I've been watching the games on ESPN2 today and the announcers keep discussing whether they like the experimental distance (which is a little further back than the regular 3-point line). Most of them have answered that they like it, or that they think that it isn't enough. During the Arkansas-UCONN game one of them made a comment about adopting the NBA 3-point line.

Why is everybody in favor of pushing the 3-point line back further? I am against anything that makes the college game more like the NBA and less like how it works currently (I guess I'm in the "it aint broke so don't fix it" group). Anyway, I was just wondering why they are suddenly acting like the college game needs fixed.

I think people are harkening back to "the old days" when there was no 3-pt line at all in college basketball or something. I think it's dumb that they're tinkering. And adopting the NBA line is beyond ridic.

For a while now, I have heard complaints that the NCAA line was too easy. It does actually goes back to the lore of the "old days". The days of curling off of a pick and hitting the 15 foot jumper. The majority of threes that I see being shot result in dribble drives and then a kick out to a spot shooter a la the NBA.

I like the phrase "Dribble Drive."

As far as the topic, they should get rid of the 3 point shot in college. The players need to learn to shoot the ball between a dunk and a 20 footer. *sigh NBA*

I think they want to move it back b/c some teams that shoot 40% from the 3pt line find it advantageous to just come down and chuck up 3 pointers. I personally like the international 3point line to make it more challanging but not quite NBA range.

There was a game in the tournament a few years ago, where in the first half, one team put on a halfcourt clinic, pick and rolls, extra passes, and built up a nice halftime lead. In the second half, the other team seemed to basically say to itself, "well, we can't compete playing basketball, so let's just throw up a bunch of threes and hope for the best". They did, most of them went in, and they won they game. That sort of thing happens quite a bit, and its the biggest reason to move the line back.

There should be one standard 3 point line. The college one is way too easy, figure 40% on 3's is like shooting 60% on 2s. I'd move it back to the NBA line, or the international distance, at least. Those 3-4 feet make it a much harder shot.

I don't care too much one way or the other, but if I had to choose I would probably rather them just keep it the way it is. One thing I don't understand is the thought behind moving it one foot back. Is one foot really going to make a big difference? I think most people that can shoot from 19'9" will be able to shoot from one foot further away.

For those interested:
International distance (FIBA): 20' 6.25"
College: 19'9"
NBA: 23'9"(farthest) 22' (closest).

Would the 9" to the international distance or 12" back make a difference? I think so, but not sure how much it will drop the percentages. Going back to NBA range would deffinitely make a difference as I belive the NBA percentage on 3's is lower than college (someone would have to check that) and that's with the NBA only having the best of the best 3 point shooters.

I personally like the wider lane of the international game as well FWIW.

Dola - saw this report on the NCAA website. What I don't understand is that they're saying the changes basically made no difference, yet in the same report saying how the change is a good thing. If it doesn't affect anything, then why bother??

Excerpt:
Participating institutions are asked to track three-point field goal percentages, three-second violations, rebounds from free-throw attempts by lane space, and fouls following free-throw attempts. Last year, data was collected from a 134 games, including 117 from Division I, 14 from Division II and three from Division III.

The 2004 information showed that lengthening the three-point line did not create a significant difference in the number of three-point shots made, shots attempted, or shooting percentage during the experiment. In studying the lane, the percentage of offensive (21 percent) and defensive rebounds (79 percent) per game was consistent with the random sample of regular-season games tracked by the committee. There was no significant difference in the number of three-second violations or fouls after free-throw attempt either.