Geno Auriemma: "Men's college bball is a joke."

[FerryFor50]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-the-dagger/uconn-women-s-coach-geno-auriemma-on-the-men-s-game----it-s-a-joke--220123899.html

Not sure if the guy who coaches a team that dominates women's basketball every year, has won 9 titles in the past 20 years and plays in a game that has only crowned 7 different champs in 20 years should be calling the men's sport a joke. Personally, I like seeing parity and a variety of teams being in the hunt every year.

Men's game has:

13 different champions in 20 years
4 titles for UConn men
4 titles for Kentucky men
4 other teams have 2 titles

[-jk]

To my surprise, I'm with Geno. <ick> It's not so much "behind the times" as an inevitable hole we've dug. (I miss flowy hoops.)

It's been a problem for decades.

Fred Barakat came into the ACC as commish of refs with the explicit goal of getting the teams to play more physically. He thought they needed to bang more to succeed in the NCAA tourney. And it worked - the ACC went from a tickle foul conference and perennially early out to a two decade domination of the NCAAs.

It really worked!

And it won't change until the NCAA takes over official assignments across D1, or the Power 5 do it for them where it counts.

I still miss flowy hoops.

<sigh>

[Duvall]

Geno Auriemma: "Please talk about me and not put any pressure on my players going into the Final Four."

[-jk]

Geno Auriemma: "Please talk about me and not put any pressure on my players going into the Final Four."

Him and "bed check - they're all there" Valvano!

-jk

[AncientPsychicT]

4 titles for Kentucky men

Whoa there, Ferry. I know they're undefeated and all, but there's no reason to concede them the title just yet! :mad::mad:

:p

[FerryFor50]

Whoa there, Ferry. I know they're undefeated and all, but there's no reason to concede them the title just yet! :mad::mad:

:p

Oops. Counted wrong. 3.

[FerryFor50]

To my surprise, I'm with Geno. <ick> It's not so much "behind the times" as an inevitable hole we've dug. (I miss flowy hoops.)

It's been a problem for decades.

Fred Barakat came into the ACC as commish of refs with the explicit goal of getting the teams to play more physically. He thought they needed to bang more to succeed in the NCAA tourney. And it worked - the ACC went from a tickle foul conference and perennially early out to a two decade domination of the NCAAs.

It really worked!

And it won't change until the NCAA takes over official assignments across D1, or the Power 5 do it for them where it counts.

I still miss flowy hoops.

<sigh>

I don't disagree with the notion that the college game isn't that flowy. But it's far from a joke.

Is it really that much worse than the women's game in terms of flow? It would be interesting to see a comparison of stats for total average pace of both games, points per possession, average fouls per game, etc.

[gwlaw99]

There are 63 mens teams shot over 46% this year.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/statistics/team/_/stat/scoring-per-game/sort/fieldGoalPct/seasontype/2/count/41

7 women's teams did.
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/statistics/team/_/year/2015/cat/4

[-jk]

I don't disagree with the notion that the college game isn't that flowy. But it's far from a joke.

Is it really that much worse than the women's game in terms of flow? It would be interesting to see a comparison of stats for total average pace of both games, points per possession, average fouls per game, etc.

I'm afraid the women's game has joined the men's game. It took a little longer. I extolled the women's game for years. But I think they've joined the men's. <sigh>

-jk

[chris13]

Two thoughts

1) Watching the "I Hate Christian Laettner" documentary and some of the late 80s / early 90s Duke and UNC games on YouTube made me appreciate how much less physical the games were back then. The players weren't nearly as physically developed either.

2) The UCONN / Butler title game in 2011 was the nadir of the sport for me. Just terrible. I think things have gotten marginally better since then but the NBA game is more aesthetically pleasing.

[burnspbesq]

That's hilarious, coming from a guy whose philosophy of defense is "foul every cutter and everyone trying to get post position, and dare the refs to call it all."

[CDu]

He's not wrong. He omits the fact that the women's game is also "a joke."

Note, the term "a joke" was probably a poor choice of words. His point was that the quality of play has degraded to the point that the value of the product is diminished.

[OldPhiKap]

In Gino's defense, he is a wanker for saying this.

[Wander]

He's not wrong. He omits the fact that the women's game is also "a joke."


He is wrong, because he explicitly states that the men's game is worse than the women's in this regard. But I think it's pretty clear that the men's game is more skilled with better offense.

[bluedevilsince72]

I am a fan of women's basketball but it is by far more brutal to watch than the men's game. The "fundamental" thing that everyone says about the women's game is a complete myth. The shooting is not better. 95% women have no mid range game. Spot up shooting might be closer. Women's dribbling is not better than the men. Passing is certainly not better. There might be more passing in the women's game (because very few can create their own shot) but that doesn't make it better passing. The amount of turnovers in the women's game is appalling. Finishing around the basket is a huge weakness for women. Missed layups are a huge problem thats hurting their game.

Maybe i'm missing something. Im not sure what fundamentals the women do better than the men.

That being said, the men's game is getting tougher and tougher to watch. I can't watch it live anymore. I have to dvr it and fast forward thru the many stoppages in play. We need to go to the FIFA rules. That game is so much faster (in game) paced and the game duration is so much shorter. But I doubt colleges can sacrifice the amount of money made during commercials.

[Duvall]

That being said, the men's game is getting tougher and tougher to watch. I can't watch it live anymore. I have to dvr it and fast forward thru the many stoppages in play. We need to go to the FIFA rules. That game is so much faster (in game) paced and the game duration is so much shorter. But I doubt colleges can sacrifice the amount of money made during commercials.

Funny how Bilas and his ESPN cronies who have all kinds of suggestions for fixing the game never get around to mentioning any of the rules changes that would reduce the time for commercial breaks.

[RCDevil]

His argument is complete bull.

It seems to be based around the argument that college players can't shoot.

The average FG percentage in the modern NBA is around 45. In the modern college game, it's 43. Not a whopping difference.

It's like people can't appreciate defensive-oriented play at all. Happens in other sports too - the NHL implemented a gimmicky penalty shootout in 2005 and narrowed the neutral zone to increase scoring. I get that more offensive-oriented play can be exciting, but is there really a need for all this rabble-rousing when scoring goes down a bit?

I also find it amazing that Auriemma would trash a sport that his own school has been incredibly successful at over the past couple of decades. I wonder what the UConn men's team has to say about this. I really, really hope this was just a bad April Fool's joke.

[BigWayne]

I am a fan of women's basketball but it is by far more brutal to watch than the men's game. The "fundamental" thing that everyone says about the women's game is a complete myth. The shooting is not better. 95% women have no mid range game. Spot up shooting might be closer. Women's dribbling is not better than the men. Passing is certainly not better. There might be more passing in the women's game (because very few can create their own shot) but that doesn't make it better passing. The amount of turnovers in the women's game is appalling. Finishing around the basket is a huge weakness for women. Missed layups are a huge problem thats hurting their game.

Maybe i'm missing something. Im not sure what fundamentals the women do better than the men.



Dead on. I have watched a number of Duke women's games and the occasional game where one of the other name teams is playing. The style of play reminds me more of high school games than anything we see in men's games at college or pro level. Besides the items state above, the propensity in the women's game to just chuck a shot up as if the clock is running out is unbelievable.

[madscavenger]

I don't disagree with the notion that the college game isn't that flowy. But it's far from a joke.

Is it really that much worse than the women's game in terms of flow? It would be interesting to see a comparison of stats for total average pace of both games, points per possession, average fouls per game, etc.



Walter doesn't watch a basketball game like other people. He turns off the sound and listens to classical music. He told me that Mozart's early symphonies go particularly well with basketball because they have a lot of allegro and practically no adagios. .............George Burns, with regard to Walter Matthau.

[OldPhiKap]

.............George Burns, with regard to Walter Matthau.

I prefer a good Dead show, typically second set.

[UrinalCake]

I know his comments came off pretty harsh, and he's an abrasive guy, but I dont think he was entirely wrong either. A lot of people are getting hung up on comparing the men's game to the women's, and in that aspect I disagree with the notion that the men's game is worse, but I think what he was trying to say is that the men's game needs to make changes to improve its product. It wasn't quoted in this article, but he goes on to say that all of the major sports league make rule changes when necessary to improve the game, but men's basketball has not. Hence his description of them being "behind the times."

The tournament is always going to be popular, and as Duke fans we will always watch and support our team. But that doesn't mean we should ignore ways to improve the quality of play and make the sport more appealing to the general public.

[BD80]

A joke?

Hey geno: Scoreboard!

Look at the TV revenues, gate receipts etc.

I find geno to be a joke. A big fish in a tiny little pond, trying to prove he is relevant compared to coaches in the men's game.

Which is larger, his ego or his inferiority complex?

[DBFAN]

Let me first say I can't stand Geno, and his constant need to be respected. With that being said, I agree with him on the game not being as good as it should. Instead of us watching teams that use skill, talent and strategy we have been relegated to watching UK. YES they have a ton of talent, but when I watch them play there is only one thing I notice. They put a bunch of 7 foot defensive lineman on the court, and say hey, we are just gonna stand here in the lane with our hands up, and just make it a wrestling match. They don't even cover the 3 pt line that well, just that they are so tall you can't see over them. Once anyone of them break a sweat they just bring more Giants in to stand around and do the same. I am dumbfounded by the idea that with that much talent they only score as much as they do. When Vegas was trying to run the table, 90 pts was the norm, and they had to try to not beat someone by 20+. This will not help these kids at the next level because they won't be bigger than everyone else, and they will be at least a year removed from knowing what it's like to play an entire game, and to have more skill sets than bullying their way to the basket against players who aren't more tired

[jmck214]

I just hope if they take the shot clock down to 24 that they also increase the foul out limit to 6 since there will be more possessions and therefore more opportunities to foul. If they didn't do this then it would hurt a team like Duke that traditionally has a short bench

[Ichabod Drain]

Why so serious Geno?

[FerryFor50]

Funny how Bilas and his ESPN cronies who have all kinds of suggestions for fixing the game never get around to mentioning any of the rules changes that would reduce the time for commercial breaks.

Well, it's a chicken and egg problem.

Because the men's game does so well in the ratings, they sell more commercial time and try to maximize the profit.

With the women's game, if the ratings were better, we'd see the same problem with commercials - but since they're not, companies aren't spending as much to advertise on the women's games, outside of demographic targeting.

[KandG]

His argument is complete bull.

It seems to be based around the argument that college players can't shoot.

The average FG percentage in the modern NBA is around 45. In the modern college game, it's 43. Not a whopping difference.

It's like people can't appreciate defensive-oriented play at all. Happens in other sports too - the NHL implemented a gimmicky penalty shootout in 2005 and narrowed the neutral zone to increase scoring. I get that more offensive-oriented play can be exciting, but is there really a need for all this rabble-rousing when scoring goes down a bit?



"Rabble-rousing when scoring has gone down a bit?" A bit?

There was already a thread about the issue with college basketball based on an excellent article by Seth Davis. I suggest people who think what Geno is saying is overblown should re-familarize themselves with the article:

http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/02/26/hoop-thoughts-college-basketball-scoring-pace


"Since 2000, scoring has declined year-to-year 13 times and increased twice. Overall field goal percentage has declined six times in the last eight seasons. Before that, it had decreased just four times in nine years.

This is on pace to be the slowest season since efficiency maven Ken Pomeroy starting tracking tempo in 2002. That season, teams averaged 69.6 possessions per 40 minutes. This season, they are averaging 66.2."

Also, from Seth's article:

"Even before a coach calls a single time out, he is guaranteed nine stoppages of play—four media time outs per half, which last 2 minutes, 15 seconds each, plus a 15-minute halftime. That’s 33 minutes, or almost another entire game, to talk to his team. Yet, on top of those breaks, a coach is also granted four 30-second time outs and one 60-second time out. One of those 30-second time outs is referred to as the “use-it-or-lose-it” time out because teams only get to call three 30-second time outs in the second half. In other words, the rules actually incentivize a coach to call a time he out he wouldn’t otherwise take."

The college game is lower scoring, overly physical, there are fewer possessions, spacing and offensive execution are poor for the majority of teams, and coaches call a ridiculous number of timeouts, meaning it can easily take 30 minutes or more to get through five minutes of clock at the end of games like Duke-Utah.

Frankly, I'm glad Geno spoke out, and I hope other prominent figures continue to do so. The idea that people are over-reacting to a dip in scoring and don't appreciate defensive play and grit is the sort of thing that causes people to mock college basketball fans. The NBA game became much more watchable once they instituted rule changes and cleaned up the physical play, and college basketball needs to find a way to get there.

[Gewebe14]

4942

[rsvman]

Sorry, KandG, but I'm with RC. The sport isn't all about offense. College basketball was a great game even when there was no shot clock and no 3-point shot. Making rule changes that are principally designed to increase scoring isn't necessarily going to improve the game.
The real problems are being sacrificed at the altar of this fundamentally flawed concept, in my opinion.

[KandG]

Sorry, KandG, but I'm with RC. The sport isn't all about offense. College basketball was a great game even when there was no shot clock and no 3-point shot. Making rule changes that are principally designed to increase scoring isn't necessarily going to improve the game.
The real problems are being sacrificed at the altar of this fundamentally flawed concept, in my opinion.

And the "real problems" are? (Genuinely curious about this, not being contentious)

[Wander]

And the "real problems" are? (Genuinely curious about this, not being contentious)

Not the OP, but the biggest in-game problem the sport has to me are the excessive stoppages of play near the end of games. It's over the top and would be comedic if it weren't so annoying. I would like to take away a time out from each team AND forbid multiple timeouts being called in a row when no game time has elapsed AND change the every 4 minute timeouts to every 5 minute timeouts (maybe 30 sec or whatever longer to make up for lost ad time).

You mentioned this, but it doesn't really have anything to do with offense/scoring.

[OldPhiKap]

Not the OP, but the biggest in-game problem the sport has to me are the excessive stoppages of play near the end of games. It's over the top and would be comedic if it weren't so annoying. I would like to take away a time out from each team AND forbid multiple timeouts being called in a row when no game time has elapsed AND change the every 4 minute timeouts to every 5 minute timeouts (maybe 30 sec or whatever longer to make up for lost ad time).

You mentioned this, but it doesn't really have anything to do with offense/scoring.

WSJ had an article a few weeks ago, and found that the last two minutes of a game average over ten minutes in real-time.

[rsvman]

And the "real problems" are? (Genuinely curious about this, not being contentious)

The overly physical nature of the game, especially around and near the basket. Illegal screens, holding players, over-the-back on rebounds not called often enough, calling ticky-tacky fouls on the perimeter but allowing the big guys to bang. Carrying, double-dribble, and travelling have also been largely ignored and/or redefined over the past decade or so. The one-and-done rule.

Shortening the shot clock doesn't fix anything. Witness the NIT final last night, which made it all the way into the mid-60s even with an OT using a 30-second shot clock.

[uh_no]

The overly physical nature of the game, especially around and near the basket. Illegal screens, holding players, over-the-back on rebounds not called often enough, calling ticky-tacky fouls on the perimeter but allowing the big guys to bang. Carrying, double-dribble, and travelling have also been largely ignored and/or redefined over the past decade or so. The one-and-done rule.

Shortening the shot clock doesn't fix anything. Witness the NIT final last night, which made it all the way into the mid-60s even with an OT using a 30-second shot clock.

ding ding ding ding ding!!!!

It's ugh to watch.

people say "don't allow so much contact" but then the problem is there's no way to play defense....because guards wrap up the ball like a running back, make it from the three point line to the basket without dribbling and lay it in.

IMO the point is, NO you can't reach and hit the player, but you ought to be able to reach and get the ball...and if the guard is allowed to carry the ball like jerome bettis to the basket, then you have no shot to reach and get the ball, and the only shot you have is to try to reach and get the player.

You know what I call a euro step? a travel.

[weezie]

... Carrying, double-dribble....

Definitely!. At least twice in every game I've seen over the past couple of seasons, in person and on tv.

The travelling, yeah, that's what the pros do all the time but unless the refs are real laser-eyed, they're going to miss that when they're so focused on hand checking and reaching in.

[KandG]

The overly physical nature of the game, especially around and near the basket. Illegal screens, holding players, over-the-back on rebounds not called often enough, calling ticky-tacky fouls on the perimeter but allowing the big guys to bang. Carrying, double-dribble, and travelling have also been largely ignored and/or redefined over the past decade or so. The one-and-done rule.

Shortening the shot clock doesn't fix anything. Witness the NIT final last night, which made it all the way into the mid-60s even with an OT using a 30-second shot clock.

Then in this case, we agree more than we disagree. I've never advocated for a simple shortening of the shot clock, nor have most of the people calling for change such as Jay Bilas or Seth Davis -- though it would help as part of the process.

If the college game is overly physical (as the NBA game was in the 1990s/early 2000s), then the physical play needs to be officiated differently. Changes in rule enforcement made a huge difference in making the NBA much more open & watchable, especially over the last 5 to 7 years, in liberating point guards and improving the spacing of offenses and increasing the role of outside shooters.

I still think the suggestion Davis, Bilas and several others have made are good ones. Whether the NCAA will actually do anything is something I'm less optimistic about.

[JetpackJesus]

ding ding ding ding ding!!!!

It's ugh to watch.

people say "don't allow so much contact" but then the problem is there's no way to play defense....because guards wrap up the ball like a running back, make it from the three point line to the basket without dribbling and lay it in.

IMO the point is, NO you can't reach and hit the player, but you ought to be able to reach and get the ball...and if the guard is allowed to carry the ball like jerome bettis to the basket, then you have no shot to reach and get the ball, and the only shot you have is to try to reach and get the player.

You know what I call a euro step? a travel.

But a proper euro step is not a travel. It's just two steps. The problem is that a number of players seem to be getting away with taking an extra step before the euro step part of their move.

*EDIT* Unrelated to the quoted post, but I've heard a number of commentators state in games this year that the NCAA should give teams fewer time outs. I don't recall if Bilas is among them, but that is certainly a suggetion that would shorten game time and commercial time.

[lotusland]

I just hope if they take the shot clock down to 24 that they also increase the foul out limit to 6 since there will be more possessions and therefore more opportunities to foul. If they didn't do this then it would hurt a team like Duke that traditionally has a short bench

So more fouls and foul shooting is an improvement?

[uh_no]

I just hope if they take the shot clock down to 24 that they also increase the foul out limit to 6 since there will be more possessions and therefore more opportunities to foul. If they didn't do this then it would hurt a team like Duke that traditionally has a short bench

48 minutes. 6 fouls. 8 minutes per foul
40 minutes. 5 fouls. 8 minutes per foul

Are college players THAT incapable of fouling that we can't have the same rate as the NBA?

[grad_devil]

48 minutes. 6 fouls. 8 minutes per foul
40 minutes. 5 fouls. 8 minutes per foul

Are college players THAT incapable of fouling that we can't have the same rate as the NBA?

Dickie V. keeps calling for the 6 foul disqualification, and I wonder why he's so incapable of doing simple math.

[-jk]

So more fouls and foul shooting is an improvement?

If the refs consistently called it, the contact would go way down. And, yes, it'll be ugly for a while.

-jk

[SupaDave]

Easy, all dunks only get one point. Alley-oops and jump shots within the line get two points. Move the free throw line back 3 feet. Give them real jump balls. And finally, move back the line and make it 4 points instead of 3. EXCITING... Or nah?

[bluenorth]

The FIBA rules aren't that bad. As with any "new" set of conditions, they would take some time to adjust to. Coaches argue that you have to rush to run your offense, but it's really a matter of initiating more quickly. Presently it's too common to see a team running it's offense by simply swinging the ball from one side of the court to the other several times, then starting its actual attack after they've burned up 15-20 seconds of the shot clock. With FIBA you only have 8 seconds to cross mid-court so you still have at least 16 seconds to run your sets.

When US teams play in Canada for pre-season games in late August and early September, they usually use FIBA rules. It would be interesting to hear any comments from coaches who've had that experience. I can't recall Duke ever going north for those games, but many other Div. I schools have.

In the short term perhaps the most likely compromise would be to move to a 30 second shot clock. That, plus reducing the number of timeouts, would IMHO make for a better game.

[bluebeagle]

How about if a guy is fouled in the act of shooting and hits the shot he gets no and 1. After all if he hits the shot what advantage did the defensive player get. If he misses the shot he gets three free throws to make two points. One thing it would do would be to stop all these phantom calls where the guy "must of fouled him with the body"!. Then they show the replay and maybe at most the guys jersey brushed up against the shooter.

[Eternal Outlaw]

How about if a guy is fouled in the act of shooting and hits the shot he gets no and 1. After all if he hits the shot what advantage did the defensive player get. If he misses the shot he gets three free throws to make two points. One thing it would do would be to stop all these phantom calls where the guy "must of fouled him with the body"!. Then they show the replay and maybe at most the guys jersey brushed up against the shooter.

Seems to hurt teams trying to come back. Now if a guy gets a lane to the hoop you let him go because 2 is better than possibly 3. If this was the rule, there really is no negative for a team up to not hack the guy. At worst 2 points? Team up would be ecstatic to be able to aggressively challenge without the possibility to have a three point play.

[drcharl]

From the coach who said the men's game was a joke, "And the bottom line is that nobody can score, and they'll tell you it's because of great defense, great scouting, a lot of team work, nonsense, nonsense..."

Final Score of the Woman's Championship Game: UCONN 63 - ND 53.

[uh_no]

From the coach who said the men's game was a joke, "And the bottom line is that nobody can score, and they'll tell you it's because of great defense, great scouting, a lot of team work, nonsense, nonsense..."

Final Score of the Woman's Championship Game: UCONN 63 - ND 53.

Perhaps you missed the part where he said the women's game want far behind?

[SoCalDukeFan]

Link (http://7online.com/sports/mark-cuban-says-horrible-state-of-college-basketball-hurting-nba/642945/)

I think he has some good points.

SoCal