NCAA to experiment with deeper 3pt line and wider lane in NIT

Submitted by ypsituckyboy on

Indiana basketball fans will be excited to know that the NCAA will be experimenting with a different court set-up during the NIT this year. They'll be extending the 3 point line by 1 ft 8 inches (the FIBA length), and making the lane 4 feet wider (like the NBA). They'll also be using 4, 10 minute quarters and reducing the shot clock to 20 seconds after an offensive rebound.

My initial instinct is to think that this would be both good and bad for a Beilein team. I think the wider lane would force defenses to spread out more (3 second rule) and create more room for cutting/dribble penetration. That's good for us. However, I think the deeper 3 point line would be an advantage for teams who are more drive-reliant and don't have shooters that are as skilled. It'd drive down 3pt% for both teams, but I think that would have more harm to a team like Michigan that shoots more 3s than average.

I guess the flip side to that is that Michigan could sag and utilize more help D on post-up oriented teams.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-02-27/experimenta…

Bambi

February 27th, 2018 at 5:22 PM ^

May be wrong but I thought there was no defensive 3 second rule in college. I feel like these changes, the reduced shot clock after a rebound included, would only hurt us.

Losher

February 27th, 2018 at 6:10 PM ^

If I am reading that clearly I think they are saying that it would cause teams to spread out their interior defensive strategy/player placement more like the 3-second rule does in the NBA game. 

Quailman

February 27th, 2018 at 8:04 PM ^

Men's college basketball is the only level of play that plays two halves still instead of four quarters. 

 

Also, you should watch more NBA games, the league is full of talent and they are playing exciting, good basketball that even involves defense. I know thats not what all the cool kids say, but the cool kids don't actually watch and just parrot stuff to sound cool. 

rob f

February 27th, 2018 at 9:21 PM ^

I do try to watch an occasional NBA game, even occasionally one not involving the Pistons. But usually I just simply get bored and switch channels in search of something more likely to keep my attention, be it college hoops, hockey, football, or more recently, the Winter Olympics. I right now am trying---and failing--- to get interested in the Wizards @Bucks game on TNT. My bigger point remains that, if I find it a chore to watch NBA hoops (and yes, they are talented athletes), then why try to fool myself into trying to watch a consolation college tournament playing by essentially the same NBA rules?

ST3

February 27th, 2018 at 5:37 PM ^

This could reduce the number of commercial breaks. Instead of TV timeouts every 4 minutes of game action, this lends itself to breaks every 5 minutes. I am sure they will extend the breaks to get the same number of commercials in. Fewer, longer breaks is a good thing, I think.

I've noticed many officials calling really touchy fouls whenever the clock ticks just past the 4 minute TV timeout time - the under 16, 12, 8, and 4 minute timeouts. There are 8 of these in a game. In a 4 quarters game, there would be 4 of these "under 5 minute" TV timeouts. Would the officials be consciously or sub-consciously aware of these and call really touch fouls to get to the TV timeout? Maybe, but we're still talking a reduction of 8 of these instances to 4. I've talked myself into this. I'm all for 4 quarters.

iforaneye

February 27th, 2018 at 5:37 PM ^

I have always been curious about why college uses halves but both HS (at least when I was in school) and NBA use quarters. I wouldn't mind seeing all levels use the same timing standard.

jsquigg

February 27th, 2018 at 5:38 PM ^

They ignore the three second call anyway unless blatant.  Moving the three point line back is just begging for a less efficient shooting offense.  The offensive rebound rule is ok.  I like experimenting, but I don't like zapping the college out of college basketball.

ThatTCGuy

February 27th, 2018 at 5:39 PM ^

All of this would hurt us. Making the three-point line farther away and taking time on the shot clock away from a relatively slow-paced, three point shooting based offense doesn't sound like much fun.

gremlin3

February 27th, 2018 at 5:52 PM ^

The 3 point line should be the exact same distance as the NBA.  If you can't get it there with accuracy, you shouldn't be shooting it at the college level.

jmblue

February 28th, 2018 at 6:56 AM ^

It's pretty simple: because the NBA 3-point shot is difficult.  If you make college guys shoot from that distance, they'll perform significantly worse than the pros.  If you want a viable college 3-point line, where people shoot about the same percentage as in the pros, you have it closer.

College football likewise lets guys get only one foot inbounds and stops the clock after a first down because it too recognizes that they're not pros.

 

 

 

gremlin3

February 28th, 2018 at 12:54 AM ^

Then why is the ball the same size? Why is everything else the same except the shot clock and the lane? Using your logic, college free throws should be at 12 feet instead of 15, the rooms should be 9.5 feet, and the court should be only 90 feet instead of 94 (and so on). Please give me a better argument than "development" as to why the three point line should be closer.

Michigan Arrogance

February 27th, 2018 at 9:17 PM ^

demphasize? IDK  will it? I'm thinking this may be like when Tiger Woods came on and by 2002 the Masters and half the courses on the tour lengthened the holes by 30-60 yards to try and level the playing field.

Well, it had the opposite effect: it actually made it better for Tiger (as opposed to teh field) b/c he was the only guy to come close to that length off the tee AND do it accurately.

Look at what happened when the NCAA moved the line from the HS distance 15-20 eyars ago. Did that demphasize the 3? I think we may see the best 3 point shooters speparate themselves from the fieldso teams  can still be effective in hitting 3s and teams with players that are that are just OK at it now will be hurt the most. not to mention it will spread the game out increasing the importance of spacing on O and D

Michigan4Life

February 27th, 2018 at 9:36 PM ^

due to Steph Curry influence.

Will there be a downward tick on 3 pt shooting % short term? Yes, but long term, it will go back up to the normal level from the past few years.

Teams are not going to demphasize the 3s because it's still a better shot than midrange jumpers. Analytics confirms it regardless of the level unless your team shoots less than 34% from 3 pt land.

Mattb_22

February 27th, 2018 at 6:02 PM ^

I still won't watch the NIT, but I like these rule changes. To me, the 3 point line should be moved back. Too easy of a shot for these guys as it is right now

SFBlue

February 27th, 2018 at 6:10 PM ^

NIT will be a B1G-fest this year. I predict that PSU and Nebraska make the finals. Since 1984, B1G teams have won the NIT ten times. I think Nebraksa nets number 11 this year. 

SFBlue

February 27th, 2018 at 6:32 PM ^

There will be some good teams, that is for sure. Maybe 'Bama, Syracuse, Texas, UCLA. LSU, Indiana. Potentially St. Mary's (Ca.). Possibly Louisville. Even with the expanded field of '64,' the rise of mid-major programs has kept the bar for the tournament I think reasonably high. A big part of that is how successful the Big East has been with programs like Creighton, Butler, etc. 

ish

February 27th, 2018 at 6:11 PM ^

quarters are fine, but leave the 3pt line as is.  makes the game more exciting.  it's among the reasons college basketball is a better watch than the NBA.

The Victors

February 27th, 2018 at 6:23 PM ^

The one I definitely don't like is moving out the 3-point line.  That's a drastic change to something they already changed just a few years ago.  I like it how it is.  Also, with this change, would the corner threes be the same distance as ones at the top of the key?  Or do they need to cut it off to have it fit in the court? I much prefer a uniform distance for the 3-point line.

4 10-minute quarters isn't a big deal either way. If it reduces the number of commercial breaks (in turn increasing the length of the breaks), I am for it.

Don't really have an opinion on widening the lane.  If it opens up the game more, that's fine.  Problem is, the court isn't getting any wider.  I do hope it would help prevent certain team's big men from camping in the lane (*cough* Purdue *cough*).

I also don't mind the 20-second shot clock after an offensive rebound.  Would the time keeper have a separate button for that?  I could see it getting confusing and having to stop the game to get the clock right, and the LAST thing college basketball needs is more stoppages and reviews.

If college basketball wants to experiment with changes, let's go after what matters first and that is the length of reviews.  There are plays that need to be reviewed, but like the review at the end of the Michigan/Purdue game, if the review needs 5+ minutes, it is not conclusive and you stick with the call on the floor.  The length of reviews has been an absolute kill-joy to so many great games.