The idea of a shot clock at the high school level has been a topic of debate that has picked up steam recently, with the NFHS turning down the proposal just 2 years ago. 8 states currently use a shot clock, using either 30 or 35 seconds.
So how do the Tennessee high school boys feel about implementing the rule? Every boys coach in the state was sent the survey and there were 244 responses with 66.4% favoring the adoption of a shot clock.
The comments provided some more insight.
Among the comments for adoption were:
- Absolutely 100%. Lets not be the last to adopt this because it will come at some point. Let’s move the game forward and be an early adopter instead of one of the last to comply . Tennessee can be creative and find a way to make this happen ! IT IS GOOD FOR THE GAME AND THE FANS
- The more we mirror the college association the farther along athletes will be.
- The high school game should go hand in hand with the college game. A shot clock makes the game more enjoyable to play, coach, and watch. I support a shot clock at the high school level 100%!
- Makes for a better basketball product. If you require it to play, schools will find a way to fund the shot clocks.
- We are in the entertainment business whether we want to label it or not. Crowd sizes have dropped. Offensively, the shot clock would force the action and create more time and score situations. The shot clock would also help the defenses. Some defenses are having to play for incredible amounts of time (think about it; if your defense is good and the team you’re playing is patient, single possessions can last for well over 1 minute with little or no attacking of the basket).
- If we are going to prepare our kids for the next level this needs to happen.
- Overall, I believe the shot clock is great for the game. It allows the game to be played in different styles, college teams still play uptempo and possession games, but creates a better product in all areas of the basketball experience (coach, player, fan).
- Best prepares players for the next level & will hopefully make the 4th quarter/end of game situations more exciting
- As coaches, administrators, teachers and governing bodies we are supposed to do everything we can to prepare students for the next step. No matter if that is socially, emotionally or academically. As it relates to basketball the same principles should apply. If the next step is college basketball then we should prepare that person or persons with the tools already in place so they can succeed at that level.
The opponents of adoption were concerned about cost and giving more talented teams an advantage:
- We have a hard enough time getting people to work the concession stand, take up money, run the clock, and keep the score book. The refs have enough to keep up with as it is, a shot clock will only screw things up!
- My concern would be who is to cover the cost of installation of shot clocks.
- The officials have a hard enough time officiating the game without paying attention to the shot clock as well.
- Colleges have a hard time in most cases handling the time element on offense. The quality of possessions in college is getting worse. The shot clock would hinder the quality of the high school team game and force the players to become more individually oriented.
- I don’t think many schools can afford it and it requires another adult at the table. We have played games where the game clock operator was a student and it is not a good situation.
- Would be hard for teams less talented or with lesser guard play to compete especially since they voted to keep 3 classes. 1200 enrollment trying to beat 2500 enrollment may need to shorten the game or at least have the option to.
- Shot clock would end up causing more problem than good. Who would be in charge? Would an official have to run it? Who is responsible for cost?