Honest Coaches: Should college basketball keep the shot clock for 30 seconds or change to 24 like NBA and FIBA?

Gary Parish and Matt Norlander of CBS Sports polled nearly 100 coaches in the annual Candid Coaches Series. They surveyed everyone from head coaches in elite programs to assistants at small Division 1 schools. In exchange for complete anonymity, these instructors offered complete honesty on a number of topics. Over the course of three weeks, we release the results of our summer survey on the state of college basketball.

For nearly a century, men’s basketball did not have a shot clock. In 1985, after a few conferences had tried one for a few years, the NCAA officially created a paycheck clock for all of its games.

He allowed a whopping 45 seconds per possession.

This first generation of the shot clock era lasted for nearly a decade. In 1993, the 10-second cut and men’s college hoops have been played with a 35-second clock for over 20 years. Another shave came in 2015 when it was scaled back to 30. In the past decade, there has been a push by some to have the 24 second clock, the length at every other major iteration of competitive organized men’s basketball around the world.

Some argue that college basketball has playing and coaching styles that are accentuated by a longer shot clock and that these traits should not be discarded in the spirit of trying to emulate the NBA or other professional leagues.

With this in mind, we wanted to see the position of university coaches on this topic in 2022.

How long should the shot hour be: 24 or 30 seconds?

30 seconds 50%
24 seconds 50%

Quotes that popped

in favor of 30

• “The less time the team has, the more it is simply relying on talent and taking some practice out of the game. In the NBA, it’s a bunch of quick hits. But players can shoot those hits. In the college game, our players don’t have the same skill, so we need More time to have better shot chances. I have a real fear that if we lower the shot clock it will increase the holdings, but the points per acquisition will actually go down. Because we will all take harder shots. He might score more overall points due to the large size of the holdings. , but I think the quality of those shots will drop dramatically because we don’t have players who can perform batting moves with the same efficiency as the NBA players.”
• “I think the biggest reason is that most high schools don’t have shooting hours, and for kids to come as freshmen to learn to play the game the right way, I think you need more time on the clock. They aren’t adapted to play quickly is technically a shot clock. 16 seconds. That’s what changes the shot hour to 24.”
• “Those who argue for 24 fail to acknowledge that the NBA has five guys on the field who can get their shot themselves. That’s not the case in college basketball.”
• “I don’t want to be like the NBA. I love our game and the rules. When we go on foreign trips and play in 24, it limits what I can do as a coach in attack. Defensively, you’re only going to have to protect one side of the change on the ground And the more the ball changes side, the better the chance to score, so you’re helping the defense with that rule. I think we see enough basketball. Make it more spread.”
• “I have a strong opinion on this. We try to be the NBA and we are not. Our players are not talented. I think it still gives some strategy to the coaches. The more we look like the NBA, the less we will be watching because they are doing it at a higher level than us. I think it’s awful. The NBA takes bad shots but they are the elite at taking bad shots. The college will take bad shots and we’re not elite. It’s going to be bad.”
• “I don’t think US youth basketball will prepare well-prepared players enough to play effectively with a 24-second shot clock early in college. NBA players are the most talented scorers and shooters on the planet. European/International players learn capture details and divergence – in addition to prioritizing skill development – at a very young age.Undeveloped talent will weaken and muddy the game than what can be achieved with a 30-second hour.Unless youth basketball changes states completely from a game-heavy, AAU-centric structure, A change from 30 seconds would result in a poor product for college basketball.”
• “I suspect [30] It’s the best for the game because, to me, the best thing about college basketball is parity. Thirty seconds creates parity over 24. If you’re a fan who wants to see the best teams always win, then the 24 shot clock will do. But if you want to see the turmoil and the schools that maybe have less talent find a way to equalize themselves, for me it’s a 30-second shot clock and for me that’s the best of the game. Parity is the bulk of college basketball. And this is from someone who was an associate coach with the FIBA ​​and Team USA. I like the IBF rules, but not all college basketball.”
• “Watch (Nike) EYBL in 24 seconds. Worst shot ever. You need to teach them the game before they try to play fast. Even Jordan learned to play right before the fast.”

for 24

• “Twenty-four seconds. There is no substitute for uniformity across all levels of basketball in my opinion. When you come into the game in this country, what you learned about the game and how to apply those skills and within the game you should have a direct translation of the way the game is played in college and on Professional level. For the same reason that high school basketball has a shot clock as well. If we can map out the learning curve from one level to the next, our game becomes better.”
• “From some coaching NBA, players adapt, coaches adapt, I think it’s a more exciting game. I think there’s more training, actually. Not in a bad way. You have to think hard about more things. I like eight seconds in The back area as well, and that goes in line with the 24 seconds.”
• “Many teams practice with a 24-second shot clock.”
• “I think there has to be some uniformity in basketball, from high school, college, international basketball, FIBA…the other thing it would do is get rid of these games in the fifties, and have the teams play a little bit higher, Faster. It’s a more enjoyable style for the players, but also for the fans.”
• “I would like to see a 24 second shot clock, but there will be an ugly adjustment period based on the speed decisions that have to be made. Some states don’t even have a shot clock in high school, so 30 seconds is an adjustment, let alone 24. Some young European leagues You play with 24 seconds and maybe that’s why they move the ball and themselves better.”
• “My theory is because of the NBA and how everything is going in that direction, so why isn’t it all an NBA? Make the 3-point line the same, make all the rules the same. Why not? If that’s a measuring stick Guys trying to get into the league.”
• “Fans want the college game to be faster and with higher points, so let’s give them what they want – the 24-second shot clock.”

Some coaches argue that 24 seconds would offset the possibility of kidney disruption.

Getty Images


Here it is, apparently: the most divisive topic in college basketball. Literally a 50/50 split. Fabulous. I think this is the first – at most second – time in the 10-year history of the Candid Coaches Series that a survey has generated a 50% return for one answer and 50% for the other.

This question was asked in part by former basketball commentator/coach Fran Fracella, Tweet about the topic Earlier this summer, further discussion of a potential rule change was hotly debated. Given the way men’s college basketball has made its way over nearly four decades to reduce the shot clock, I think a move to 24 is inevitable.

But I don’t think it’s imminent.

For the 24 Defenders, the good news is that there are more coaches available (if not passionately supporting) the concept now than in any previous year. The 30s are still a passionate and motivating group, however, and they wouldn’t go quietly into their 64-68 possession night. I don’t blame them. (This question was one of three in this year’s series that generated the most opinion and opposition; the other two will be published next week.)

I’ve been candid about a lot of rule changes – good and bad – over the years. When it comes to pay-hours, I’m dealing with inconsistency. I would welcome 24 seconds as much as I am good with 30 forever. While I think the jumps from 45 to 35 to 30 were gradual and not at all harmful to college basketball preparations, I agree with coaches who say that less than six seconds per possession is enough for a change that will affect efficiency and shot selection.

Given the way most college basketball teams play, getting a good shot in 24 seconds is a goal faster than a realistic 30 over goal. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to upgrade again, but I’m willing to bet the first Two years (at least) under 24 hours would be equal parts captivating and dirty. Turn rates per game are likely to reach an all-time high, and the field goal percentage could drop to its lowest in more than a decade.

Not that it’s not worth trying.

There were cries in earlier times when the shot clock was shortened that the quality and identity of college basketball would fade, leaning in the wrong direction. These warning bells were misleading. In fact, since moving to 30 seconds seven years ago, Points per possession increased every season With one exception (2019-20; the year the post-season coronavirus killed) compared to offensive efficiency in the 15 years before it.

However: I’ve talked to some veteran officials in the background about 24-30, and they think college basketball is going to have a tough transition period. These are objective observers who experience the game differently than anyone else. Someone assumed that college basketball would actually drop not just in points per possession, but in points each Game. He predicted the score would be four points per game, which would be a sharp drop. (Men’s college basketball has fluctuated between 70.1 and 73.6 points since the shot hit 30 hits in 2015. Prior to that, averages were at their highest in the 1960s.

What do college basketball fans want? Do they know what they want in this regard? No doubt there was a faction that embraced and settled at the pace of a 30-second clock. Then there are some people who would like to see games being defined, at least, in the 1970s more often and want the final change to 24. (Will there still be a debate, remember). It has been trained and developed without a valid pay hour. Bringing electronics and technology into thousands of gyms will likely be something that will take another 20 years to reach. College basketball can’t wait for that, but it’s not a catalyst on that front now, that’s for sure.

I don’t think changing the shot clock will improve or reduce the popularity of the sport. But as the sport continues to improve globally, as younger players become more skilled and basketball only continues to grow, the big picture of what is good for college basketball versus what is best for the players who play it will only get higher.

Do we do this for the fans or the players? Will the change assuage the alleged needs of these two populations?

I think the sport will eventually be tested by 24 seconds into the next decade. If there is a rule change on this front, appropriately enough, college basketball will probably need more time around the clock to get there.