By RICHIE HALL
sports@readthereporter.com
Your views can evolve over time.
Mine certainly have. That includes a topic that might change how Indiana high school basketball games are played next season.
Kyle Neddenriep of the Indianapolis Star reported last week that shot clocks might be coming to Indiana games next season. After the Indiana Basketball Coaches Association announced the results of a survey that said 68 percent of coaches polled favored a shot clock, a proposal will go before the IHSAA at its Feb. 20 executive committee meeting for a 35-second shot clock.
The IHSAA will consider the IBCA’s proposal at its May 4 board of directors meeting. Since Indiana is very, um, passionate about high school ball, there have been opinions.
What others are saying
The Kouts Twitter/X basketball account (@MustangBasketb1) replied to Neddenriep’s post and disagreed with the need for a shot clock. “We are not AAU, so let teams find a way to compete when they are underdogs,” the account said.
That led to a response from Jim Reamer, the owner of the basketball news website courtsideindiana.com and one of the more knowledgeable people about Indiana basketball.
Reamer has been supportive of a shot clock for years. “It eliminates a lot of late game fouling, improving the end of games,” he said. “No one enjoys teams fouling with [two to three] minutes to go.”
Andrew Smith, the sports media director for New Palestine High School and a former girls coach, said he wasn’t in favor. Smith said no clock “allows teams with good ballhandlers to be able to match up against a bigger, faster, team,” although he did acknowledge that it prevents teams from “sitting on a lead and taking [one to two] minutes off per possession.”
“If I’m down three with a minute to go, with no clock, I likely have to foul,” said Smith. “With a clock, I can play defense because we know we’re getting a possession back.”
What I think
The topic of shot clocks has been around for a while. About 10 years ago, if someone had asked me about using shot clocks, I would’ve been a hard “No.” I simply didn’t think it was necessary, and I was concerned about the cost of purchasing them. We’ll get to that in a second.
But as time has gone on, I have softened my view. The main reason is because of what Smith mentioned: teams sitting on a lead and passing the ball around to eat up the game clock. I’ve seen teams do that with a lead of less than five points – make a basket, get the ball back and play keep-away until the final buzzer.
Is that within the rules? Yes. But does it make for compelling basketball? Not really. As Reamer noted, at that point the losing team’s only option is to foul, and it’s not much fun to watch the final two minutes of a game become 10 minutes because of endless free throws.
So, let’s give shot clocks a try. I’ve noticed that several of our big schools already have shot clocks, so they will be ready if and when the clocks are approved.
Now, there are two logistical hurdles to overcome. The first one, as I mentioned before, is obvious: shot clocks are expensive. The Daktronics website lists a pair of game time shot clocks – a combo version – at over $5,000. If shot clocks are mandated, there should be some financial compensation available for schools that have a limited budget.
Then there is the matter of personnel. You will need someone to operate the shot clock. I don’t think this is an issue, though – you’re paying someone to push a few buttons on a control pad. I’m certain that schools can find someone capable of that complicated task.
Adding shot clocks will take some getting used to, but they might make basketball in Indiana better in the long run. They also could make the game more fun – and shouldn’t that still be the main point of high school sports?
Richie Hall has covered high school sports for more than 25 years, 18 of those years in Hamilton County. You can email him at sports@readthereporter.com.
