As someone who has watched, read, laughed, and yelled at the computer (like most of you), I've been in these threads since late 2004 when football and trash talking between players and schools was set to become an NSAA sanctioned event--only with better fans and officiating. However, it's only until now, and the issue with the shot clock in high school basketball that has sparked interest (again!) that I must create an account and actually write a post.
As someone who has been a head basketball coach at the high school level and currently coaches at the collegiate level, a shot clock is absolutely necessary. The arguments that "the game is too physical" and "coaches are emphasizing defense more" is the ABSOLUTE argument needed in FAVOR of the shot clock. Reward the team for playing good defense with a shot clock violation or a rushed shot. Reward the team that is more physical in the paint or teams that can guard out front without hand-checking or fouling. Reward the team that plays great team defense. (The argument that if a team is playing great defense, they'll continue that through the entire possession is unwarranted. Offense has the advantage--especially in late-game situations.) Also, to look back at PAST games and try to assimilate or estimate the outcomes of current and future games is like saying a DRAW 4 card is coming up in the deck of UNO because it was played three hands ago--no future outcome can be predicted with accuracy.
When the 3-point line was adopted in the late 80's (in Nebraska), there were many people against it; however, Wahoo's point total during their championship run went from 88.1 to nearly 92 points a game. Over the course of a season, a lot of extra points were made. And, cost was one of the benefactors. Sure, a gym had to be stripped, re-striped, and refinished, but many gyms were too small for the corner shot--and money was an issue when re-configuring gym space and seating. The shot clock will be an additional cost to the school, a person hitting a reset button will be an additional cost, but the value of possessions and overall game play will be well worth it. Many district and state games end with one team stalling out--what if a defensive team was rewarded for the clock and great defensive play? Implementing a shot clock will make coaches and players better and give fans something to root for at the end of games. Well-coached teams will be taught how to get a good shot within the limits of a shot clock. Poorly-coached teams will have to learn how to adjust.
The argument that a team doesn't take the entire 30 seconds to shoot a shot is invalid--applying that notion to all teams is irresponsible. Possessions will increase, players will adjust and become more efficient offensively as well as defensively.
Your team is down two points in the district final. They've fought hard all game long, but they're unfortunate to not get final possession of the game--unless they foul. What if it was the same scenario, but there were 35 seconds left on the game clock? The opponent gets a full possession. Your team plays great defense. The shot clock is winding down, the opponent takes a bad shot; your team gets the rebound. Now, they have at least 5 seconds to tie or win. With no shot clock, you're forced to foul, hope they miss. (If they make both, you're down two possessions.) This way, defense, rebounding, and coaching all play a part in the win--not just stall out and win the game.
The NFHS will eventually adopt the shot clock. It was a close vote the last couple years. But ultimately, in the years to come, the three point line, shot clock, and "flopping" issues will open the door for something else we'll all be on here talking about. I enjoy each of your responses and the camaraderie and affinity we all share for the love of student-athletes and the betterment of high school sports.
