Ivy League stalemate

When it comes to the possibility of pushing the three-point line back, a discussion that will happen this weekend in Atlanta, the Ivy League representatives have come to a split decision.

Well, by Ivy League representatives I mean the four people who called me, three of which not in time for an article today describing the common feelings about the possibility of extending the three-point line from 19-feet 9-inches to 20-feet 6-inches, as well as widening the lane a foot on either side.

Cornell coach Steve Donahue and Brown guard Damon Huffman believe something needs to happen with the three-point shot, while Brown coach Craig Robinson and Yale coach James Jones are starkly opposed to any changes.

With their positions, each is speaking from the stance which will first benefit the Ivy League and their respective teams, and after those priorities focus on the bettering of the game of college basketball in general.

Donahue expressed concern that the three is too easy now -- that it is just in the flow of the offense instead of being a shot that is simply harder to make than others. As for the effect on the Ancient Eight, he thinks that since the conference gets guys who are more on the skillful shooter side than the athletic side, they will generally still be able to hit form the longer distance. This means that for a team which has everyone on the court attempt wide open threes, some of these guys might be discouraged.

Notable quotes:
On three-point line: "I think for teams that shoot the ball well it would help, and obviously we utilize that here. I think in general our league would be helped by it. When we play major teams, higher level teams, with more athleticism and size ... that would spread the floor and allow us to utilize our abilities there, and obviously we'd be more competitive against more athletic teams."

On widening the lane: "it takes people away from the rim and stops the continuing pounding of the ball inside. I don't necessarily think our game has gotten to that point. "If you don't widen the lane and continue to move the three-point line out, there's some spacing that the offense can generally use better, that can continue the flow of the game, because you're going to either have to go out on that guy or not."

On decision two years ago: "It was really close two years ago, almost to the point that we all approved it. And then all of a sudden everyone couldn't agree on it, and they dropped it."

Damon Huffman, a rising senior guard for Brown and a 45.5% shooter from downtown, was in Europe so he wasn't able to do a full phone interview, but said in an e-mail that he too believes the line should be moved back.

Robinson is against the adjustments, for one, because the change is not that big, saying that only a half-step won't be enough to discourage mediocre shooters, and people will easily adjust. He also believes that the lack of a semi-circle to denote where taking a charge is possible is an issue that should be addressed as well.

Notable quotes:
On the three-point line: "I like the three-point line how it is. If they move it back to the international line then everybody will adjust and I don't think it will make that much of a difference, it's not like they're moving it back to the NBA line, which would make a huge difference."

Difficulty of a three for his team: "We're not making every shot from there, so it's not too close, if you know what I mean. It's still assured that it's hard to make."

On widening the lane: "I think widening the lane is a negative for teams who have big, imposing centers. So I'd be in favor of it."

Jones thinks the game is working fine how it is; if it's broken don't fix it. He wants to maintain a true post presence, and not just shift to play the international style, which could happen if the line was pushed back and the lane was widened. It all depends on the team's style of play, and unlike some Ivy teams, Yale is less guard-heavy and wants to maintain the current balance between inside and outside.

Notable quotes:
On the changes to be discussed: "I don't like them. I like the way the game is right now, and to me it's not broken so we don't need to fix it."

On the difficulty of a three: "If you look at the percentages around the country, it's not easy for many guys."

On widening the lane: "It becomes more of a European-style game and there's no true post presence anymore, and [that] is something I particularly like in college basketball."

Total roundup:
Three-point line moved to international length (nine inches further out):
Donahue - Yes
Huffman - Yes
Robinson - No
Jones - No

Lane widened (either one foot on each side, or the European trapezoid):
Donahue - No
Robinson - Yes
Jones - No, but perhaps Yes if three-point line is moved back

If I was Penn coach Glen Miller (who did not wish to comment on the hypotheticals), I would probably be against moving the line back, because the Quakers give so many of their players (and by so many I mean all) the green light from deep. If the line was extended, this might be enough to discourage the Brennan Votels and Justin Reillys from launching three-balls.
However, with all of the backdoor cuts Miller utilizes, opening up the court - and especially widening the paint area - would make those cuts a little bit easier, making the decision that much harder.

As for me, personally, I think the shot is way too easy. Three points are supposed to be rewarded for a tougher shot, but a hard layup or a post move is often more difficult than hitting a three. Widening the lane I think is unnecessary, because the game has not gotten to the point that the physicality should be toned down through keeping forwards further from the basket.