PonyFans.com

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2859065

In the 2008-09 season, the line will be extended 1 foot to 20 feet 9 inches. The lane, however, will not be expanded.

For women's bball, the line will stay at 19' 9".

edit: also...
1. the position closest to the basket for free throws has been eliminated.
2. refs can review a play on monitors to determine flagrant fouls.

Backing up the 3-point line is long overdue. Seems like every player in college will heave 3s at a moment's notice. Hopefully this will limit the number of players cranking bombs from behind the line, and who knows, maybe more players will realize the limits of their range and actually develop a mid-range jumper.

That's going to mess up the aesthetics of bball courts. A couple of three-point lines, one foot apart. It seems like it would be frustrating as a player too, needing to check and double check each time where you are. And imagine the courst with an NBA three point line as well.

RGV Pony wrote:That's going to mess up the aesthetics of bball courts. A couple of three-point lines, one foot apart. It seems like it would be frustrating as a player too, needing to check and double check each time where you are. And imagine the courst with an NBA three point line as well.

Well I guess you could make a large solid arc such that men stepping inside the arc are going for two and women stepping past the inside would be going for two. If the NCAA allows it that may not be as bad as two lines.

Are there any arenas now that have professional and men's AND women's college teams? The three-point lines are going to look like a rainbow.

Man that is stupid, it is already bad enough to have a NBA and college 3 point line, but now adding a woman's line? Really silly.

Have the women go back another foot as well or better yet, just use the NBA three point line in college so we can go back to some more exciting basketball instead of just launching 3s every trip.

Or you know if they really wanted equality of the sexes then the women should just play with the men, with the men's ball, with the men's court designations. But oh wait that wouldn't work would it.

PonyPride wrote:Are there any arenas now that have professional and men's AND women's college teams? The three-point lines are going to look like a rainbow.

Memphis? I think the Tigers might have their own floor, though.

ON COLLEGE BASKETBALL

Another pointer: Widen the lane
Increasing distance of arc not enough

Skip Myslenski
ON COLLEGES

May 4, 2007

So, after years of debate, the three-point line might be moved back. That at least was the suggestion of the NCAA men's basketball rules committee, which approved a measure Thursday that would push back the distance to 20 feet 9 inches.

That is a foot longer than its current distance, but here is what it is not. It is not 20 feet 6 inches, which is the length in international play. Nor is it a mirror of the NBA line, which shrinks from 23 feet 9 inches at the top of the key to 22 feet in the corners. Nor is it an alteration accompanied by the widening of the lane, another move that is sorely needed.

"We made it a point to come up with a distance that was correct for us, and that didn't necessarily mimic the inter- national line," committee Chairman Larry Keating said.

The proposal must still be approved by the playing rules oversight committee May 25. If that happens, the change will take place in November 2008, yet the feeling here is that will be nothing more than a meaningless soft-shoe shuffle.

Sure, it will make the three-pointer a tougher shot and require greater skill and open up the court somewhat, which is a welcome prospect. Few, if any, savor the hand-to-hand combat that often characterizes today's games. Yet we must wonder why Keating's committee so feared mimicking anyone, which seems a prideful stance that kept it from doing much more.

By moving to the NBA distance, it would have transformed the three-point shot from a marked-down sales item to a top-of-the-line showpiece. By moving to the international distance, it would have better prepared players to perform on that stage, which recently has been filled with pratfalls and failures. And most significantly, by tying the move to a change to the trapezoidal lane used in international play, it would not only have improved this country's prospects on the world stage, it would have made the court safer for finesse and sleight of hand.

Those virtues are endangered in today's game, which features outsized players who prefer the bump more than beauty, the grind more than a gaudy display of athleticism. And think of this: The dimensions of the court have not changed over the years, yet the players on it are now bigger and stronger and faster and taking up more space.

That alone makes it harder to operate, and that in turn screams for changes that give them room to roam. The extended three-point line will stretch defenses. But widening the lane as well would have pulled big men out and unclogged paths to the basket.
That would have helped the game even more.

----------

[email protected]
Copyright © 2007, The Chicago Tribune

Both ideas would be great, make the 3 point shot a home run that takes great skill (or luck) to make and widen the lane to open up the middle. Game would be much more exciting then IMO.

Lots of exciting assist plays (no look, behind the back...etc) and flying power dunks...

If this Brittani Allen kid can shoot as well as advertised, it almost makes you wish the women's line got pushed back, too.

Quite honestly, there are two changes I'd like to see (that I doubt we ever will):

1 - As players get bigger and stronger and faster and even the big guys can run and handle the ball, make the court bigger, so there's room to make the ball do the work (also called "passing") rather than just a bunch of thoroughbreds holding a 94-foot track meet.

2 - Raise the rim. Too many guys can dunk now. Raise it to 11 feet and make guys learn to shoot again.

Corso wrote:Raise the rim. Too many guys can dunk now. Raise it to 11 feet and make guys learn to shoot again.

I agree. The dunk is a crowd pleaser (so it isn't going away), but it isn't basketball. Basketball is all about dribbling, passing and shooting the ball into the basket.

In my perfect version of basketball no fouls would be called. Absolutely none except those so egreious that it would land them in jail. The refs can't call the sport anyway so "let 'em play" would become a reality. Holding--ok
tackling--ok
traveling--ok (already is)
no 3 second clock
put a fence around the court and let them go at it.

Ultimate basketball

While I am certainly no expert on the fine art of the basketball shot and how to develop it I would think that players spend years developing the feel of the shot from the time they first pick up a basketball as a kid and they play all their lives with a 10 foot rim....I would think that raising the rim would throw them off on their shot.

Unless I am wrong and the shot is all about hand eye coordination and not about the repetiveness and learned trait of the 10 foot rim...ie....the shooter makes the shot by seeing the basket and knowing what to do to make it go in and the placement of the rim is immaterial........ or if it is largely a learned instinct that thrives in knowing the general direction to launch the shot and because the basket is she same distance from the ground it has been their whole lives, that is not even considered....

I would imagine it is a combination of both and raising the rim would doom many shooters.