At least start in Classes A-B and see where it goes. Tired of seeing kids stand around and pass the ball for two minutes. That’s not strategy. If South Dakota can do it, Nebraska can.
Basketball Is it time for Nebraska HS basketball to have a shot clock?
- Thread starter northeastNebraska
- Start date
At least start in Classes A-B and see where it goes. Tired of seeing kids stand around and pass the ball for two minutes. That’s not strategy. If South Dakota can do it, Nebraska can.
i think the top two classes get it going, not so sure the smaller classes need this, but on a side note the way basketball is being played these days you will have a turnover before you will have a shot clock violation so it may or may not matter much.
All I know is, when I am watching a game and team tries stalling with a 2 point lead and over 2 minutes to go, I feel sorry for the kids. I don't have any data to back it up, but it doesn't seem to work out very often. I find myself rooting against the stalling team.
Played against many teams in my day that would run their offense for 3-4 minutes straight, only to get an "and-1" or splash a three after 3.5 minutes of solid defense. Complete back-breaker. Shot clock for ALL classes has my vote.
Yes, without a doubt. I always here the excuse about hiring an operator, I get that, but maybe we could get a four man officiating crew. Three to officiate, one to operate the shot clock. This maybe an added expense, but this would allow NSAA to mandate and control the training so everyone is trained the same, and would allow for a neutral operator.
Bring in the shot clock in all classes or don't do it at all. If it's good for Class A and B then it should be good for the other 4 classes.
Well they would have to pay for someone to operate it, so why not? Hell raise the price of admission a buck and it’ll pay for itself
This. It’s not like the schools would be paying the extra official $2,000 a game.
I think it happens when the stakes are higher in districts, state, etc. more than anything. Teams that are well coached and have solid guard play are good enough to hold the ball for long periods. The two I remember that were really good at was Terry Lantz (Ralston) and Jim Weeks (Beatrice). They were always good enough that their team could hold the ball that long and get away with it, and as a player/coach on the other side it frustrated the heck out of you.
Pay for an operator? At many schools the clock operators and bookeepers are volunteers and hard to come by as it is
Taking the air out of the ball is a coaching/player strategy just like the triple option vs the spread offense in fb. Two setters vs 1 setter in volleyball. Do I run my best runner in a relay on the first leg or the last leg in track, etc. etc. etc. If they run a delay game you work hard for a steal or foul and hope they miss free throws. With the 3 pt shot you still have opportunity to outscore them even if they make both free throws.
If a team has worked hard to gain a lead why shouldn't they be able to have strategic options to protect it?
It’s not strategy. It ruins the game of basketball. Kids need to run the offense and go up and down the court. Not hold the ball.
If this were remotely close to a “strategy”, you’d see it in all levels of basketball. It’s not even close to a strategy, it’s boring and no one wants to watch it.
Just because you disagree with it and hate it, doesn't negate it from being a strategy. I can respect that you don't enjoy it as a style of basketball, but don't disregard as a way to win a basketball game. If I'm a basketball coach and I'm outgunned by a team that thrives on high tempo, why wouldn't I try to slow it down? As a coach, I'm going to do everything I can to win a game. If that means cutting a team's possessions and shots in half by running through my offense and shortening the game, why wouldn't I do it? I'm a big fan of uptempo and the golden state style of basketball too, but if I don't have the horses to do it, why would I do it?
To the point about seeing it at all levels, well all the other levels have a shot clock. And those teams with leads run down the possession to the last second of the shot clock. Do you think they should just throw up a shot as quickly as possible because you disagree with holding the ball? You better believe that if there were no shot clock, you'd see more inferior teams chopping down game clock. There is a shot clock because the NBA wanted higher scoring games in the 50's to draw more fans. Which if I'm running a business, I can understand and appreciate.
For the record and to get back to the original question, I'd be for a shot clock. Unfortunately costs are definitely an issue for some schools. Maintenance and the issue of the possibility of it stop working during a game could be tricky. Some school districts can afford to pay their scores table and possible shot clock operator, but a lot of schools can't. Paying another official to do it would be difficult because I believe it's already difficult to find officials, especially the further west you go. Increasing the gate is an idea, but could have a negative effect. The idea is you want people there to watch 20+ games a year. Higher prices at the gate might deter people from wanting to take the whole family. Not everyone has a media, conference, or faculty pass to get into all the games for free.
Cheap alternative, but is there a way that one of the refs on the three man crew can have a clock on him like in football? and give the five second run down with the waving arm?
Does anyone know the cost of a shot clock? the two clocks and the two sets of LED lights that would go around the background? Maybe it's not as expensive as people think? You could probably find a volunteer to do run the shot clock, It can't be that super difficult right? Start, stop, reset?
For it to happen, it will have to get brought up in district meeting proposals. For it to be even considered by all classes, I think you'll see a proposal that would just implement it in Class A and B first as the trial run. Then you'll see other classes jump on board.
To the point about seeing it at all levels, well all the other levels have a shot clock. And those teams with leads run down the possession to the last second of the shot clock. Do you think they should just throw up a shot as quickly as possible because you disagree with holding the ball? You better believe that if there were no shot clock, you'd see more inferior teams chopping down game clock. There is a shot clock because the NBA wanted higher scoring games in the 50's to draw more fans. Which if I'm running a business, I can understand and appreciate.
For the record and to get back to the original question, I'd be for a shot clock. Unfortunately costs are definitely an issue for some schools. Maintenance and the issue of the possibility of it stop working during a game could be tricky. Some school districts can afford to pay their scores table and possible shot clock operator, but a lot of schools can't. Paying another official to do it would be difficult because I believe it's already difficult to find officials, especially the further west you go. Increasing the gate is an idea, but could have a negative effect. The idea is you want people there to watch 20+ games a year. Higher prices at the gate might deter people from wanting to take the whole family. Not everyone has a media, conference, or faculty pass to get into all the games for free.
Cheap alternative, but is there a way that one of the refs on the three man crew can have a clock on him like in football? and give the five second run down with the waving arm?
Does anyone know the cost of a shot clock? the two clocks and the two sets of LED lights that would go around the background? Maybe it's not as expensive as people think? You could probably find a volunteer to do run the shot clock, It can't be that super difficult right? Start, stop, reset?
For it to happen, it will have to get brought up in district meeting proposals. For it to be even considered by all classes, I think you'll see a proposal that would just implement it in Class A and B first as the trial run. Then you'll see other classes jump on board.
Shot clocks run about $5,000 a piece. A lot of the schools will say they can’t afford it.
I just wish Nebraska didn’t have so many school districts. Iowa helps move consolidations forward. I know that’s not what this thread is about but that saves money.
I just wish Nebraska didn’t have so many school districts. Iowa helps move consolidations forward. I know that’s not what this thread is about but that saves money.
I'd agree with you that slowing the game down is a strategy. I don't like the strategy but it sure is a stratagy.
However, I think teams can still implement that style of play with a shot clock, just not to such extreme measures. What iterates me as a fan and former player are the teams that stretch out the last possesion of quarters. We have all seen it, a coach yelling one shot followed by a guard standing at half court or a three guard set working together at half court passing the ball around until 10 seconds left. To me, and most, the 50+ seconds of nothing is irritating and not helping kids learn to play the game. During postseason you'll see this magnified. Some teams will do it at with 70+ seconds on the clock. Furthermore you'll see both teams do it in the same game. Always cracks me up when one fan base gets all fired up for the opposing team doing it then at the end of the next quarter their team is doing the same thing!
With that said, in my limited years of prior coaching I completely understand why teams do it if that is what the rules are. Every possession is valuable, especially in the postseason.
Do I think the game would benefit from teams learning how to play for 2 for 1 with 60 seconds left instead of holding it? Absolutely! Although I understand why teams stall I wish a shot clock was in place to limit this from happenning.
Last edited:
Which is why the skill level of men's college basketball keeps rising while the shot clock shrinks? That's not what I see on my TV.
