it's going on the basic theory that 20 seconds has been given to clear on initial possession. and that (mostly) teams don't need to set up a full clear from a faceoff win. hence, 80 - 20 = 60. it's the same idea with resets.Sportin' Life wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 6:04 pmJust wondering why shortening the shot clock following the face off is seen as an improvement by some. It seems like a rule designed to devalue a possession. As a result, in Paul's Lacrosse League it has lead to some teams dumping the ball out of bounds after winning the face-off in order to set up their D (yawn). If Rabil wants to run his league that way he can go ahead but I'd hate for the college game, which is superior in so many ways, to blindly follow what the PLL does as it tries to carve out its niche in a niche sport.wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 12:59 pm
to the maybe most impactful discussion, faceoffs, which was the genesis of this thread and discussed at some length at the end of last year by coaches:
- 60 seconds off the face. i think this is a done deal. having rabil write rules isn't exactly a blueprint, but the pros anyway got us the shot clock, and it has improved the game, imo.
as far as pll, that was starting @ 52. so a drop of 20 is more egregious. and that game's much faster anyway. not really a comp
all why 60 sounds fine. that said, if the trend is your friend, a better bet would be that the time(s) will drop in the future before they go higher..