Write for State of the Sport!
We are always looking for guest contributors. Just fill out the contact form below and tell us a little bit about yourself and what you would like to write about. We’ll get back to you as soon as possible.
Online Sports Magazine
I’ve got it! A simple and sound idea that would deliver each of the following to EVERY college basketball game (variations would work at other levels, too):
- ELIMINATION OF REPEATED, DELIBERATE, LATE-GAME FOULING BY TRAILING TEAMS ( In my view, this is the holy grail of improvements for the game of basketball)
- Elimination of late-game deliberate slow play by leading teams
- Guarantee of a walk-off made basket
- Elimination of late-game clock malfunctions, errors, and reviews
- A fair, but not fluky, chance for trailing teams to mount a late comeback
- Elimination of overtime (and the added actual time, increased foulouts, and anticlimactic endings that come with it)
- Reduction in variability of length of games (in actual time)
Without a doubt, the presence of the game clock directly leads to an unpalatable style of play (fouling, four corners, desperate heaves at the basket, etc.) during the final few minutes of nearly any game that’s remotely competitive. This will always be the case (no matter what bandaid rule changes are implemented) as long as basketball determines a winner using a who’s-leading-when-time-expires? format. In order for basketball’s late-game style of play to resemble, well, basketball, the sport must declare a winner using a which-team- is-first-to-reach-a-certain-point-total? format. With that in mind, I believe the game clock should be abandoned for those last few “minutes.”
This particular format would replace the last four minutes of game-clock-focused play with a comparable amount of game-clock-free (and basketball-focused!) play:
1. Teams play a timed 20:00 first period
2. Teams play a timed 16:00 second period (I would prefer for this period to end naturally – instead of sounding a buzzer and stopping play as soon as the clock reaches zero, allow play to continue until the next whistle)
3. Upon returning from that timeout, the game clock is abandoned for good. Instead, the target score for that game is established by adding a flat number (I think seven would work) to the leading team’s score (if the score is 70-62 after 36 minutes of play, the target score is 77; if the score is 65-64 after 36 minutes of play, the target score is 72)
4. Teams play the final untimed portion of the game until one team’s score matches or exceeds the target score
Certain adjustments could be made (the juncture at which to abandon the game clock, deriving the target score by adding a flat number or percentage of scoring from that game, using a natural or buzzer-prompted transition from timed portion to untimed portion, etc.), but the idea is to abandon the game clock just before it would compel a team to deviate from the basic objectives of basketball.
I began exploring the necessity, soundness, feasibility, and superiority of this format (and other variations) in 2007, and I believe in the idea now more than ever. I would appreciate any thoughts you might have on its viability.
Thanks!