Random1234

If schools ever want to see successful athletic programs across all sports in their school they need to hire a Full-time AD, give them 2-3 assistants, and then follow that up with a competent Athletic Trainer or two, lastly a full-time maintenance team that focuses on maintaining the athletic facilities. It would be the responsibility of the AD to oversee all these different operating bodies. This obviously cost a lot of $$$ and TN has proven to try and do the complete opposite!

The NCAA tournament this year showed how the shot clock could be positive in different ways. Duke was up on Houston and wasn't able to just hold onto the ball, Houston was able to pull off the comeback. UCONN women were up big on South Carolina, they were able to still stall, but due to the shot clock stay aggressive in their offense to continue to score. Obviously, this is nitpicking. I do see it both ways but having experienced playing & coaching with and without it, I lean toward being in favor of a shot clock. To each their own.

The high number of free throws also has to do with the recently implemented 5-foul bonus rule. Free throws being shot at 5 team fouls in high school is atrocious. Especially considering how awful the officiating is. This new rule also protects the officials, because it doesn't show how lopsided it actually gets on the scoreboard. It will say 5 team fouls to 3 team fouls, but we all have experienced it where it is really 10-3, 12-3, etc.

How does East Ham look for the foreseeable future?

I would say that those who have coached and/or played with a shot clock are more likely to be in favor of it. Those without it may just be having a fear of the unknown. You can still run a stalling offense within a shot clock. Once it gets implemented (it's bound to come sooner or later just on basic development of the game) people will see that the game really doesn't change all that much at this level. Shots are not going to just suddenly get jacked up because there is another clock running. A 35 second shot clock leaves plenty of time for high school teams to still run an offense with multiple looks and hold on to the ball if they choose to do so.

That would be a great hire, young coach with some previous experience as a HC. Knows the game, loves the game, and can get players to play hard for him!

What was his sales pitch when he recruited your girls? Asking for a friend....

I've always said, the officiating may be bad, but it's our responsibility to not put ourselves in a position where the ref can take it away from us.

Who are the next recruits headed to BC?

This is true, however 100+ points is excessive. Bradley can easily press for the first 4:00 of the 1st quarter get up 20 and then call off the dawgs. Get a rebound, let the defense get setup, run a basic offense and do multiple multiple passes, sit back in a zone, etc. They will still win the game by 50-60 points but would have the respect for showing good sportsmanship. It's high school after all, not the NCAA, not the WNBA I'm an agreement with you that different scheduling should be done. I think take the best of the best (Bradley, Central, etc) and put them in their own tournament. Regardless of travel, school size, or any of those excuses, put the best against the best and let's see who the real champion is.

That would require a coach to have class, good sportsmanship, character, etc.....

Why are they letting him go?

Are you saying this because of records or do you have inside information on these programs?

I think the answer is rather simple, 9-1 will keep you hired year after year.

They should for the mere fact it would keep the girls bb coach around.