Interesting to see a lot of articles pointing out how the college game needs to be changed. This is ESPN Insider piece but I felt the contents were important and everyone should see them. This was also in the recent ESPN Magazine College Hoops preview. By Jay Bilas
http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9867778/jay-bilas-ideas-fix-college-basketball-espn-magazineCOLLEGE BASKETBALL is a great game, but it has been slowly declining over the last several seasons, for a variety of reasons. Don't be fooled by a terrific and aesthetically pleasing NCAA championship game between Louisville and Michigan, or get distracted by the billions of dollars being generated off the game. The quality of play simply isn't keeping pace with the quality of players and coaches in the game.
To the old-timers who love to blame AAU basketball for the so-called erosion of fundamentals, that is simply wrong. The players coming out of high school are better, more athletic and more skilled than they have ever been, but you wouldn't know it from watching the college game. For years, the casual fan couldn't tell the difference between a good game and a close game, and college basketball has benefited from that; but now, it's clear to everyone how difficult the game has become to watch.
We are headed into what could be one of college basketball's best seasons in years, mainly because of the star power of the incoming freshman class. But it would be folly to ignore the game's problems: It is over-coached, too slow and allows a level of physicality that takes away from the beauty of the sport.
But we can and should do something about it; we need to make college basketball more watchable and a better fan experience. And part of the solution is admitting the NBA has a better product because it calls fouls and allows its players to use their athleticism on both ends of the floor.
Here are four ways college basketball could follow the League's lead.
Make officials, well, official.
NBA coaches don't whine during games nearly as much as their college counterparts, and their sideline behavior is much better. Why? In large measure it is because the NBA mandates the standards by which its employees call games -- and enforces it. College officials, on the other hand, are independent contractors who answer to many different masters (conference supervisors, the NCAA and seemingly every coach) with many different standards.
So, whether it is through the NCAA or the big conferences, the best college officials need to be full-time, salaried employees; their schedules, training and accountability should be administered under one umbrella. NCAA supervisor of officials John Adams is doing an admirable job, but the only real leverage he has comes in his selection of officials who work the NCAA tournament. That is not enough.
Clean it up.
Over a decade ago, the NBA had become a grinding, physical, mugging league; beauty and grace were being sacrificed in the flames of the Jordan Rules. But the League went through a Freedom of Movement initiative, and cleaned up its act. College basketball still lags in that area, convinced it "values" or "cares" about defense more. What nonsense.
Over the past 50 years, shooting percentages and scoring have fluctuated in concert with the changes in the college game, yet the number of fouls called has largely stayed constant. That indicates that, consciously or unconsciously, officials are being selective about what they call.
There is way too much physicality in today's college basketball.
They feel stuck due to competing interests -- they need to get games over with, and they get criticized for certain games being parades to the free throw line. In turn, because officials will only call so many fouls, coaches have determined that organized fouling is a competitive advantage. As a result we see coaches teaching teams to "be physical with your chest," by which players keep their hands up but commit felonies with their chest and lower body.
Administrators believe that the status quo allows the underdog to be a factor in more games with Goliaths, so much so that one official once said that with greater freedom of movement, the better player would have an advantage. Think about that for a minute. That's like saying Usain Bolt will have an advantage in the 100-meter dash if he is allowed to run in a straight line without being grabbed and held.
And to be clear, what I'm talking about is not defense. It's one thing to hold the ball -- that can be good strategy. But you cannot hold your opponent. That is a foul. And until those fouls are called consistently throughout the season, the game will continue to be a slugfest worthy of Pat Riley's old Knicks teams.
Speed it up.
There is no shot clock in the world that is as long as the 35 seconds in men's college hoops. The NBA (24 seconds), FIBA (24 seconds), the WNBA (24 seconds) and women's college basketball (30 seconds) all operate successfully with shorter shot clocks. That is embarrassing.
Similarly embarrassing are the self-serving excuses on why it shouldn't change. For some coaches who yearn to control every dribble, they fear a shorter clock will lead to more bad shots. Others believe it will lead to more possessions, which will provide an advantage to better, deeper and more talented teams. In fact, the NBA gathered data on the subject when the WNBA went to a reduced shot clock, and fears of bad shots were unfounded -- scoring went up and the game became more enjoyable for players and fans. There is no downside to a shorter shot clock.
While we're on the topic of speed of the game, college basketball would benefit by going to a four-quarters system instead of two halves, and reducing the number of team timeouts. With media timeouts every four minutes, the number of team timeouts should be reduced to only two per half, with only two available in the last two minutes of the game or overtime. And by going to four 10-minute quarters instead of two 20-minute halves, there would be more natural breaks that follow exciting end-of-clock situations, and fewer annoying stoppages in play while still allowing the necessary amount of commercial breaks.
Let the talent shine.
Right now the men's game is unbalanced, with too many shots coming from 3-point range because the risk of the shot is less than the reward. If the NCAA adopted the NBA 3-point distance of 23 feet, 9 inches, it would improve floor spacing, open up better driving lanes and put the appropriate risk back into the shot.
At the same time, the lane should be widened to match the NBA lane, with the same restricted area or charge circle. What's the objection? These are great athletes that we often say should be allowed to go to the NBA early, yet they cannot handle playing the game with pro rules? Nonsense. When college teams go overseas for foreign tours, they do very well with the shorter shot clock, longer 3-point shot and wider lane.
One last thought (and it's a no-brainer): Allow the NBA throw-in from the frontcourt in the final two minutes of regulation and overtime. This move not only increases excitement and makes the game more enjoyable for fans, but it allows for greater strategy on the part of both the offense and the defense.
Look, I love college basketball. It is a great game, and can be the best game. But when you love something, you take care of it -- even when the truth is painful.