ADVERTISEMENT

Basketball Shot Clock one step closer to coming to Class A

Alum-Ni

All-State
Gold Member
Aug 29, 2004
50,139
1,671
113

Per the NebPreps article, during the Class A Caucus this morning, 23 ADs voted in favor of implementing a shot clock, with two opposed. The deadline to submit a proposal to the NSAA Classification Review Committee is Oct. 1.
 
If and when this passes, I wonder how this will effect North Platte. Will they have the shot clock implemented for all of their home games? Last year at home they played these teams who aren't in Class A...Kearney Catholic, Sidney, Northwest, York, Pius, and Minden.
 
Pius is Class A but for those other schools I'd imagine there would be no shot clock then. Cant' see them only using it when NP is on offense
If and when this passes, I wonder how this will effect North Platte. Will they have the shot clock implemented for all of their home games? Last year at home they played these teams who aren't in Class A...Kearney Catholic, Sidney, Northwest, York, Pius, and Minden.
 
If and when this passes, I wonder how this will effect North Platte. Will they have the shot clock implemented for all of their home games? Last year at home they played these teams who aren't in Class A...Kearney Catholic, Sidney, Northwest, York, Pius, and Minden.
I think the shot clock should be used if the game is in North Platte since North Platte is Class A.
 
So after visiting with someone who was in the meeting some interesting points were raised....when asked if a shot clock should be used for girls, there were a lot of "uhh I was thinking of boys and uh i don't know". When the question was asked what levels shot clock should be used for there weren't many answers...so what say you.....should it be used in JV, Reserve/Freshmen, JH?
 
So after visiting with someone who was in the meeting some interesting points were raised....when asked if a shot clock should be used for girls, there were a lot of "uhh I was thinking of boys and uh i don't know". When the question was asked what levels shot clock should be used for there weren't many answers...so what say you.....should it be used in JV, Reserve/Freshmen, JH?

I would guess it will start at the varsity level only.
 
  • Like
Reactions: northeastNebraska
If I'm coaching a varsity team using a shot clock, I want my JV and freshmen (and my 8th graders, if possible) playing with the clock. No question. BTW, the girls will adjust to the clock as well or better than the boys. But, the people thinking the shot clock is going to 'solve' some problem in high school basketball are going to be disappointed.
 
If I'm coaching a varsity team using a shot clock, I want my JV and freshmen (and my 8th graders, if possible) playing with the clock. No question. BTW, the girls will adjust to the clock as well or better than the boys. But, the people thinking the shot clock is going to 'solve' some problem in high school basketball are going to be disappointed.

I tend to agree......I really don't think a shot clock will increase scoring all that much, for sure not right away.

I don't have any skin in the game, and maybe I'm wrong, but I think coaches would want to focus their efforts on their JV, JH teams on learning systems, sets, and fundamentals before throwing a shot clock at them.
 
I still don't think that a shot clock will help the game. I already see too much clear-out and try to take my guy off the dribble. Now I'll see more of that as soon as the shot clock hits 10.

And is really needed? How many HS possessions actually last longer than 35 seconds?

This is high school basketball! Why do we want to emulate college or (god-forbid) pro hoops? Let's work on more fundamentals, shooting and team play.

Old-guy rant over.
 
Tuesday, the NSAA's Classification Review Committee voted 7-2 to not add a shot clock for Class A for the 2022-23 season. For the shot clock proposal to be approved by the committee, it needed a two-thirds affirmative vote. The adoption of a shot clock was approved by the Class A Caucus (athletic directors) by a wide margin in July.

The two Class A members of the classification committee voted in favor of the shot clock addition, while the seven non-Class A members voted against it. It appears financial considerations for schools are the biggest reason those voted against it were. More details are here: https://nebpreps.com/time-running-out-on-class-a-shot-clock-for-2022/
 
If I'm coaching a varsity team using a shot clock, I want my JV and freshmen (and my 8th graders, if possible) playing with the clock. No question. BTW, the girls will adjust to the clock as well or better than the boys. But, the people thinking the shot clock is going to 'solve' some problem in high school basketball are going to be disappointed.
I agree with this. I thing you will see shooting percentages plummet because kids know they have to get the shot off and take bad shots. Never understood the coaching method of taking the air out of the ball but not sure forcing teams into bad shots will help. At the top couple of classes you would have the skill level to do it but I don't believe its doable at the bottom few classes.
 
Personally, I think the idea that a shot clock isn't really the solution to increasing scoring. I discussed with a highly successful HS coach, and they feel that the way the rules are now (more physicality, less freedom of movement) is the reason for lower scoring.

Below are the boys top season scoring averages. If there are better, more skilled athletes now (I agree there are), why hasn't there been a team to crack this list in 20 years? I don't think the shot clock will solve this. Just my .02....

Team Scoring, Season Average

94.4-Alliance, 1989
91.4-Wahoo, 1994
90.4-Wahoo, 1993
90.2-Mitchell Sunflower, 1968
90.1-Wausa, 1969
89.0-Wahoo, 1991
88.3-Wahoo, 1990
88.3-Mead, 1971
87.5-Elmwood, 1967
86.9-Henderson, 1984
85.3-Spencer, 1966
85.2-Bellevue Christian, 1990
84.8-Herman, 1964
84.6-Anselmo-Merna, 2002
84.5-Atkinson West Holt, 1988
84.4-Odell, 1964
84.4-Lyons, 1979
83.4-Pawnee City, 1968
83.4-Alliance, 1988
83.3-Laurel, 1969
 
Tuesday, the NSAA's Classification Review Committee voted 7-2 to not add a shot clock for Class A for the 2022-23 season. For the shot clock proposal to be approved by the committee, it needed a two-thirds affirmative vote. The adoption of a shot clock was approved by the Class A Caucus (athletic directors) by a wide margin in July.

The two Class A members of the classification committee voted in favor of the shot clock addition, while the seven non-Class A members voted against it. It appears financial considerations for schools are the biggest reason those voted against it were. More details are here: https://nebpreps.com/time-running-out-on-class-a-shot-clock-for-2022/

This is a bit misleading unless you dive into the article and understand the NSAA process. This was voted down as a Class Caucus proposal, meaning it can not advance with only class A voting. The no vote was in fact a must for all representatives because the proposal involved a financial cost to schools, meaning the process must go through the legislative process. The class A voters likely voted to show their support of the shot clock coming to class A. They also knew going in the proposal would not advance.

The proposal is in the legislative stage already as well. It will be voted on by ADs in the districts it was submitted in. Typically schools do not vote on proposals that don't affect their class, but this one is a little interesting as it could eventually affect all classes. Stay tuned...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alum-Ni
Personally, I think the idea that a shot clock isn't really the solution to increasing scoring. I discussed with a highly successful HS coach, and they feel that the way the rules are now (more physicality, less freedom of movement) is the reason for lower scoring.

Below are the boys top season scoring averages. If there are better, more skilled athletes now (I agree there are), why hasn't there been a team to crack this list in 20 years? I don't think the shot clock will solve this. Just my .02....

Team Scoring, Season Average

94.4-Alliance, 1989
91.4-Wahoo, 1994
90.4-Wahoo, 1993
90.2-Mitchell Sunflower, 1968
90.1-Wausa, 1969
89.0-Wahoo, 1991
88.3-Wahoo, 1990
88.3-Mead, 1971
87.5-Elmwood, 1967
86.9-Henderson, 1984
85.3-Spencer, 1966
85.2-Bellevue Christian, 1990
84.8-Herman, 1964
84.6-Anselmo-Merna, 2002
84.5-Atkinson West Holt, 1988
84.4-Odell, 1964
84.4-Lyons, 1979
83.4-Pawnee City, 1968
83.4-Alliance, 1988
83.3-Laurel, 1969
My thoughts as well. Basketball players today are more skilled and developed individually than they ever have been.......yet no one cracks the list above. Why? Because of the current rules and style of play being used.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClkTwr2011
While I could care less whether Class A implements a shot clock, I find it asanine that districts with ZERO class A schools get to vote on what Class A wants.
 
While I could care less whether Class A implements a shot clock, I find it asanine that districts with ZERO class A schools get to vote on what Class A wants.
It is because of the trickle down effect. Happens all the time. If it passes in one Class then the proposal happens soon in another class and soon after all classes. Sometimes in order for this not to happen, schools vote against a proposal, that is not in their Class. This is their right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yossarian23

Some insight into the current shot clock situation in Nebraska.

Behind the Vote
by Mike Sautter, NebPreps

Over two weeks ago, the possibility of a shot clock for Class A basketball games in Nebraska for the 2022-23 season all but died.

Inexplicably, that sad reality came to be even after 28 of 31 Class A schools voted in favor of playing with a shot clock next season.

How Did We Get Here?
There has been a lot of confusion lately on the role of the NSAA (i.e. the Gretna football situation). The Nebraska School Activities Association's primary purpose is to enforce and oversee the rules the member schools propose and that are eventually approved by the board. The NSAA and people who work for the membership coordinate the state championships for sanctioned events.

The National Federation of High School Associations gave its blessing to the state associations for adoption of a 35-second shot clock beginning in the 2022-23 season.

Changing a rule or bylaw is multi-faceted and can be confusing. There are two ways a bylaw or proposal can be approved. The Class Caucus, or by submitting proposals through the NSAA's legislative process, which is the more traditional way.

In July, Class A athletic directors voted at their caucus meeting to approve the shot clock for Class A only with a 23-2 vote.

After a successful proposal passes a class caucus, the next step is for it to go to the Classification Rules Committee. That committee is composed of two members from each of the four classifications: A, B, C and D.

The review committee met in October and did not give the required two-thirds affirmative vote. The committee voted 2-7, with only the Class A representatives, Tom Kerkman (Omaha Westside) and Pat Gatzmeyer (Lincoln High), in favor of moving forward with the shot clock. The seven non-Class A members voted against the proposal. The general reasoning behind this vote is that the review committee can only move a proposal forward if there is no financial impact to schools. The shot clock creates a financial impact.

The Traditional Route
Multiple shot clock proposals -- just for Class A, just for Class B and for all classes -- were on the docket through the NSAA's traditional legislative process. The Class A-only proposal was brought to the membership through district meetings.

In November, District II, primarily made up of Omaha schools, voted in favor of the Class A-only proposal. In January, it was then brought to all six districts for a vote from the membership.

The Class A-only proposal would affect some Class B schools if they play away games at Class A schools. This happens often, see North Platte as an example.

District Votes
That vote happened on Jan. 11 and Jan. 12. Only two (District II and District VI) of the six districts voted to pass the Class A only shot clock proposal.

At the District I meeting in Lincoln, the proposal failed by a 10-10 vote with 20 schools abstaining. Of the 10 "no" votes, two were Class A schools (Lincoln Southeast and Lincoln Pius X). The Class B schools that voted "no" were Beatrice, Norris and Waverly. The five other no votes were from schools below Class B.

Although it passed District II previously, the shot clock proposal had to be voted on again. It passed overwhelmingly with a 31-1-48 vote. The one "no" vote was Shelby, a non-Class A or B school.

District III is northeast Nebraska. Some of those schools play teams in South Dakota, one of the states that plays with a shot clock. The Class A schools in the district are Norfolk and, depending on the scheduling cycle, South Sioux City. When South Sioux City is not in Class A it is in Class B. I do know that Norfolk voted against the shot clock

Although we know District III voted against the shot clock, it has been over two weeks since the District meeting on Jan. 12. The District has yet to post meeting minutes which are public record.

*After publishing the results for District III were made public. The District III vote was 13-18-18. South Sioux City was a yes vote.*

The District IV meeting in Kearney was Jan. 11. The vote was a 17-32-22 lopsided "no". The three Class A schools in the district -- Kearney, North Platte and Grand Island -- voted in favor of the proposal. The traditional Class B schools in the district, Grand Island Northwest and Hastings, also voted in favor. As you would guess, the no votes came from Class C1, C2, D1 and D2 schools.

District V has no Class A schools. McCook, the one Class B school, voted "yes". Again, the no votes were from smaller classes. The total vote was 5-14-4.

In Alliance at the District VI meeting, the vote was 18-6 with no schools abstaining. Sidney, Scottsbluff and Alliance, the three traditional Class B schools, voted in favor of the proposal. Like District III, these schools do often play in South Dakota which has a shot clock.

The Tally
When all the votes came in, 28 of 31 Class A and 26 of the 29 Class B schools voted for the Class A-only proposal.

So why did it fail? The NSAA's constitution and bylaws state that every vote counts. Even if it's for a Class A-only proposal, the Class C and D schools each get a vote.

The reason behind the smaller schools' "no" votes, I've been told, is fear of a "trickle-down" effect.

If the shot clock works well in Class A, the smaller-class schools fear it would not be long before proposals would come to institute a shot clock for their classes. Although that could be years away, it is clearly something they do not want to pay for. The cost, anywhere from $2,500 to $12,000 for purchase and installation, is a deterrent. The clocks also need a separate person to operate them during games. Some of the schools struggle to find scorekeepers and scoreboard operators as it is.

Another reason given by some is it will create bad shots from players who are not as skilled. The data proves that wrong.

The first foray that the state has seen into using a shot clock came at the 2021 Metro Holiday Tournament. By most, if not all, accounts, it went well.

In 22 games (boys and girls), there were four what I called "forced possessions" defined as possessions that ended in a heave to the rim or not within the offensive system to beat the shot clock.

There were 11 shot clock violations and just one reset error, or the game being stopped due to the shot clock being reset improperly. On one occasion, there was a referee error or official not understanding the rules or when/how the shot clock should be reset that resulted in a stoppage of play. There were three operator errors, or play stopped because the shot clock operator made a mistake by not turning on the clock or not starting it on time.

What's Next?
It's still possible the shot-clock proposal could be approved in some form, but it will take the equivalent of sinking two full-court shots.

The next step is the NSAA Board of Directors considering the proposal at its April board meeting. It lands there because it was an-approved ruling by the District II vote in 2021. The Board could vote for the Class A-only proposal. Historically, however, the Board tends to vote the way the membership in their district voted.

It can also be brought to the floor of the general assembly of the membership in April. A sticking point, according to the NSAA"s constitution and bylaws, is it needs to be new business or a new proposal for it to be discussed there. Could minor changes be made to the proposal to make it new business is a question to be determined. If it even reaches discussion it would then needs a three-fifths affirmative vote by the assembly for it to be brought back out to the membership for another round of voting.

If those two Hail Mary's fail, then it can still -- and likely will -- continue to be brought up year after year by the Class A caucus.

Resolution
If Class A wants a shot clock and voted for it, why not let the biggest schools have it? In the most recent case, it failed not because Class A, or even Class B schools, voted against it. It failed because Class C and D schools voted against it.

Surely, clear heads can find a way for Class A and perhaps Class B to do what the majority of these schools think is best and not be held hostage by smaller schools in the state whose circumstances differ and may very well have good reasons to vote against a shot clock.

It doesn't have to be this hard, does it?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ClkTwr2011
This is how legislation works, so you basically saying do away with the legislation process and give me what I want regardless of the outcome could effect others. Sorry this America and every vote counts I understand your frustration but this is the processes
 
This is how legislation works, so you basically saying do away with the legislation process and give me what I want regardless of the outcome could effect others. Sorry this America and every vote counts I understand your frustration but this is the processes
It doesn't effect them, it's a Class A proposal. Schools that have no skin in the game should abstain from voting. It would be like Omaha Central voting on a 6-man football proposal...
 
This is how legislation works, so you basically saying do away with the legislation process and give me what I want regardless of the outcome could effect others. Sorry this America and every vote counts I understand your frustration but this is the processes
It is really not how the legislative process works. The way the legislative process REALLY works is a little more in the order of "You scratch my back and I will scratch yours". People that are not effected by these things should not stand in the way of progress with the understanding that this is the accepted way things are to be done, and when it comes time for Class B to vote 5 years from now everyone unaffected will step aside once again. I will help you today and you will help me tomorrow is the legislative process.

Imagine if Class A, B, C1 would get into a grudge situation in which they decide to retaliate against Class D and their screwed up Football Playoff system. They would have Class D outnumbered and basically determine the Playoff system for schools that have absolutely zero effect on them. This is always my fear when people that should not be in the decision making process are making decisions. Bad things can (and do) happen because of it.

I don't care one way or the other. I don't believe a shot clock will make the game any better or any worse. I simply don't like the lack of respect amongst the decision makers in these situations.
 
It is really not how the legislative process works. The way the legislative process REALLY works is a little more in the order of "You scratch my back and I will scratch yours". People that are not effected by these things should not stand in the way of progress with the understanding that this is the accepted way things are to be done, and when it comes time for Class B to vote 5 years from now everyone unaffected will step aside once again. I will help you today and you will help me tomorrow is the legislative process.

Imagine if Class A, B, C1 would get into a grudge situation in which they decide to retaliate against Class D and their screwed up Football Playoff system. They would have Class D outnumbered and basically determine the Playoff system for schools that have absolutely zero effect on them. This is always my fear when people that should not be in the decision making process are making decisions. Bad things can (and do) happen because of it.

I don't care one way or the other. I don't believe a shot clock will make the game any better or any worse. I simply don't like the lack of respect amongst the decision makers in these situations.
Then I would guess Class A might want to start scratching and this is how is works. So by your definition it is Class A Fault. Also is there any other States that have shot clock in just one class, I am asking because I really do not know
 
Then I would guess Class A might want to start scratching and this is how is works. So by your definition it is Class A Fault. Also is there any other States that have shot clock in just one class, I am asking because I really do not know
When South Dakota first implemented it, it was just in the state's largest class (2008-09), then five-ish years later it was implemented in the lower classes (2014-15).
 
If SD can do it, so can Nebraska. But if the small schools don't want it, it shouldn't be this hard to figure it out (yes for A-B, no for C-D)

This is a huge reason why Nebraska will never decrease in number of classifications from 6. It effects the smaller classes the most and they greatly outnumber the larger classes. They won't even vote yes for something that doesn't pertain to them but those that it does pertain to clearly want.

Also a huge reason why raising the 8 man enrollment cutoff has been so slow to happen.
 
Then I would guess Class A might want to start scratching and this is how is works. So by your definition it is Class A Fault. Also is there any other States that have shot clock in just one class, I am asking because I really do not know
I really am not assigning any fault for the outcome of this specific issue. However, it is really not possible for Class A to be at fault when they have the smallest representation.

By my definition, everyone is at fault for standing in the way of their peers progressing as they nearly unanimously wish to do. Everyone with a vote needs to be supportive of their peers and what they are trying to do. If I have a Class C vote and the issue at hand is Class A exclusive, then I talk to my Class A peers and ask them what THEY want. I then support the progress that they are trying to promote. I do this with the understanding that tomorrow the issue at hand is Class C exclusive and I am going to be extended the same courtesy.
 
I really am not assigning any fault for the outcome of this specific issue. However, it is really not possible for Class A to be at fault when they have the smallest representation.

By my definition, everyone is at fault for standing in the way of their peers progressing as they nearly unanimously wish to do. Everyone with a vote needs to be supportive of their peers and what they are trying to do. If I have a Class C vote and the issue at hand is Class A exclusive, then I talk to my Class A peers and ask them what THEY want. I then support the progress that they are trying to promote. I do this with the understanding that tomorrow the issue at hand is Class C exclusive and I am going to be extended the same courtesy.
as stated above this is the legislative processes and sometimes you win and sometimes you dont
 
I was thinking about shot clocks this morning and something occurred to me. This is a rule change to help defenses. That's rare. In football, it is practically extinct. It surprises me that people are so in favor of it. It incentivizes conservative defense. Play it safe, don't create a shot for them, and be ready to defend whatever special they try to execute on timing that you can predict. I wish we could get some similar fan momentum for defensive-advantage football rule changes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClkTwr2011
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT