Exhibition

This forum is for Basketball discussion only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
usufan5477
Posts: 506
Joined: September 13th, 2014, 7:54 am
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Exhibition

Post by usufan5477 » November 4th, 2017, 6:34 am

What did some of you that went to the game last night think of the team?



User avatar
ChicAggie
Posts: 2816
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:18 pm
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 357 times
Been thanked: 380 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by ChicAggie » November 4th, 2017, 1:38 pm

No one on this board went to the game? Was a vow of silence demanded of all who entered?


"Good is the enemy of great.” ~ Jim Collins

User avatar
ProvoAggie
Site Admin
Posts: 12653
Joined: June 14th, 2010, 1:00 am
Location: Provo, Utah
Has thanked: 566 times
Been thanked: 650 times
Contact:

Re: Exhibition

Post by ProvoAggie » November 4th, 2017, 2:09 pm

I was there with my family and had a good time. I was impressed with all of our starters but there seemed to be a pretty large drop off when they came out of the game. It's hard to really gauge how good the team will be. We beat the crap out of a bad team like we should...it's better than losing to them.



cval
Posts: 933
Joined: December 10th, 2010, 1:32 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 0

Re: Exhibition

Post by cval » November 4th, 2017, 3:07 pm

Hard to tell much against such poor competition. The starters looked fine. The deeper we got into the bench the worse we looked.

I thought Stall was a pleasant surprise. he was strong, and while a bit raw, was able to hit the boards hard and play good interior D. Merrill is bigger/heavier. I hope he is just more physically mature, but he didn't look as athletic to me. He didn't shoot well, but had 8 assists and didn't play much in the 2nd half. Even though he didn't score, he seemed to control things.

Brown and Isby were disappointing to me. Kind of invisible. Henson looked good early, but then disappeared in the 2nd half. Miller looked lost when he first entered, but when he got warmed up he looked much better. When they went on a bit of a run to trim the lead to the mid twenties, Miller hit three threes in a row, and before you could look up the lead was back to near 40. I thought Stall looked better than Taylor, but looking at the box score, I was surprised by the number of rebounds Taylor had.



Blue Sage
Posts: 525
Joined: January 28th, 2015, 6:24 pm
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 34 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by Blue Sage » November 4th, 2017, 11:37 pm

cval wrote:Hard to tell much against such poor competition. The starters looked fine. The deeper we got into the bench the worse we looked.

I thought Stall was a pleasant surprise. he was strong, and while a bit raw, was able to hit the boards hard and play good interior D. Merrill is bigger/heavier. I hope he is just more physically mature, but he didn't look as athletic to me. He didn't shoot well, but had 8 assists and didn't play much in the 2nd half. Even though he didn't score, he seemed to control things.

Brown and Isby were disappointing to me. Kind of invisible. Henson looked good early, but then disappeared in the 2nd half. Miller looked lost when he first entered, but when he got warmed up he looked much better. When they went on a bit of a run to trim the lead to the mid twenties, Miller hit three threes in a row, and before you could look up the lead was back to near 40. I thought Stall looked better than Taylor, but looking at the box score, I was surprised by the number of rebounds Taylor had.
As you said it was hard to tell from that game. For me I thought Stall was awkward reminded me of Stone and liked Taylor more. I didn't know about brown and isby so I was excited to see them out there. Miller was ok-ish but needs some work. Overall I have no idea where this team is at but and a bit worried as it seems it will be a live and die by the 3 team with no inside game. I miss those old school players Stew had that would come off the bench that would serve up a plate of nasty. I really really hope I am wrong.



aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 9095
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 4076 times
Been thanked: 2267 times
Contact:

Re: Exhibition

Post by aggies22 » November 5th, 2017, 7:03 am

If we aren't going to impose any kind of physical will on a much, much, smaller, weaker opponent, then it probably isn't going to get much better as the season progresses. We are who we are built to be, a team that will indeed live and die by the 3. I was at least slightly impressed that Henson at least moved down low and would try to battle for a rebound. I don't think he is going to be an offensive post presence but early reports were that Henson was unwilling to battle for a rebound.



Hoopsnut
Posts: 191
Joined: April 1st, 2017, 12:28 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by Hoopsnut » November 5th, 2017, 8:12 am

Shooting 3’s isn’t a bad strategy. We had the advantage at the guard spots...... why not use it. Foul trouble is going to always be a concern due to our depth. No problem with winning big in an exhibition game. It builds confidence.



cdaAg
Posts: 639
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:41 am
Location: Perry, enfin
Has thanked: 89 times
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by cdaAg » November 5th, 2017, 8:36 am

Here was my perspective written in a different thread in which someone asked about how we looked:

How did we look tonight? We looked somewhat disjointed (to be expected at this time of the season). Our offense is still predicated on hitting a high percentage on low percentage shots. We do a LOT of drive and kick. We struggled to keep a smaller team off the boards. I was hopeful to see Brown doing more work on the inside for offense, but his work was at the perimeter. Stall looks quite young in his development at this point. I was pleased to see him getting some rebound putbacks, but don't know if he'll be able to do that against bigger teams. I really hope I'm wrong on this, but will be surprised if Henson provides much more than what we've gotten out of Diogo Brito. Bottom line, and nothing that hasn't been discussed significantly already on our site, we have a guard line that's top 50 in the nation and a frontcourt that's hopefully top 250 in the nation. When we're hitting from outside, we'll compete well. If not, we don't have enough inside game or sets to get good shots to do much. Our offense still looks JUCO.



User avatar
USU78
Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
Posts: 7124
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
Location: Sandy
Has thanked: 1153 times
Been thanked: 342 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by USU78 » November 5th, 2017, 8:40 am

Hoopsnut wrote:Shooting 3’s isn’t a bad strategy. We had the advantage at the guard spots...... why not use it. Foul trouble is going to always be a concern due to our depth. No problem with winning big in an exhibition game. It builds confidence.
We have the advantage at the guard spots ... until we don't


You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

MetsJetsAggies
Posts: 6266
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:39 am
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 136 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by MetsJetsAggies » November 5th, 2017, 11:07 am

Hoopsnut wrote:Shooting 3’s isn’t a bad strategy. We had the advantage at the guard spots...... why not use it. Foul trouble is going to always be a concern due to our depth. No problem with winning big in an exhibition game. It builds confidence.
The NBA teams have made it clear that shooting 3 pointers is a winning strategy. The question is can we shoot a high volume and still hit at 34%+?



USUBlue
13=13
Posts: 4330
Joined: January 10th, 2011, 3:05 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by USUBlue » November 5th, 2017, 11:43 am

MetsJetsAggies wrote:
Hoopsnut wrote:Shooting 3’s isn’t a bad strategy. We had the advantage at the guard spots...... why not use it. Foul trouble is going to always be a concern due to our depth. No problem with winning big in an exhibition game. It builds confidence.
The NBA teams have made it clear that shooting 3 pointers is a winning strategy. The question is can we shoot a high volume and still hit at 34%+?
I don't like you 34% number -- I know that is equivalent to 50% for 2's, but you're missing something. When we were good inside with Stew, our bigs shot much closer to 60% and 2nd chance points also went up because of proximity to the basket. That inside presence also toughened us up on defense by having that more physical presence inside. So in short, it would take more like 40% from the 3's to be good shots for me, and I'm still worried about 2nd chance points and defensive toughness.



MetsJetsAggies
Posts: 6266
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:39 am
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 136 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by MetsJetsAggies » November 5th, 2017, 1:20 pm

USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
Hoopsnut wrote:Shooting 3’s isn’t a bad strategy. We had the advantage at the guard spots...... why not use it. Foul trouble is going to always be a concern due to our depth. No problem with winning big in an exhibition game. It builds confidence.
The NBA teams have made it clear that shooting 3 pointers is a winning strategy. The question is can we shoot a high volume and still hit at 34%+?
I don't like you 34% number -- I know that is equivalent to 50% for 2's, but you're missing something. When we were good inside with Stew, our bigs shot much closer to 60% and 2nd chance points also went up because of proximity to the basket. That inside presence also toughened us up on defense by having that more physical presence inside. So in short, it would take more like 40% from the 3's to be good shots for me, and I'm still worried about 2nd chance points and defensive toughness.
We shot 38% from 3 last season. The trick is keeping that number high while still upping the # of attempts. Take every open 3 we get and we should be able to, but if people start jacking up contested shots or off balance shots (Koby had a tendency to), then it might dip. If we can hit around 9-12 3's a night we will have success



dogie
Posts: 3056
Joined: November 4th, 2010, 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by dogie » November 5th, 2017, 2:33 pm

USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
Hoopsnut wrote:Shooting 3’s isn’t a bad strategy. We had the advantage at the guard spots...... why not use it. Foul trouble is going to always be a concern due to our depth. No problem with winning big in an exhibition game. It builds confidence.
The NBA teams have made it clear that shooting 3 pointers is a winning strategy. The question is can we shoot a high volume and still hit at 34%+?
I don't like you 34% number -- I know that is equivalent to 50% for 2's, but you're missing something. When we were good inside with Stew, our bigs shot much closer to 60% and 2nd chance points also went up because of proximity to the basket. That inside presence also toughened us up on defense by having that more physical presence inside. So in short, it would take more like 40% from the 3's to be good shots for me, and I'm still worried about 2nd chance points and defensive toughness.
The results of an exhibition game aren't a great predictor of what will happen in a typical regular season game. However, the numbers are interesting. The Aggies were 15-38 (39.5%) on three-point attempts 16-24 (66.7%) on two-point attempts and 31-62 (50.0%) overall. Over 60% of the Aggies' attempts were three-point shots against clearly inferior competition. Twenty years ago, a 38-attempt game would have broken the all-time school record (25) by more than 50%.

The Aggies got 1.18 points per three-point attempt and 1.33 points per two-point attempt. The relative value of two-point v. three-point shots isn't quite this simple, however, because of various other factors. For example, a team that shoots more three-point shots will likely get more offensive rebounds (longer rebounds and more overall misses). Teams that shoot more two-point shots will get more easy put-back opportunities and will shoot more free throws when being fouled in the act of shooting, including more and-one three point plays.

Also, passing up a three-point shot for the possibility of finding a two-point shot will probably result in marginal two-point attempts (and vice versa). In other words, if USU took three fewer three-point shots, it is likely that the replacement two-point shots wouldn't have been taken at a 66.7% pace. Moreover, passing up shot opportunities for longer offensive possessions is going to lead to more turnovers during the course of the game.

My main thought is what will happen against good MWC teams that have a strong inside presence. I'm concerned that we could see some games with 45 three point attempts and no real effort to score inside.



AggieDude
Posts: 5464
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 5:10 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Exhibition

Post by AggieDude » November 6th, 2017, 8:14 am

I think the emphasis should be on passing, moving without the ball, and taking good shots. If that results in 45 three point attempts in a game or 25 in a game, it doesn't matter. Getting kids to understand the three concepts of passing, moving without the ball, and taking good shots isn't an easy thing to do. It used to be that a framework of some kind would be implemented to facilitate the three goals, aka set plays. In an effort to introduce creativity and unpredictability set plays seem to be going the way of the dodo. IMO, for an offense to be effective with this platform, the players need to be extremely well coached in passing, moving without the ball, and taking good shots. Otherwise, I'd prefer set plays.



Stucki
Posts: 451
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:09 pm
Location: Midvale
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by Stucki » November 7th, 2017, 10:16 am

Contemporary basketball is all about taking open 3s and shots at the rim. Layups off of transition or form cuts to the basket is where most paint points come from now. Post up opportunities are usually lower points per attempt, so they are not as utilized as in the past.

Shot Type League Average Shooting Percentage Reward for Success (Points) Expected Value of Shot Attempt (Points)
0-3 feet 62.80% 2 1.256
3-10 feet 38.30% 2 0.766
10-16 feet 40.30% 2 0.806
16ft. To 3PT Line 39.40% 2 0.788
3PT Line (And Beyond!) 35.00% 3 1.05

This does not take into account offensive rebounding or time left on the game or shot clock.


Hail the Utah Aggies!

User avatar
treesap32
Moderator
Posts: 14906
Joined: July 28th, 2005, 1:00 am
Location: Washington D.C.
Has thanked: 259 times
Been thanked: 506 times
Contact:

Re: Exhibition

Post by treesap32 » November 7th, 2017, 12:41 pm

Free throws are the most effective way to score.



User avatar
Roy McAvoy
Posts: 5356
Joined: November 2nd, 2011, 1:30 pm
Has thanked: 370 times
Been thanked: 609 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by Roy McAvoy » November 7th, 2017, 12:46 pm

dogie wrote:
USUBlue wrote:
MetsJetsAggies wrote:
Hoopsnut wrote:Shooting 3’s isn’t a bad strategy. We had the advantage at the guard spots...... why not use it. Foul trouble is going to always be a concern due to our depth. No problem with winning big in an exhibition game. It builds confidence.
The NBA teams have made it clear that shooting 3 pointers is a winning strategy. The question is can we shoot a high volume and still hit at 34%+?
I don't like you 34% number -- I know that is equivalent to 50% for 2's, but you're missing something. When we were good inside with Stew, our bigs shot much closer to 60% and 2nd chance points also went up because of proximity to the basket. That inside presence also toughened us up on defense by having that more physical presence inside. So in short, it would take more like 40% from the 3's to be good shots for me, and I'm still worried about 2nd chance points and defensive toughness.
The results of an exhibition game aren't a great predictor of what will happen in a typical regular season game. However, the numbers are interesting. The Aggies were 15-38 (39.5%) on three-point attempts 16-24 (66.7%) on two-point attempts and 31-62 (50.0%) overall. Over 60% of the Aggies' attempts were three-point shots against clearly inferior competition. Twenty years ago, a 38-attempt game would have broken the all-time school record (25) by more than 50%.

The Aggies got 1.18 points per three-point attempt and 1.33 points per two-point attempt. The relative value of two-point v. three-point shots isn't quite this simple, however, because of various other factors. For example, a team that shoots more three-point shots will likely get more offensive rebounds (longer rebounds and more overall misses). Teams that shoot more two-point shots will get more easy put-back opportunities and will shoot more free throws when being fouled in the act of shooting, including more and-one three point plays.

Also, passing up a three-point shot for the possibility of finding a two-point shot will probably result in marginal two-point attempts (and vice versa). In other words, if USU took three fewer three-point shots, it is likely that the replacement two-point shots wouldn't have been taken at a 66.7% pace. Moreover, passing up shot opportunities for longer offensive possessions is going to lead to more turnovers during the course of the game.

My main thought is what will happen against good MWC teams that have a strong inside presence. I'm concerned that we could see some games with 45 three point attempts and no real effort to score inside.
Well the Houston Rockets AVERAGE 45 3-point attempts per game, and 13 NBA teams average more than 30 attempts per game. :noidea:

I know the NBA game is 8 minutes longer, but their 3-point line is also 3 feet further away.
Last edited by Roy McAvoy on November 7th, 2017, 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.



MetsJetsAggies
Posts: 6266
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:39 am
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 136 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by MetsJetsAggies » November 7th, 2017, 1:01 pm

treesap32 wrote:Free throws are the most effective way to score.
I have faith Koby and Isby will be able to get to the line a bunch. Koby's only issue is sometimes he tried to get to the hoop and try to draw the foul/actually get fouled, doesn't get the call, and complains to the ref instead of getting back. Just get in there and attack the rim, everything else will work itself out



dogie
Posts: 3056
Joined: November 4th, 2010, 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by dogie » November 7th, 2017, 1:09 pm

treesap32 wrote:Free throws are the most effective way to score.
Or dunks. But the Aggies has an uncanny way of “defending” the dunk last year. Opponents must have missed 20 dunk attempts last year.



User avatar
WAaggieFan
Posts: 3200
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 9:02 pm
Location: Wenatchee, WA
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 60 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by WAaggieFan » November 7th, 2017, 2:32 pm

treesap32 wrote:Free throws are the most effective way to score.
Out of sheer volume due to the new way they're called that the NCAA instituted last season. I'm hearing that the NCAA really wants to change up the college game even more by having each complete team line up at the free throw line before the first buzzer. Once the buzzer sounds the game clock begins and the first player in line will begin shooting free throws. Once the free throw shooting player misses a shot he/she is to go to the back of the line allowing the next player in line to now begin shooting free throws. Line substitutions will only be allowed from the bench during the 'transition period between 'shooters' and may not replace the player who will be shooting immediately after the player who just missed a free throw. This will go for 40 total minutes of game time with a 'half time' granted the 2 teams after the first 20 minutes of free throws. At the end of 40 minutes of 'game time' total free throws will be added up and the team which has made the most combined free throws will be awarded the victory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



User avatar
USU78
Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
Posts: 7124
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
Location: Sandy
Has thanked: 1153 times
Been thanked: 342 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by USU78 » November 7th, 2017, 2:49 pm

WAaggieFan wrote:
treesap32 wrote:Free throws are the most effective way to score.
Out of sheer volume due to the new way they're called that the NCAA instituted last season. I'm hearing that the NCAA really wants to change up the college game even more by having each complete team line up at the free throw line before the first buzzer. Once the buzzer sounds the game clock begins and the first player in line will begin shooting free throws. Once the free throw shooting player misses a shot he/she is to go to the back of the line allowing the next player in line to now begin shooting free throws. Line substitutions will only be allowed from the bench during the 'transition period between 'shooters' and may not replace the player who will be shooting immediately after the player who just missed a free throw. This will go for 40 total minutes of game time with a 'half time' granted the 2 teams after the first 20 minutes of free throws. At the end of 40 minutes of 'game time' total free throws will be added up and the team which has made the most combined free throws will be awarded the victory.
That there is some must see TV. :notworthy:


You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

User avatar
treesap32
Moderator
Posts: 14906
Joined: July 28th, 2005, 1:00 am
Location: Washington D.C.
Has thanked: 259 times
Been thanked: 506 times
Contact:

Re: Exhibition

Post by treesap32 » November 7th, 2017, 3:08 pm

WAaggieFan wrote:
treesap32 wrote:Free throws are the most effective way to score.
Out of sheer volume due to the new way they're called that the NCAA instituted last season. I'm hearing that the NCAA really wants to change up the college game even more by having each complete team line up at the free throw line before the first buzzer. Once the buzzer sounds the game clock begins and the first player in line will begin shooting free throws. Once the free throw shooting player misses a shot he/she is to go to the back of the line allowing the next player in line to now begin shooting free throws. Line substitutions will only be allowed from the bench during the 'transition period between 'shooters' and may not replace the player who will be shooting immediately after the player who just missed a free throw. This will go for 40 total minutes of game time with a 'half time' granted the 2 teams after the first 20 minutes of free throws. At the end of 40 minutes of 'game time' total free throws will be added up and the team which has made the most combined free throws will be awarded the victory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Does this guy have any eligibility left?




User avatar
AGinNEIowa
Pick'em Champ - '15, '16, '17 WTHCG
Posts: 6174
Joined: January 10th, 2003, 12:00 am
Location: northeast Iowa
Has thanked: 103 times
Been thanked: 70 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by AGinNEIowa » November 7th, 2017, 3:38 pm

what's with the background music?


Enter your Picks on GOOGLE DOCS
BOWLS Entry Sheet

WEEK 15 Entry with results

WEEKLY & WTHCG Standings Congrats to winners - Aggies22 Weekly, bigblue WTHCG

KICKOFF Standings & Summary Congrats to winner - NHAGGIE!

User avatar
WAaggieFan
Posts: 3200
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 9:02 pm
Location: Wenatchee, WA
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 60 times

Exhibition

Post by WAaggieFan » November 7th, 2017, 4:27 pm

treesap32 wrote:
WAaggieFan wrote:
treesap32 wrote:Free throws are the most effective way to score.
Out of sheer volume due to the new way they're called that the NCAA instituted last season. I'm hearing that the NCAA really wants to change up the college game even more by having each complete team line up at the free throw line before the first buzzer. Once the buzzer sounds the game clock begins and the first player in line will begin shooting free throws. Once the free throw shooting player misses a shot he/she is to go to the back of the line allowing the next player in line to now begin shooting free throws. Line substitutions will only be allowed from the bench during the 'transition period between 'shooters' and may not replace the player who will be shooting immediately after the player who just missed a free throw. This will go for 40 total minutes of game time with a 'half time' granted the 2 teams after the first 20 minutes of free throws. At the end of 40 minutes of 'game time' total free throws will be added up and the team which has made the most combined free throws will be awarded the victory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Does this guy have any eligibility left?

Hahaha! "When Ted St. Martin comes on at halftime it's swish, swish, swish. People in the crowd yawn and go out for a hot dog." Unfortunately, Mr. St. Martin was sponsored by Coors to travel the nation and put on exhibitions/take on challengers so his amateur days are over. Fortunately, TD had already failed to offer him and he really wouldn't have contributed anyway. USU is much better off without him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



AggieArmy
Posts: 85
Joined: February 2nd, 2012, 9:21 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 0

Re: Exhibition

Post by AggieArmy » November 10th, 2017, 9:33 am

The starting 5 were: McEwen, Merrill, Isby, Brown Jr., and Dargenton.
The 2nd team was: Ainge, Brito, Miller, Henson, and Taylor. Stall is the 3rd string center.

McEwen easily looked like the best player on the court.

Ainge looked like a kid just off his mission, I'm not as down on him as some, hes got NBA DNA and should improve with coaching and maturity.

Merrill looked bigger, solid player.

Brito looked the same as last year, smart player who doesn't hurt the team when hes in as long as he doesn't shoot too much.

Isby looks like hes got some skills, losing Pearre hurts, bit i think Isby is just as good, and Isby has a higher ceiling.

Miller looked good to me, good all around intelligent player with a good looking 3 point shot. Miller and Isby will both get a lot of time at the 3.

Brown Jr is athletic, sounds like he is going to get the majority on minutes at the 4.

Henson has a real nice 3 point shot, tall player. His minutes will increase as defense and rebounding improve.

Dargenton has got some hops, looks like he is getting more comfortable out on the court.

Taylor may be the teams best post defender and rebounder, hes continually improved since hes been in the program.

Stall is big, gives good effort, he reminds me of Stone, if he keeps up the hard work and good attitude he will contribute to the team this year.

Pearre's injury is too bad, it will be tough for him to get minutes on the wing with Merrill, Isby and Miller there. His best shot at minutes may be for him to be a defensive specialist or an emergency point guard.



dogie
Posts: 3056
Joined: November 4th, 2010, 7:56 pm
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Re: Exhibition

Post by dogie » November 10th, 2017, 12:54 pm

treesap32 wrote:
November 7th, 2017, 3:08 pm
WAaggieFan wrote:
treesap32 wrote:Free throws are the most effective way to score.
Out of sheer volume due to the new way they're called that the NCAA instituted last season. I'm hearing that the NCAA really wants to change up the college game even more by having each complete team line up at the free throw line before the first buzzer. Once the buzzer sounds the game clock begins and the first player in line will begin shooting free throws. Once the free throw shooting player misses a shot he/she is to go to the back of the line allowing the next player in line to now begin shooting free throws. Line substitutions will only be allowed from the bench during the 'transition period between 'shooters' and may not replace the player who will be shooting immediately after the player who just missed a free throw. This will go for 40 total minutes of game time with a 'half time' granted the 2 teams after the first 20 minutes of free throws. At the end of 40 minutes of 'game time' total free throws will be added up and the team which has made the most combined free throws will be awarded the victory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Does this guy have any eligibility left?

[youtube][/youtube]
I think he used it up in the late ‘50s at Medfield College. He puts Julius Erving and Bill Walton to shame.



Locked Previous topicNext topic