Auriemma's Comments

[waggy]

...regarding Men's Basketball:


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. College men's basketball is so far behind the times it's unbelievable. I mean women's basketball is behind the times. Men's basketball is even further behind the times. Every other major sport in the world has taken steps to help people be better on the offensive end of the floor. They've moved in the fences in baseball, they lowered the mound. They made the strike zone so you need a straw to put through it. And in the NFL you touch a guy it's a penalty. You hit the quarterback, you're out for life. You know, in the NBA, you touch somebody in the perimeter, you whack guys like they used to do when scores were 90 to 75, they changed the rules.

This is entertainment we're talking about. People have to decide, do I want to pay 25 bucks, 30 bucks to go see a college scrum where everybody misses six out of every ten shots they take, or do I want to go to a movie? We're fighting for the entertainment dollar, here, and I have to tell you it's not entertainment from a fan's standpoint.

So that's just -- I'm talking as a fan, not as Geno, Auriemma, the basketball coach.

[GoMuskies]

These comments may be legit....but I have a hard time taking them seriously when they come from a guy who has made a mockery of the women's game by winning national championship after national championship without ever being challenged. He's just doing his job, and doing it better than anyone else, so I don't blame him, but it makes the women's game generally unwatchable.

[JTG]

...regarding Men's Basketball:

Who cares what this clown thinks. Stick to the chicks Geno. Officiating could go a long way to clean up the game.

[ammtd34]

Eh. Whatever.

[bleedXblue]

Gino-

How about them 80-35 games women's college basketball has almost on a daily basis?

Are you kidding me?

[Xville]

As others have said he is probably right, but the guy is a bit of a douche so i don't really care what he says. I don't think it is necessarily the officiating that has made the game a little bit of a drag, it is because no one can shoot and the reason I believe is AAU ball. The best thing for the game would be for AAU to fold up shop and go home. In AAU, no one plays defense and everyone just tries to get the rim and dunk on someone. AAU is also partially responsible for why it takes big men a long time to develop outside of those guys that are top 5-10 recruits. Those big men aren't taught how to shoot, how to have proper footwork...nothing. They are just taller and bigger than everyone so they just throw the ball up and dunk it. Don't get me wrong I think that the officiating is a little bit of an issue, but I think AAU is a much much bigger problem.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Gino-

How about them 80-35 games women's college basketball has almost on a daily basis?

Are you kidding me?

Yeah newsflash Geno, you won your Sweet 16 game by 51 points. Talk about a joke.

[X Factor]

Just compare team shooting percentages between mens and womens.

Men's teams shoot a better percentage from the field and three pointers than womens teams.

He doesn't know what he's talking about.

[LA Muskie]

He's a douche. It really can be left at that.

[BandAid]

Actually, scoring is waaaay down in baseball

[LA Muskie]

Actually, scoring is waaaay down in baseball

Geno suggests re-roiding the game!

[sirthought]

He's absolutely right.

The New York Times reported last month that the NCAA scoring average was the second lowest it had been since 1952, with teams playing at a much slower pace. This year's possessions per game average is "easily the lowest since 2002, and probably the lowest since at least the 1940s," according to the same report.

The shot clock should be shortened.

The lane should be opened up more.

The 3 point line should be same as the NBA.

[xubrew]

He was at a press conference. He was asked a question. He answered it. What's the problem?? He might be a douche, but in this case I think he's right, and he's certainly qualified to give the answer that he did. John Wooden said the same thing many times, and I think it's even more true now than it was when John Wooden was still living. TV ratings and attendance are down. I think that's a strong indication that perhaps he is right.

I think the way the men's game is officiated is a huge problem. Last year, I think they actually had it right when they tried to have the referees officiate the game the way it would have been officiated in the 1980s and 1990s. Everyone went ape shit over the number of fouls being called, but I really think we'd have been better off had they stuck with it. It would have been an eye gouging five or six weeks because no one likes watching parades to the foul line, but after the players adjusted I think the game would have been a lot better. If you watch old NCAA games from the 1980s, not even big bad Georgetown was as physical in the post as most teams are.

I think recruiting is a joke. The AAU circuit seems to consist of every crooked asshat on the planet. Many from the AAU also seem to be in bed with the recruiting services and subscription sites, which makes you question how good some of these highly rated players really are.

Scheduling has gone down. Seemingly no one wants to play good games anymore, which makes for a season that's far less interesting than it used to be.

Seriously, if you go back and watch basketball from 80s and early to mid-90s, the game was a lot better. I don't see how anyone can say that it wasn't. I'm a huge college hoops fan, and I do think the game is digressing more than it's progressing in more ways than one. We're getting to a point, and maybe we're already there, where we wake up one day and wonder why all the arenas are half empty and why the TV ratings suck ox balls. I think because the season ends with the tournament, people forget just how uninteresting the regular season is to so many people compared to what it used to be.

I'm not a huge fan of Geno, but in this particular case, I wish people would listen to him rather than blowing him off. Many things about college basketball are a complete joke.

[smileyy]

There was an article on Grantland talking about the bind the NCAA has created for itself with men's basketball -- they can't make rule changes to make it more entertaining, because then they have to admit that they're putting out an entertainment product, which makes the players entertainers, which brings to light the tremendous amounts of money the NCAA makes off of them.

[GoMuskies]

There was an article on Grantland talking about the bind the NCAA has created for itself with men's basketball -- they can't make rule changes to make it more entertaining, because then they have to admit that they're putting out an entertainment product, which makes the players entertainers, which brings to light the tremendous amounts of money the NCAA makes off of them.

The fact that they bend to the will of television networks at every turn isn't already an admission that the NCAA is putting out an entertainment product?

Grantland sucks. I just like to say that. Because it's true.

[smileyy]

Grantland has a lot of great writers. Let me see if I can find the article....ah, here it is:

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/college-basketballs-scoring-problem/

[sirthought]

Jeff Van Gundy has stated the college game should adopt NBA rules. He said that the offensive player is too hampered and there is little flow.


Most college crowds are more enthusiastic. I think the energy in the arena is usually better in college basketball. I think the college game should adopt more of the NBA-type rules, the shot clock is way too long, too many timeouts breaking the rhythm and the flow of the game. I think the defense is usually way ahead of the offense in college basketball.

Now, I'm not sure about the defense comment and I don't know that it needs to be quite as fast as the NBA, but there are just too many observers out there stating that the college game needs revamping. I wonder if it will happen and who is really fighting it?

[xubrew]

I actually like the shot clock where it is. I think tempo is part of the game, and as long as teams are preventing from stalling the game, I don't mind it being slowed down. Besides, with the defense being so physical, a shorter shot clock would actually make the offense worse because it would force more bad shots. Everyone who wants a shorter shot clock to speed the game up and generate more offense will probably want to rethink that.

I do agree that the college officials should officiate the way the NBA does. Just that change would fix a lot.

[paulxu]

I don't think going to 30 would change what you mention at all. Most of those 5 seconds are spent walking it over the time line.
You could still have all your tempo and get rid of that part, or the first 5 seconds of just bouncing it around out at half court.

24 would change the tempo. And I'm all for that. That's plenty of time.
I'm guessing there is a good chance of 30 next year. I don't think it'll have much of an impact, but should raise the scoring a little.

[xubrew]

I don't think going to 30 would change what you mention at all. Most of those 5 seconds are spent walking it over the time line.
You could still have all your tempo and get rid of that part, or the first 5 seconds of just bouncing it around out at half court.

24 would change the tempo. And I'm all for that. That's plenty of time.
I'm guessing there is a good chance of 30 next year. I don't think it'll have much of an impact, but should raise the scoring a little.

I'd be fine with it at 30, but I'd prefer 35. I wouldn't like it at 24 at all. It eliminates the game within the game of teams trying to control the tempo. The tempo would just be controlled for them. If an up tempo team doesn't want the other team to slow them down, then part of the strategy becomes not letting them.

Of all the things that need fixing I don't think the shot clock comes anywhere close to cracking the top ten, which probably means that's what they'll focus their attention on, which kind of reinforces his point about the game being a joke.

[X-Fan]

I actually like the shot clock where it is. I think tempo is part of the game, and as long as teams are preventing from stalling the game, I don't mind it being slowed down. Besides, with the defense being so physical, a shorter shot clock would actually make the offense worse because it would force more bad shots. Everyone who wants a shorter shot clock to speed the game up and generate more offense will probably want to rethink that.

I do agree that the college officials should officiate the way the NBA does. Just that change would fix a lot.
I'd be on board with this. I like the college game. IMO, the reason offense is "so much worse" in college now than it was in the '80s & '90s is because the best players are underdeveloped and leave after 1 or 2 years. To me, the best part of college basketball is that defense can be the great equalizer. I'm not talking about Havoc or UC's aggressive style, but utilizing solid position, hustle, and effort to stop your opponent from scoring.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I actually like the shot clock where it is. I think tempo is part of the game, and as long as teams are preventing from stalling the game, I don't mind it being slowed down. Besides, with the defense being so physical, a shorter shot clock would actually make the offense worse because it would force more bad shots. Everyone who wants a shorter shot clock to speed the game up and generate more offense will probably want to rethink that.

I do agree that the college officials should officiate the way the NBA does. Just that change would fix a lot.

I would have to disagree big time here. The shot clock is way too long. Shortening it to 30 sec or even 28 would not make offense worse. College basketball teams do not need 35 seconds to get up the court and set up a play.

The shot clock being shortened I think should be priority number 1.

Edit: Maybe not number 1 but top 3 in my opinion. Lowering it would help the game be higher scoring and would eliminate terrible stagnant offenses to some extent.

[xubrew]

I would have to disagree big time here. The shot clock is way too long. Shortening it to 30 sec or even 28 would not make offense worse. College basketball teams do not need 35 seconds to get up the court and set up a play.

The shot clock being shortened I think should be priority number 1.

Edit: Maybe not number 1 but top 3 in my opinion. Lowering it would help the game be higher scoring and would eliminate terrible stagnant offenses to some extent.

I just don't think it would automatically result in higher scoring or better offense. Before the NBA changed the rules, it wasn't uncommon at all to see games end in the 70s or 80s, and they play a much longer game. The shot clock isn't what's hurting the offense. It's the officiating. The offense in college basketball is, for the most part, sucktacular, but it isn't because of the length of the shot clock. It was actually a lot better when there was no shot clock at all. I'm not suggesting that it needs to be lengthened or eliminated, but am just pointing out that the shot clock isnt' what's wrong.

Shortening the shot clock is like using a hammer to fix a loose screw. It's just not what needs to be done. The NBA has a shorter shot clock, and they'll be the first ones to tell you that.

[MADXSTER]

Most people I know prefer watching a college game over an NBA game. So why change the game to be more like the NBA? Maybe the NBA should be more like college. Just sayin.

[XUFan09]

Most people I know prefer watching a college game over an NBA game. So why change the game to be more like the NBA? Maybe the NBA should be more like college. Just sayin.
I think a lot of that has to do with the mid-season motivation of NBA players in a long season.

[xubrew]

I also think more people have a college team to root for than an NBA team to root for. There are ten times as many college teams.

I don't follow the NBA, but I do think the consensus is that the game became a lot better when they changed how it was officiated. I agree with anyone who says the college game should do the same, and agree with almost no one who says it's fine the way it is.

[Chalmers0]

How much press did Geno Auriemma and UConn's women's team get this year before Auriemma made this comment? He's just trying to keep a media spotlight on himself and this comment certainly has worked.

[smileyy]

Most people I know prefer watching a college game over an NBA game. So why change the game to be more like the NBA? Maybe the NBA should be more like college. Just sayin.

I know just as many who think college basketball, except maybe at the highest levels, is unwatchable as compared to the NBA. Anecdotes!

[smileyy]

Nobody who uses a shot clock uses a 35-second shot clock, except men's basketball. Everyone else is 30 or 24 seconds.

[LadyMuskie]

I also think more people have a college team to root for than an NBA team to root for. There are ten times as many college teams.

I don't follow the NBA, but I do think the consensus is that the game became a lot better when they changed how it was officiated. I agree with anyone who says the college game should do the same, and agree with almost no one who says it's fine the way it is.

I don't think the college game is perfect, but anyone who thinks it "should be more like the NBA" hasn't been to an NBA game. They're not that fun to watch. There's a reason why they keep the music blaring over the loudspeakers even when the game is being played. If you live in LA or New York it's more fun to people watch than anything else (i.e., spot the celebrities).

Auriemma says "This is entertainment we're talking about. People have to decide, do I want to pay 25 bucks, 30 bucks to go see a college scrum where everybody misses six out of every ten shots they take, or do I want to go to a movie? We're fighting for the entertainment dollar, here, and I have to tell you it's not entertainment from a fan's standpoint."

The NBA falls behind the NFL, MLB and Nascar in revenue generated. It's not that wildly popular. I bet if we did a poll on this site alone, more people attend NFL or MLB games more regularly than NBA games - if they've attended any at all. A Harris poll conducted last year showed that the popularity of the NBA fell behind the NFL, MLB, auto racing and college football. The NHL was nipping at its heels, and college basketball wasn't far behind either (although it was the least popular).

I don't think Auriemma is concerned with the game itself. I think he's concerned with putting butts in the seats so he can make more money.

[xubrew]

I don't think the college game is perfect, but anyone who thinks it "should be more like the NBA"

Lady, I agree with everything you posted. I only think that the game should be OFFICIATED the way the NBA game is as far as what is and is not a foul. They actually started to do this at the beginning of last year, and it was working. Toward the end of the OOC season, we were seeing some really good games that were fun to watch. But, after everyone (and to be fair, it was pretty much everyone) started complaining about all the fouls being called, they dialed it back to the point to where it is actually more physical now than it was two years ago.

I don't want the game to be like the NBA, and I sure as hell don't favor a 24 second shot clock that forces everyone to play a certain way. I like for there to be a lot of things on the buffet, and when you try and force every game to be of a certain tempo, I think it eliminates a lot of the different strategies and styles of play that so many different teams have.

I just think that the way college basketball, and div1 men's basketball in particular, is officiated is a big detractor to the game's potential quality. Had they stuck with it last year and just said that referees don't need to stop calling fouls, players need to stop fouling, I think it would have worked and we'd have a much better product now. It's not the shot clock that's the problem.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I don't think the college game is perfect, but anyone who thinks it "should be more like the NBA" hasn't been to an NBA game. They're not that fun to watch. There's a reason why they keep the music blaring over the loudspeakers even when the game is being played. If you live in LA or New York it's more fun to people watch than anything else (i.e., spot the celebrities).

Auriemma says "This is entertainment we're talking about. People have to decide, do I want to pay 25 bucks, 30 bucks to go see a college scrum where everybody misses six out of every ten shots they take, or do I want to go to a movie? We're fighting for the entertainment dollar, here, and I have to tell you it's not entertainment from a fan's standpoint."

The NBA falls behind the NFL, MLB and Nascar in revenue generated. It's not that wildly popular. I bet if we did a poll on this site alone, more people attend NFL or MLB games more regularly than NBA games - if they've attended any at all. A Harris poll conducted last year showed that the popularity of the NBA fell behind the NFL, MLB, auto racing and college football. The NHL was nipping at its heels, and college basketball wasn't far behind either (although it was the least popular).

I don't think Auriemma is concerned with the game itself. I think he's concerned with putting butts in the seats so he can make more money.

Well obviously considering the majority of people live in Cincinnati where there is no NBA team.

I am more passionate about college basketball than NBA but that is because my NBA team has sucked for the last 12-15 years. The NBA to me is way more entertaining than baseball. But NBA games are more expensive to go to. I think college needs to make some changes but it doesnt need to have all the same rules as the NBA. The shot clock has to be shortened though. Makes no sense why it is 35 seconds and everyone else plays with a shorter clock. Block/charge needs to be addressed but I dont know how to fix that. Maybe make the circle bigger under the basket? I dont think the 3 point line should be moved back not sure how that would help offense.

I thoroughly enjoy college basketball though so I dont think it has that many problems but I could see how casual fans might think so.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Lady, I agree with everything you posted. I only think that the game should be OFFICIATED the way the NBA game is as far as what is and is not a foul. They actually started to do this at the beginning of last year, and it was working. Toward the end of the OOC season, we were seeing some really good games that were fun to watch. But, after everyone (and to be fair, it was pretty much everyone) started complaining about all the fouls being called, they dialed it back to the point to where it is actually more physical now than it was two years ago.

I don't want the game to be like the NBA, and I sure as hell don't favor a 24 second shot clock that forces everyone to play a certain way. I like for there to be a lot of things on the buffet, and when you try and force every game to be of a certain tempo, I think it eliminates a lot of the different strategies and styles of play that so many different teams have.

I just think that the way college basketball, and div1 men's basketball in particular, is officiated is a big detractor to the game's potential quality. Had they stuck with it last year and just said that referees don't need to stop calling fouls, players need to stop fouling, I think it would have worked and we'd have a much better product now. It's not the shot clock that's the problem.

Yeah but one of the things a lot of people out there complain about in college basketball is that there is a whistle every 5 seconds. So calling more fouls wouldnt fix anything. At least not until the players stopped fouling. I cant tell you how many people I have heard complain about the refs not letting them play and complaining there is a whistle every other time down the court.

I also think they should take a timeout away. Every game at the end of the half coaches are calling the use it or lose it timeout at the end of the half for no reason other than they will lose it if they dont. Lets just lose it.

[drudy23]

but it makes the women's game generally unwatchable.

As opposed to the competitive women's games that are watchable?

[GoMuskies]

I can watch some women's college basketball. The women's NCAA Tournament can actually be kind of great (Jackie Stiles and SW Mo. State come to mind). But now that UConn is SO dominant, it's pointless to watch.

[ammtd34]

Yeah but one of the things a lot of people out there complain about in college basketball is that there is a whistle every 5 seconds. So calling more fouls wouldnt fix anything. At least not until the players stopped fouling.

That was already starting to happen last year.

[ammtd34]

I can watch some women's college basketball. The women's NCAA Tournament can actually be kind of great (Jackie Stiles and SW Mo. State come to mind). But now that UConn is SO dominant, it's pointless to watch.

The Dayton vs. UConn first half might have been the best half of women's basketball I've ever watched. The 2nd half...

[X-Fan]

I can watch some women's college basketball. The women's NCAA Tournament can actually be kind of great (Jackie Stiles and SW Mo. State come to mind). But now that UConn is SO dominant, it's pointless to watch.

Many will not like this statement, but I'll say it anyway. Womens basketball is not enjoyable to watch. I tried. I really did. Back when Amber Harris and Ta'Shia Phillips were at X I did my best to watch and cheer them on. Then they were SECONDS away from a Final Four and Dee Dee Jernigan missed two point blank layups. I was done after that.

Sorry to bring up a sore subject, but basketball played below the rim is not interesting to me.

[94GRAD]

I can watch some women's college basketball. The women's NCAA Tournament can actually be kind of great (Jackie Stiles and SW Mo. State come to mind). But now that UConn is SO dominant, it's pointless to watch.

I thought Jackie Stiles was the lawyer in Seinfeld?

[GoMuskies]

I thought Jackie Stiles was the lawyer in Seinfeld?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrQ-EgjJZsk

[paulxu]

, and I sure as hell don't favor a 24 second shot clock that forces everyone to play a certain way.

That's just the point. It doesn't force everyone to play the same way. It, or the 30 second clock, just take away the stupid down time where players are walking the ball up the court because they've got 25 more seconds to screw around. Or they are standing out at half court dribbling, looking around. You can still have your different offensive sets, run the plays you want to run...you just can't hold the ball for no good reason. The shorter clock eliminates nothing but the 4 corner nonsense.

[X-band '01]

I can watch some women's college basketball. The women's NCAA Tournament can actually be kind of great (Jackie Stiles and SW Mo. State come to mind). But now that UConn is SO dominant, it's pointless to watch.

Xavier would have matched up with SW Missouri State and Stiles had they beaten Purdue in the Elite 8 that year. But humiliating Tennessee in the Sweet 16 was still an awesome way to finish that season.

[xubrew]

Yeah but one of the things a lot of people out there complain about in college basketball is that there is a whistle every 5 seconds. So calling more fouls wouldnt fix anything. At least not until the players stopped fouling. I cant tell you how many people I have heard complain about the refs not letting them play and complaining there is a whistle every other time down the court.

I also think they should take a timeout away. Every game at the end of the half coaches are calling the use it or lose it timeout at the end of the half for no reason other than they will lose it if they dont. Lets just lose it.

EXACTLY!!! The players need to stop fouling. I don't like whistles every five seconds either, but they need to call it that way until the players adjust, which they eventually would. If you want better offense, then the defense cannot simply be allowed to defend by knocking the crap out of anyone before they can make any sort of basketball move. That should be a foul, and back when they used to call those fouls, the game was better and more people liked watching it.

Watch about any ten minute sequence of the 1984 game between Houston and Georgetown. Houston was an explosive offensive team, and Georgetown was considered a fiercely strong defensive team that many teams were afraid of. But, you'll notice they really weren't that physical at all by today's standards. They knew how to position themselves, and they knew how to play defense. It was all skill. Today, it's almost no skill. They just let players knock the crap out of each other, which requires no skill at all. The game used to be better. The play used to be better. I think officiating the game the way it was thirty years ago, and officiating the game the way it is played in the NBA, would absolutely fix it. It DID fix it for the NBA, and it was starting to do the same in college last year. They'd have to stick with it, but players would eventually adjust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLn5-b5zNxU

[xubrew]

I do completely agree on the timeouts.

There are five media timeouts each half (16, 12, 8, 4 and the first called timeout), and as many as eight additional thirty second timeouts on top of that, which last over a minute. Tack on the fifteen minute half, and that's 45 minutes of timeouts. During the NCAA Tournament, it's a lot more than that.

I realize we need TV, so if we must have the media timeouts, than that's all their should be. At most, I'd give each team two. That's it.

[sirthought]

Watch about any ten minute sequence of the 1984 game between Houston and Georgetown. Houston was an explosive offensive team, and Georgetown was considered a fiercely strong defensive team that many teams were afraid of. But, you'll notice they really weren't that physical at all by today's standards. They knew how to position themselves, and they knew how to play defense. It was all skill. Today, it's almost no skill. They just let players knock the crap out of each other, which requires no skill at all. The game used to be better. The play used to be better. I think officiating the game the way it was thirty years ago, and officiating the game the way it is played in the NBA, would absolutely fix it. It DID fix it for the NBA, and it was starting to do the same in college last year. They'd have to stick with it, but players would eventually adjust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLn5-b5zNxU

Watched the first half and thought three things: 1) Man, those were short shorts back then. 2) Houston really played a poor zone defense, especially in the back court. I can understand why today's coaches would want their guys more physical than that. 3) Amazing how much the lack of a three point shot makes this game look different. AND they don't have a shot clock, yet they don't hold it as much as teams do today.

[smileyy]

Team defense is so much better than it used to be. So so much.

[xubrew]

Team defense is so much better than it used to be. So so much.

It is if you watch Wisconsin. They're one of the only teams that knows how to play defense the way you used to have to play it. Most interior defenses now are nothing more than rugby scrums.