should there be shot clocks

[Pantherbert]

One problem I would have with a shot clock is quite frankly having to find ( and pay) someone trustworthy and consistent enough to do it. It's hard enough at times with the clock-operator and scoreboard positions as it is. Can you imagine the chaos of of having someone not paying attention with the re-set button? I've kept a shot clock for D-2 college games and you really have to be on top of it. Did the ball touch the rim? Did a team "have or lose possession" off a contested rebound ? Lose balls and what constitutes having "control" of a loose ball? Sometimes resetting the shot comes down to a judgement call. I'd be against it if for nothing more than it would be a pain.

 

 

 

It all just seems like it would be a bit more trouble than it's worth for something so minor.

[midtnbb]

No.

 

Most people that want a shot clock for hs usually suggest a 40, 45 or 50 second clock. I would suggest that you go to several games and just time the possession of each team before they take a shot. I believe that you will find that most possessions do not last this long.

[DUKnowDaGame?]

The shot clock makes the game more interesting by adding another level of intensity. AAU and exposure games use the shot clock, so when I look at a High School game it seems "dumbed down", and girls who play year-round have a distinct advantage by playing all summer under the pressure of the clock. The excuse that some teams will dominate may be true for the first few years, but as programs make the adjustment, the teams will get better. I'm sure that's what many naysayers said when the women's game moved from half-court to full-court! I mean you don't get stronger by lifting the same amount of weight day after day...at some point you're going to have to add some weight. As knowledge and technology allow athletes to compete at ever-increasing levels, the game must adapt in order to maintain the challenge.

 

 

/thumb[1].gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":thumb:" border="0" alt="thumb[1].gif" />

[DUKnowDaGame?]

One problem I would have with a shot clock is quite frankly having to find ( and pay) someone trustworthy and consistent enough to do it. It's hard enough at times with the clock-operator and scoreboard positions as it is. Can you imagine the chaos of of having someone not paying attention with the re-set button? I've kept a shot clock for D-2 college games and you really have to be on top of it. Did the ball touch the rim? Did a team "have or lose possession" off a contested rebound ? Lose balls and what constitutes having "control" of a loose ball? Sometimes resetting the shot comes down to a judgement call. I'd be against it if for nothing more than it would be a pain.

 

 

 

It all just seems like it would be a bit more trouble than it's worth for something so minor.

 

 

I agree that the administration of the shot clock would be a HUGH task but I think it would definitely improve the flow of the game. However, I can see programs taking short cuts and having some poor child work the clock.

[Indian]

No shot clock. This isn't supposed to be a minor-league version of college basketball, used to get players ready for the college game. Prospects can play AAU, they and non-prospects can play high school ball.

[smckinney]

I agree that the administration of the shot clock would be a HUGH task but I think it would definitely improve the flow of the game. However, I can see programs taking short cuts and having some poor child work the clock.

 

 

If we expect our kids in Tennessee to compete with rest of the country we need to start leveling the playing field. There is a shot clock in college basketball. In several states including New York, California, and Texas, girls play under a shot clock. These states house young ladies that are consistently ranked in the top of their classes. We have to move forward and provide our young ladies with every advantage to get that scholarship. The shot clock puts the game back into the hands of players not coaches with stall tactics and slow down offenses. The women game is evolving and become more and more entertaining and not just the warm up to the boys game, which also needs a shot clock.

[philtenn]

If we expect our kids in Tennessee to compete with rest of the country we need to start leveling the playing field. There is a shot clock in college basketball. In several states including New York, California, and Texas, girls play under a shot clock. These states house young ladies that are consistently ranked in the top of their classes. We have to move forward and provide our young ladies with every advantage to get that scholarship. The shot clock puts the game back into the hands of players not coaches with stall tactics and slow down offenses. The women game is evolving and become more and more entertaining and not just the warm up to the boys game, which also needs a shot clock.

 

OK. That did it.

 

Coachh17 got me questioning my pro-clock position. I've been watching the pro-clock posts and gradually I began to realize what the shot-clock was about for most of the pro posters: it's about entertainment. And the gradual degradation of sports in the name of entertainment is a pet peeve of mine. I'm officially switching my allegiance over to the anti-shot-clock group.

 

For me, high school sports are for education, not entertainment. Let the NBA turn itself into the WWF. Let them make it all about double clutch 360 windmill dunks. Let the NBA (and the college game is following) be about games in which super stars dominate (even the officiating). Bend the rules - shoot - IGNORE the rules so we can squeeze in a little more entertainment. The actual sport is being marginalized for the sake of catching the viewers attention (and, of course, money). Again, nothing wrong with it. Nothing wrong with the WWF for entertainment purposes. Nothing wrong with it, but not much there to learn from.

 

High school sports is NOT about getting scholarships so you can play ball at the college level or get exposure so you can skip college (after a year) and go onto the pros. In my opinion, it's just another way to teach the lessons that are helpful for life and No shot clock does that better than with a shot clock.

 

OK. Hit me with your best shot. /cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="B)" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> /thumb[1].gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":thumb:" border="0" alt="thumb[1].gif" /> /cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="B)" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> /thumb[1].gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":thumb:" border="0" alt="thumb[1].gif" />

[grainger09]

If you want more kids to get a chance to play put in the clock. Coachs that try to play just 5 kids will no longer be able to do that. Why you may ask because you have to play defense for the entire clock. The clock makes the offense attack not set back and hold the ball. The speed of the game increases with the clock no slow down so kids can rest. Thus the you need to have 7 to 8 kids that can play to give the needed rest becasue of the speed.

 

I am for the clock lets get more kids on the floor instead of on the bench watching the game.

[robpride]

OK. That did it.

 

Coachh17 got me questioning my pro-clock position. I've been watching the pro-clock posts and gradually I began to realize what the shot-clock was about for most of the pro posters: it's about entertainment. And the gradual degradation of sports in the name of entertainment is a pet peeve of mine. I'm officially switching my allegiance over to the anti-shot-clock group.

 

For me, high school sports are for education, not entertainment. Let the NBA turn itself into the WWF. Let them make it all about double clutch 360 windmill dunks. Let the NBA (and the college game is following) be about games in which super stars dominate (even the officiating). Bend the rules - shoot - IGNORE the rules so we can squeeze in a little more entertainment. The actual sport is being marginalized for the sake of catching the viewers attention (and, of course, money). Again, nothing wrong with it. Nothing wrong with the WWF for entertainment purposes. Nothing wrong with it, but not much there to learn from.

 

High school sports is NOT about getting scholarships so you can play ball at the college level or get exposure so you can skip college (after a year) and go onto the pros. In my opinion, it's just another way to teach the lessons that are helpful for life and No shot clock does that better than with a shot clock.

 

OK. Hit me with your best shot. /cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="B)" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> /thumb[1].gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":thumb:" border="0" alt="thumb[1].gif" /> /cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="B)" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> /thumb[1].gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":thumb:" border="0" alt="thumb[1].gif" />

 

 

 

Good post!!! I would agree........Im either way on this issue! My post was just to say the ladies would make the transition no problem

[BBallExtreme]

OK. That did it.

 

Coachh17 got me questioning my pro-clock position. I've been watching the pro-clock posts and gradually I began to realize what the shot-clock was about for most of the pro posters: it's about entertainment. And the gradual degradation of sports in the name of entertainment is a pet peeve of mine. I'm officially switching my allegiance over to the anti-shot-clock group.

 

For me, high school sports are for education, not entertainment. Let the NBA turn itself into the WWF. Let them make it all about double clutch 360 windmill dunks. Let the NBA (and the college game is following) be about games in which super stars dominate (even the officiating). Bend the rules - shoot - IGNORE the rules so we can squeeze in a little more entertainment. The actual sport is being marginalized for the sake of catching the viewers attention (and, of course, money). Again, nothing wrong with it. Nothing wrong with the WWF for entertainment purposes. Nothing wrong with it, but not much there to learn from.

 

High school sports is NOT about getting scholarships so you can play ball at the college level or get exposure so you can skip college (after a year) and go onto the pros. In my opinion, it's just another way to teach the lessons that are helpful for life and No shot clock does that better than with a shot clock.

 

OK. Hit me with your best shot. /cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="B)" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> /thumb[1].gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":thumb:" border="0" alt="thumb[1].gif" /> /cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="B)" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> /thumb[1].gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":thumb:" border="0" alt="thumb[1].gif" />

 

 

 

While I agree that sports can provide a lifetime of lessons that is an education unto itself, sports themselves exist simply for recreation and entertainment. These are not the aspects that I chose to embrace, but it is undeniable. For many students, the purpose of high school athletics IS to garner an athletic scholarship that would allow them to acquire a "free" education while doing something they love on a higher level. Sure not all high school athletes aspire to a college career through athletics, but neither do all students aspire to academic scholarships. Should classes, then not prepare all students as though they will enter college? All areas of the high school experience should prepare our children to dream bigger and perform better. Tennessee students should be prepared to compete with students from around the country in the classroom AND in the arena. If rigor has a place in the classroom--and it certainly does--then it has a place in the gym.

[Redog]

No shot clock. This isn't supposed to be a minor-league version of college basketball, used to get players ready for the college game. Prospects can play AAU, they and non-prospects can play high school ball.

 

I am proposing to TSSAA to have a shot clock division and a non-shot clock division - and let the chips fall as to who goes to what divison and to also watch which division would eventually go away........

[jvaughan]

This thread so far reminds me of the game where ESPN had Tirico, Van Gundy, and Jackson doing the Duke-Davidson game and the college guys were doing the NBA game. All Van Gundy and Jackson did was talk about how the college game needs to change this and that so that it can be more like the NBA and get the players ready. Back the three pt line up more, put in a cirlce around the basket to get rid of the charging call, etc. Makes absolutly no sense because how many of those guys are going to go play in the NBA.

 

Same argument here. Putting in a shot clock in high school would do nothing to better the overwhelming majority of the players. It would make the small precentage of players who are going to go to the next level better but what about the kids that aren't. High school basketball's primary purpose is not getting kids ready to play college ball so why try and make it more like college.