Established 1826 — Oldest College Newspaper West of the Alleghenies

NCAA basketball rule changes potentially alter game

By Jack Reyering, For The Miami Student

The number 35 will be virtually meaningless to college basketball this season, for better or for worse.

In June, the NCAA approved several rule changes for the 2015-16 basketball season. After scoring averages dipped to record lows last season, many of the rule changes aim at increasing scoring and pace of play.

The most notable change is the reduction of shot clock time from 35 to 30 seconds. After a successful trial run during the NIT tournament last spring, the 30-second shot clock will go into full affect this year.

Another change includes reducing the number of time outs from five to four, and only three will carry into the second half of the game. The league hopes this "use it or lose it" principle will speed up the final two minutes of closely contested games, which have been known to drag on for 20-plus minutes.

The six other rule changes are the following: extending the restricted area under the basket from three to four feet, the elimination of the "five-second closely guarded" rule, changing backcourt violations so the ten-second count doesn't reset on time-outs, using video review to determine whether or not a player faked a foul, using video review to determine whether or not a shot clock violation occurred and allowing dunking during pregame warm-ups.

Many of these changes were overdue and are great for the game. For others, it remains to be seen whether they will make the game better or worse.

The extension of the restricted area helps alleviate some of the tension surrounding charging calls.

Many rule changes made to the game in the last five years have centered on clearing up what constitutes a charging call, a call that often leaves players and coaches throwing boot-stomping temper tantrums.

The extended restricted area will make it more difficult for defenders to camp out under the rim and wait for the offensive players to initiate the contact that warrants a charging foul.

Miami University basketball head coach John Cooper praised this change and hopes it lays the foundation for further changes.

"I always thought the three feet wasn't enough, so I'm glad they extended it," Cooper said. "The next thing they need to do is widen the lane to the NBA length. Then, with that, you're going to have to look at extending the three point line."

Cooper believes adopting some of the NBA rules is good for the game.

"The main difference between the NBA and college ball is the players," Cooper said. "Changing these rules isn't going to make a huge difference in how the game is played."

This is certainly true for changes like extending the restricted areas and three-point arc. They make the game more challenging and help clarify existing rules.

While a five second reduction of the shot clock might not change much, it does set a precedent that values scoring over the diversity of style of play in college basketball.

Many teams use a style of play in which they try to utilize the full shot clock on their offensive possessions. Consequently, both teams get fewer possessions, resulting in low-scoring affairs.

Some coaches are pleased with the change and hope it will increase the pace of play, and Cooper is one of them.

"When they changed the shot clock when I was playing, we adjusted and didn't really even notice a difference," Cooper said. "It's going to be the same now. I like the 30 seconds. I think it will really open up the game."

The last time the shot clock was changed was in 1993-94 when it was reduced from 45 to 35 seconds. This change, too, was implemented because of a reduction in scoring trends. If scoring doesn't pick up, it wouldn't be surprising if the shot clock were reduced again.

It's a slippery slope for college basketball. Cooper said it won't change how his team plays, but for other coaches who adopt slow styles of play, the reduction of the clock must be addressed in their game plans and coaching philosophy.

College basketball is special for its blending of teams with different offensive and defensive principles. There is no one proven formula for winning. In order to be successful, teams with different styles battle on the court and make adjustments on the fly.

A longer shot clock allows some teams to slow the game down, work the ball and milk every second out of the clock. Now, teams with offensive identities that run the floor and try to beat opponents in transition will have advantage.

Much like in the NBA, strategy might take a backseat to athleticism.

Teams with the biggest, fastest and most athletic players will have a significant advantage, while teams like Butler, who have found great success by slowing the game down, lose that advantage.

It's important to preserve this part of college basketball. It makes the game competitive. It helps foster the atmosphere unique to college basketball: the fact that any team can win it all in March.

Change can be good, but it has to be done with the identity of the game in mind. Otherwise, that identity will be lost.