Watching the Cleveland/Golden State game. I can't believe that is basketball! Who can beat the hell out of who and get away with it! . . . Sorry to say it, but I'm afraid all of basketball is headed this way. +1 That game last night was as ugly a basketball game as I've ever seen. As Casper71 implied there were at least three non-called fouls on nearly every play. They used to say that NFL football resembled basketball played on grass (a despairing reference when the NFL went "pass crazy" circa 1970). I'd now say that the NBA resembles football played in an indoor cage. There was one play last night where a Cleveland player had to fend off three NFL-caliber blocks before he got into position to receive a pass. In the old days each of those blocks would have been called a foul; of course, the second two wouldn't have occurred if the first one had been called. I'll watch the next game and root for Cleveland, just out of Buckeye State pride, but I just hate this style of basketball. I hope the college game doesn't go in this direction, but this shorten shot-clock does have me worried. The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA "It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right." Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org Back to Top intrpdtrvlr General User Member Since: 7/8/2010 Post Count: 177 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/15/2015 2:26:24 PM  Casper71 wrote: As has been pointed out, the NBA games now are really hard to watch. Not sure what the answer is but watching foul, foul, foul and hold, hold, hold is not fun. It is just plain ugly to watch. Who wants to emulate that? The extreme opposite, however, is where coaches' main halftime adjustment focuses not on making basketball plays or strategy, but on successfully drawing fouls. Coach K's halftime interview against Wisconson really soured me on where college ball could continue to go. BA - Michigan State '03, MA - Ohio '05, PhD - Ohio '15 Back to Top Deciduous Forest Cat General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Ohio Post Count: 4,306 Status: Offline     RE: 30 second shot clock and other changes approved    Posted: 6/15/2015 4:03:46 PM  Even more insufferable than the over-the-top physical play in the NBA finals is the announcers condoning the style by not calling a foul a foul and a flagrant a flagrant. Apparently the only thing they think is ever a foul is if someone breathes on Lebron James. Are these guys even watching the same game? Back to Top Showing Replies:   1 - 25  of 26 Posts Jump to Page:   1 | 2    Next > View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               WHO'S ONLINE There are 174 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com 172 Guests 2 Registered Users:   Kevin Finnegan, thehawg27 There are no other users looking at this page.

Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties