bobinator said:

---

Nah, the new charge rule is overall an absolute net good.

To me, one of the great things about basketball is that it's basically the same game whether you're playing it in the NBA or in a park playing 1 on 1. At absolutely no level of basketball does anyone want to watch guys jump in front of players attacking the basket holding their hands over their nuts trying to get run over.

Yeah, they miss some now that should still be charges, but overall it's been great for the sport.

---

That's called an entertainment based standard. Its also called good defense, and was good defense for decades until certain people just "decided" it wasn't something, as you put it, they wanted to watch. What if people decide they no longer want to watch running plays in football, especially ones between the tackles? Do we outlaw them?

That and other NBA-esque changes drove people away from the college game.

I just completely disagree. It's not good defense, it's just choosing to let yourself get run over. It's not making a play on the ball, it's just standing in the way. For me it has nothing to do with entertainment, it's about what the point of the game is.

If you're set for several steps and still get run over that's still a charge, or if you beat the offensive player to the spot in legal guarding position and they push you off that's still an offensive foul, but dudes sliding in under guys attacking basket or just straight up flopping was an absolute plague on college basketball. It's also an xtremely difficult play to officiate, and dangerous for both the offensive and defensive player.

I don't see how anyone watching college basketball five years ago compares to know would think the old charge rules were better.

Letting a professional player who left the team 2 years ago come back and play in a few games before being ruled ineligible.

I do have some nostalgia for the kind of scrappy players that were willing to get just blown up stepping in to take a charge. But, it's a dangerous play for both the offensive and defensive players and an unnecessary play now that they let you contest with verticality. (i.e. play real basketball)

Also maybe most importantly, the way teams were coaching off ball defenders to slide in to take a charge like a sneaky spy was against the spirit of the original rule that exists to prevent the offensive player from forcibly displacing a defender to gain an offensive advantage.

With most of these charges the offensive player had already legally beaten his defender and was preparing to elevate and finish when out of nowhere an off ball defender slides in and undercuts the offensive player. Those plays needed to be removed from the game.

Yeah my suggestion was actually that instead of changing the rules of how you take a charge they needed to just ban charges by secondary defenders. That would probably have been pretty hard to officiate though, especially with zone defenses.

Yeah, when it comes down to it, the rules are supposed to make the game fair and prevent a team from gaining an advantage over the other team. The old charge rule had become so slanted towards the defense that it was time to go or be heavily modified. What we have now is clearly more fair to both offenses and defenses.

Another advantage which was anticipated was that this one rule change would increase pace of play and scoring. The old charge rule artificially held down scoring by neutering the aggressiveness of individual players and entire teams through fear of picking up charge fouls.

This year we have 99 teams averaging more than 80 points. Four years ago we had 8. Three years ago we had only 18. Two years ago we had 40. Last year there were 38 teams.

Scoring has been on an upward trajectory (good thing for a fan experience despite some personal nostalgia for a certain 46 point win) and the game is as visually appealing as it's been since the early 90s IMO.

Aston04 said:

---

I'm not sure what the best answer is--- but do think there still needs to be a limit on challenges. I don't want every single out of bounds reviewed, even if the challenging team is right numerous times...

---

In volleyball, you start with 2 and you keep them if you win and lose them if not. But if the game goes to a 5th set you are given an additional one. or at least given one if you have already lost your other 2.

I could see maybe starting the game with 2 and keeping them on any successful challenge, and then similarly either at the half or start of OT you are assured to get an additional challenge but never more than 2.


Or just start with 1 per half or OT period, your win you keep it, but lose and you don't get another one that period.

If you do two challenges.. keep the challenge if you are right system ... It would more often create an extra timeout or two for teams to use end of game to draw up a play. I think teams have plenty of timeouts as is.