2 things I would change about CBB

WeAreDePaul

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,337
2,467
113
1. New rule where you can stay in the game after you commit your 5th foul, but any additional foul you commit results in the other team getting 2 shots and the ball. I think this is better than going with a 6 foul rule. NBA has 6 fouls and their games are 8 minutes longer. I don't want CBB to turn into a foul fest where teams are hacking away because of that extra foul they can get. But, more importantly, I want to get rid of the system where we way too often see star players sitting on the bench for large chunks of game time because they got 2 fouls in a first half. Or picked up a 3rd foul early in the 2nd.



2. Not a rule change, but i would gather all the refs in a room and tell them if they don't lay off the charge call they are gonna be reffing girls high school in Topeka next year. Refs need to learn that the block/charge decision is a lie. It is actually a block/charge/PLAY ON NO CALL decision. Refs seem to have forgotten that they can simply not call anything there. Doesn't matter if some defender acted like he got shot and flew himself back 10 feet ono the ground. You don't have to blow your whistle there. There was a great example of this last night on Mitchell's 3rd foul. He drove the lane in control, made a jump stop and passed the ball. When he landed his momentum carried him and he BARELY made contact with the defender. the defender, who is twice his size, acted like he got shot and flew back onto the ground. Ref called charge. Ridiculous. 100% should've been a play on no call.

Also, if it's close between block and charge give the tie to the offensive player. I want to see the breakdown of these plays go to 70% block, 10% charge and 20% no calls. As of now it is probably 50/50 blocks and charges and it sucks.
 

WeAreDePaul

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,337
2,467
113
Your first rule is as bad as the block/charge problem

Why is it a bad suggestion?

I admittedly haven't thought it through thoroughly, what am I missing?

Or do you think it's fine as it is and have no problem with foul trouble being such a major component of the college game?
 

Villian07

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2015
3,073
1,622
113
I think they should go to 6 fouls like the nba.

I don’t necessarily have a problem with your suggestion other than change is hard lol.

now my suggestion. A arc outside of the charge/block circle that if one jumps from behind said arc the dunk is worth three points.

Being value back in having a traditional big man and won’t have to watch teams chuck 40 3s a game.

And could you even imagine the highlights 👀
 

hailtoyourvictor

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2012
25,334
12,630
113
Why is it a bad suggestion?

I admittedly haven't thought it through thoroughly, what am I missing?

Or do you think it's fine as it is and have no problem with foul trouble being such a major component of the college game?

If Wagner has 5 fouls and commutes a 6th, you get 2 free throws.

What if you are in 1 and 1 bonus already?

What if you are in double bonus already?
 

WeAreDePaul

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,337
2,467
113
If Wagner has 5 fouls and commutes a 6th, you get 2 free throws.

What if you are in 1 and 1 bonus already?

What if you are in double bonus already?


Simple rule. If a player (doesn't always have to be a Michigan player) commits a 6th foul the other team gets 2 shots and the ball. Doesn't matter if you are in the bonus, double bonus or not even in the bonus yet.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sgrooms

WeAreDePaul

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,337
2,467
113
1. Up it to 6 personal fouls.
2. Get rid of 1 and 1. At the 7th foul (or whatever they choose to make sense) everything is double bonus.


I don't love the 6 foul rule compared to my suggestion because it encourages teams to commit fouls and doesn't punish the fouling team sufficiently. Don't want games to turn into hack a Shaq contests with bums being put in the game just to foul people. With my rule the fouling team has incentive to not commit fouls.

That said, if the choice is stay with 5 foul or go to 6 I would take the 6.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sgrooms

Villian07

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2015
3,073
1,622
113
1. Up it to 6 personal fouls.
2. Get rid of 1 and 1. At the 7th foul (or whatever they choose to make sense) everything is double bonus.

I like this. The 1 and 1 is stupid to me. Just as good as a turnover if they miss the first FT.

I don’t see why teams don’t “hack a Shaq” on the opponents worst FT shooter on fouls 7-9 every half of every right game.
 

Villian07

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2015
3,073
1,622
113
I don't love the 6 foul rule compared to my suggestion because it encourages teams to commit fouls and doesn't punish the fouling team sufficiently. Don't want games to turn into hack a Shaq contests with bums being put in the game just to foul people. With my rule the fouling team has incentive to not commit fouls.

That said, if the choice is stay with 5 foul or go to 6 I would take the 6.

Does the shooting team get to choose the shooter or just whoever gets fouled?
 

hailtoyourvictor

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2012
25,334
12,630
113
Simple rule. If a player (doesn't always have to be a Michigan player) commits a 6th foul the other team gets 2 shots and the ball. Doesn't matter if you are in the bonus, double bonus or not even in the bonus yet.

So once you have 6 fouls and the other team is in double bonus there is no deterrent to getting your 7th, 8th or 9th fouls vs someone else getting their 2nd or 3rd because either way it’s 2 shots?

Yeah I don’t like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaycg15

hailtoyourvictor

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2012
25,334
12,630
113
I don't love the 6 foul rule compared to my suggestion because it encourages teams to commit fouls and doesn't punish the fouling team sufficiently. Don't want games to turn into hack a Shaq contests with bums being put in the game just to foul people. With my rule the fouling team has incentive to not commit fouls.

That said, if the choice is stay with 5 foul or go to 6 I would take the 6.

Then make a rule that if someone comes in on a defensive possession they can’t come out on the ensuing free throw. That’s better than Hunter Dickinson getting to play with 10 fouls when Michigan is already in double bonus.
 

WeAreDePaul

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,337
2,467
113
So once you have 6 fouls and the other team is in double bonus there is no deterrent to getting your 7th, 8th or 9th fouls vs someone else getting their 2nd or 3rd because either way it’s 2 shots?

Yeah I don’t like that.

I think you're missing a key point somehow.

It's not just 2 shots.

It's 2 shots AND THE BALL.

That is obviously a massive deterrent against a player picking up ANY fouls beyond #5, let alone 7 or 8 total fouls.
 

WeAreDePaul

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,337
2,467
113
You're giving a common foul the same penalty as an F1. Idiot


Yes, that's the penalty/risk you have to take for reaping the benefit of getting to play a guy who already has 5 fouls.

Not sure why this concept is so hard to understand. Are dumb people just this dumb that they can't grasp simple concepts and be able to draw distinctions between two similar but obviously different situations?
 

RipThru

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2010
1,298
1,318
113
Yes, that's the penalty/risk you have to take for reaping the benefit of getting to play a guy who already has 5 fouls.

Not sure why this concept is so hard to understand. Are dumb people just this dumb that they can't grasp simple concepts and be able to draw distinctions between two similar but obviously different situations?

You're dumber than a bag of hammers. But you ARE a DePaul fan so that explains a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hailtoyourvictor

hailtoyourvictor

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2012
25,334
12,630
113
Yes, that's the penalty/risk you have to take for reaping the benefit of getting to play a guy who already has 5 fouls.

Not sure why this concept is so hard to understand. Are dumb people just this dumb that they can't grasp simple concepts and be able to draw distinctions between two similar but obviously different situations?

Upping to 6 and getting rid of 1 and 1 is better than this IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RipThru

GE Nole

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
28,264
11,836
113
Your rule number 2 is absolutely spot on. It’s unbelievable how bad college refs are about the block/charge call. It’s to the point where it’s actually becoming an injury hazard because so many guys are being rewarded for flailing and falling down in the lane where guys are jumping and stepping.

And if you fix the block/charge issue, then you have much less need to address the foul issue. Because you eliminate several fouls a game.
 

IUfanBorden

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2011
25,811
10,376
113
Team
Indiana
Why is it a bad suggestion?

I admittedly haven't thought it through thoroughly, what am I missing?

Or do you think it's fine as it is and have no problem with foul trouble being such a major component of the college game?
Foul trouble is part of the game. Just like missing FT's, shots, turnovers, etc, etc...those impact the game just as much. I don't have an issue with 6 fouls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hailtoyourvictor

coryfly

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2007
44,430
5,415
113
The block/charge needs to be addressed for sure. Even in primary defender spots it is often messed up. The defender sees the guy driving and subtly moves into him and then flails backwards and they call a charge. It looks like the offensive player did commit a foul but it is really the defender who did it all. It's a very difficult play to see happen but on replay you can tell the teams who really coach this . I don't know what the answer is on how to officiate it better but something needs to be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big_Blue79

Ikibari

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2020
1,020
1,919
113
The block/charge needs to be addressed for sure. Even in primary defender spots it is often messed up. The defender sees the guy driving and subtly moves into him and then flails backwards and they call a charge. It looks like the offensive player did commit a foul but it is really the defender who did it all. It's a very difficult play to see happen but on replay you can tell the teams who really coach this . I don't know what the answer is on how to officiate it better but something needs to be done.
Eh, it’s countered with the weird rule a defender will be called for a foul if he jumps straight up in the air and an offensive player driven by momentum barrels into him and it’s a blocking foul. The logic of the rule doesn’t make any sense to me. A defender should have the right to be able to jump straight up from his planted position where momentum isn’t carrying him anywhere. If he is in the air and the offensive player then jumps or leans in to him for the contact I don’t think that should be a defensive foul.
 

coryfly

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2007
44,430
5,415
113
Eh, it’s countered with the weird rule a defender will be called for a foul if he jumps straight up in the air and an offensive player driven by momentum barrels into him and it’s a blocking foul. The logic of the rule doesn’t make any sense to me. A defender should have the right to be able to jump straight up from his planted position where momentum isn’t carrying him anywhere. If he is in the air and the offensive player then jumps or leans in to him for the contact I don’t think that should be a defensive foul.

Defenders who jump straight up in the air shouldn't be called for a foul. I don't think they are supposed to be, right? Verticality and all that or is that just in the NBA? Just like with the block/charge the foul should be on the defender, who fools the official into thinking it is on the offensive player. I think it is more officials just having a hard time making the call rather than the rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big_Blue79

CB3UK

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 15, 2012
17,235
25,093
113
Lexington, KY
Team
Kentucky
That first suggestion is a hell no from me. Fine with expanding to 6 fouls though like the NBA.

Also need to go to quarters already.
 

IUfanBorden

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2011
25,811
10,376
113
Team
Indiana
Eh, it’s countered with the weird rule a defender will be called for a foul if he jumps straight up in the air and an offensive player driven by momentum barrels into him and it’s a blocking foul. The logic of the rule doesn’t make any sense to me. A defender should have the right to be able to jump straight up from his planted position where momentum isn’t carrying him anywhere. If he is in the air and the offensive player then jumps or leans in to him for the contact I don’t think that should be a defensive foul.
This rarely happens...What people think they see, opposed to what they actually see, are often quite different. Jumping straight up is often done by a defender taking a step forward, THEN jumping straight up---which is illegal. That is usually missed by a casual fan. Its called "A to B" movement---and its illegal.
 

IUfanBorden

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2011
25,811
10,376
113
Team
Indiana
That first suggestion is a hell no from me. Fine with expanding to 6 fouls though like the NBA.

Also need to go to quarters already.
Don't care for the quarters....Keep it as it is. Not sure how TV woud play a role in this, either.
 

CB3UK

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Apr 15, 2012
17,235
25,093
113
Lexington, KY
Team
Kentucky
Don't care for the quarters....Keep it as it is. Not sure how TV woud play a role in this, either.
Men's college ball is the only level it isn't quarters. I agree that I like halves better but it's far past time to have it all unilateral
 

IUfanBorden

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2011
25,811
10,376
113
Team
Indiana
Defenders who jump straight up in the air shouldn't be called for a foul. I don't think they are supposed to be, right? Verticality and all that or is that just in the NBA? Just like with the block/charge the foul should be on the defender, who fools the official into thinking it is on the offensive player. I think it is more officials just having a hard time making the call rather than the rule.
Block/charge IMO is one the most difficult calls to make. I mean sure it looks easy, peasy when we see it in super, slo-mo, from 14 different angles. I also think a lot of it has to do with some just not understanding legal , defensive position...I chuckle when I hear a Jay Bilas say, "well, he was moving....." SO...And? You can move. An issue IMO as well is defenders NOT getting a charge call, simply b/c they didn't fall....Which IMO has led to "flopping", so to speak. A POE is needed on a secondary defender taking a charge. To me I'd like to see a rule, POE that IF the offensive player has started to gather the ball to his body, after beating the primary defender, then any contact by a secondary defender is either a block, or a no call....Someting to that extent.
 

IUfanBorden

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 11, 2011
25,811
10,376
113
Team
Indiana
Men's college ball is the only level it isn't quarters. I agree that I like halves better but it's far past time to have it all unilateral
Meh....Not being a part of something, doesn't mean you should be. I really so no benefit changing to quarters...
 

coryfly

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2007
44,430
5,415
113
Block/charge IMO is one the most difficult calls to make. I mean sure it looks easy, peasy when we see it in super, slo-mo, from 14 different angles. I also think a lot of it has to do with some just not understanding legal , defensive position...I chuckle when I hear a Jay Bilas say, "well, he was moving....." SO...And? You can move. An issue IMO as well is defenders NOT getting a charge call, simply b/c they didn't fall....Which IMO has led to "flopping", so to speak. A POE is needed on a secondary defender taking a charge. To me I'd like to see a rule, POE that IF the offensive player has started to gather the ball to his body, after beating the primary defender, then any contact by a secondary defender is either a block, or a no call....Someting to that extent.

Yes, I like the gather rule. Wish that was the rule. I agree it is difficult. I'm not sure what the answer is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lurkeraspect84