Jump to content

Buller64

Member
  • Posts

    2,016
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Buller64

  1. It has been over three months since I read an article at yahoo sports about B1G expansion (I read it back in December). What I found fascinating is that the article stated that the B1G ADs were informally asked to list their preferred schools for expansion (they were asked by the author). Two schools were listed by all of the ADs. Those two schools were UVA and UNC. Bothe Clemson and FSU were not listed on half of the ADs lists. It is entirely possible that FSU could find themselves leaving the ACC and not being invited to the B1G as s many are assuming. Personally I think that if FSU and Clemson negotiate a lower settlement they are going to the SEC. UNC and UVA will leave and go to the B1G.

     

    Forget about ND to the B1G. ND is focused on being a top notch undergrad school (like Villanova), has only 2 doctoral programs and less than 30 masters programs. B1G bylaws require 20 doctoral programs and over 50 masters programs. Joining the B1G comes up at their board of trustees meeting every 4 or 5 years and it has always been voted down. I have not seen anything that indicates that is changing. 

  2. 10 minutes ago, olafberserker said:

    Oh I get it.  A team gets a foul for violating a rule.   Don't they continue that throughout the game or do they stop getting free throws and such at the end of games?

    So you are intentionally missing the statement that was made. "The biggest problem is that it gives the losing team a chance to win by breaking the rules of the game. It is the only game where you can win by breaking the rules." My challenge to you is tell me what other major sport gives the losing team a chance to win by intentionally breaking the rules?

    Your argument that the winning team just has to make free throws is irrelevant. Because my argument is that the losing team should not have the chance to win by breaking the rules. No football team improves their chance to win by intentionally breaking the rules and getting caught. No baseball team improves their chance to win by breaking the rules and getting caught. No hockey team improves their chance to win by breaking the rules and getting caught. No soccer team improves their chance to win by breaking the rules and getting caught. No lacrosse team improves their chance to win by breaking the rules and getting caught. Only in basketball can you improve your chances of winning by breaking the rules and getting caught. 

    As to your suggestion of stopping free throws at the end of games they actually tried that in the 1970s. Player injuries increased so they discontinued it. In the 1980s they tried giving free throws and the ball, but the number of blow-outs increased and people stopped watching the game on TV. In the 1990s they added the three point shot. I still think they should have stayed with the original rule that the 3- point shot only applied in the last two minutes of the game. They changed that rule because it was too difficult to tell when the 3-point shot applied with a continuous clock. However, with modern technology I think it could be done with the backboard lighting up green on the edges (like the shot clock violation) starting at two minutes left in the fourth quarter. No attempt has been made to fix this problem since the 1990s because David Stern decided that referees should call the rules differently for different players. 

  3. Ok, apparently you trying to be a pain (watch out Puc you may have competition here). A foul refers to illegal personal contact or unsportsmanlike conduct on the court or sidelines of a game. Every foul violates a rule, but not every rule violation counts as a foul. Therefore, fouling at the end of a game does in fact violate the rules. I would tell you to refer to a rule book but based on what I have seen of basketball lately the rulebook apparently no longer exists. 

    • Upvote 1
  4. I agree that this fouling at the end of the game desperately needs to be changed. The biggest problem is that it gives the losing team a chance to win by breaking the rules of the game. It is the only game where you can win by breaking the rules. WTF? Why have rules then? That is absolutely ridiculous. The NBA tried to fix this problem by instituting a 3- point shot but that hasn;t worked. It is time to try something else. 

×
×
  • Create New...

It appears you are using ad blocking tools.  This site is supported through ads.  Please disable in order to enjoy full access to The Bulls Pen.  Registration is free and reduces ads.