Changes needed for NCAA basketball

One thing I don't understand is why college basketball is so far behind the NBA and even women's basketball. College players are coming into the NBA with such a learning curve because they were basically just taught a different game for however long they stayed in college. The NCAA doesn't have to adopt every concept of the NBA but to me it's ridiculous how the game is played and sets players up to fail at the next level. The learning curve on big men is the biggest problem usually being very hard for them to adjust. Also you never get to see stars like Ben Simmons get the proper spacing or pace of play to really let them show their talent depriving the fans of what they should see. Lots of things need to change and to me most importantly would be the shot clock making games much more exciting and atleast preparing players for the next level. Another important change would be the 3 point line allowing players like Simmons more space to work with along with big men not having the paint so clogged up. Lots of things need to change not only for entertainment reasons making college basketball very tough to watch at times but also letting players actually prepare for the next level instead of having to learn a totally different game. To me this really hurts their development and would give teams who are scouting a much better idea of the player they are seeing instead of so much guessing. Actually get a real look at how players shoot the 3 being able to compare the % with what they would most likely do in the NBA. Teams would get a very good idea of how players work on space and how they handle the shot clock. Of course some players would develop their game from what you see in college but this would give teams a much closer look at what they are scouting.

One person I have heard make lots of very good points on this subject is Jay Bilas. I have always felt this way but hearing him the past couple years speak about it made me realize how bad it was and how much a change would do for the sports and player.

This is just one article that points out a lot while they have many others speaking about the problems with NCAA basketball. It's a long read but a good one if you are interested.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt...le8081097.html

If you could change things in college what would it be or do you think it's fine how it is?

I agree 100% however the NCAA is far too worried about the tournament money to even care. The college season could be almost as big as the NBA, however they choose to leave it completely outdated.

I guess in a perfect world the NCAA and NBA would work together. Such as the NBA requiring players to be in college for two or even three years (like football) before being draft eligible. The NCAA could reciprocate by extending the 3 point line out more and some other rule tweaks. The NCAA did make a few rule changes this year. Most notably reducing the shot clock to 30 seconds from 35 and implementing the no hand check rule like the NBA. So there is some progress.

Could you imagine Simmons at LSU for 3 years?

I think it would stop all the elite teams like Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina and such from hoarding all the elite recruits every year as well. There simply wouldn't be enough roster spots for all the five stars available every year if they had to stay for 3 years.

On the flip side, who can tell an adult they aren't allowed to play basketball professionally because they aren't old enough? Seems like age discrimination. Especially when guys like Lebron and Koby went straight from high school and then all the one and done superstars like AD and Mello running around.

Yea I would like to see college players have to stay 2 years. I think 3 is way too much when football is just a different sport and very few players being physically ready to handle the NFL as a sophomore. If college made the rule for staying for 2 seasons along with adopting most of the NBA rules you would see such a better product on the court. Also players would come into the NBA with such a better grasp of the game and skill set being much improved allowing a lot of players to come in and make an impact a lot quicker then we see today. It would also give teams a much better look at the prospects they are getting and how they progress from freshman to sophomore year. It would make the draft way less of a crap shoot with teams getting a better idea of what they are getting.

I don't buy into guys going to college at all yet alone having to stay X amount of years improving players. No stat support this idea neither does logic. College life naturally comes with barriers that prevent athletes from training at the highest levels.

If you're going to force players to stay 2-3 years, you have to start paying them or the Mudiay route would become very famous.

If the NBA wanted players to stay in college longer, they would just need to turn it into a liability issue. It is a physically taxing sport without even having to consider the contact with a very long season. It's not like the long breaks between competition with tennis and baseball has their farm system.

I also have been wanting them to extend the college game into the NBA format minutes wise. Why does a college game have to be 8 minutes shorter? Just give some guys more opportunities to walk on if necessary. They only play 40 games at that level at most per year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

It's not like the long breaks between competition with tennis .

---

not to derail, but what do you mean by long breaks in tennis? Do you mean between points, games, or matches? Because none are really the case. College tennis players usually play 2 matches for each dual match(doubles/singles) and can have multiple dual matches in a week. During tournaments, they can have multiple matches in a day. I played.

The pro tour is even much more of a grind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abitabove

not to derail, but what do you mean by long breaks in tennis? Do you mean between points, games, or matches? Because none are really the case. College tennis players usually play 2 matches for each dual match(doubles/singles) and can have multiple dual matches in a week. During tournaments, they can have multiple matches in a day. I played.

The pro tour is even much more of a grind

---

Meant between tournaments. Specifically majors. I very well could be wrong,but referring relatively compared to the grind that is an NBA season.

Funny thing, once I had broken both lower leg bones, my surgeon suggested I might have to give up basketball and maybe try tennis. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

Meant between tournaments. Specifically majors. I very well could be wrong,but referring relatively compared to the grind that is an NBA season.

Funny thing, once I had broken both lower leg bones, my surgeon suggested I might have to give up basketball and maybe try tennis. :confused:

---

The grind of the tour can be just as rough as an nba season. Depending of course on one's own motivation to earn points and money since it's not a team sport.

Novak Djokovic(world #1) played 88 ATP singles matches alone the first 11 months this year.

You're right, there a breaks between majors, but no one only plays the majors. They would not be able to qualify.

Your doc was right to tell you to try tennis, you can go as intense as casual as you like. It's a great sport like that. But that same doctor's advice would not be given to someone that would play tennis at any sort of high level.

Yeah that threw me at first. I know tennis is taxing.

Okay so for comparison's sake, an NBA team plays about 15 games per month, with a tight travel schedule in between. That'd equate to about 155 games in 11 months.

If the NBA could prove to an arbitrator that guys, say with 3 years or less experience, are sustaining injuries at a higher rate than guys in the league longer, they could probably win a case for an age limit with the players union. They might even claim players could come back later in life and say the NBA could have but did not schedule a more rest friendly schedule.

Long story short, I’m all for an age limit. Among other needed changes on the college side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da ThRONe

I don't buy into guys going to college at all yet alone having to stay X amount of years improving players. No stat support this idea neither does logic. College life naturally comes with barriers that prevent athletes from training at the highest levels.

---

If the college game was played the way NBA games are played then it would absolutely be beneficial to stay a year. Of course you can get better training in the NBA but doesn't mean you will get game experience. You could be riding the bench just practicing hurting your development for games. It's impossible to make a factual argument if it's clear that going to college helps you improve but it allows players to physically and mentally mature for the next level. It allows them to work on their game instead of being thrown to the wolves and considered a bust because they aren't producing in year one or two. Very few players are ready for the NBA right out of HS and very few are ready as freshman. The bust rate is so high and I believe a lot has to do with players leaving early. Rivers would have definitely benefited from staying extra time of the game was played the same. Even AD and Drummomd would benefit also. So many players that enter young aren't even given a shot and tossed around to multiple teams because their heads are spinning being so under developed while never getting the game action to work the kinks out it there game. I would agree it is not as beneficial the way the game is played right now but if adjusted to the NBA it would no doubt be beneficial to players.