Not too many years ago, a bug-eyed mystic who called himself Baghwan accumulated such a cult following that he was able to afford 50 Rolls-Royce automobiles.
Asked why the Baghwan needed so many luxury cars, a cult spokesman replied: “Because life is a joke.”
Well, I guess that proves not all silly answers are preceded by silly questions.
Speaking of silly, I’m beginning to think the three-point field goal at least at its current college distance of 19 feet, nine inches has become a joke.
If you think Kansas University’s opponents have been cranking threes at a ridiculous pace, you’re right. The 38-trey fusillade Arizona unloaded against KU on Saturday afternoon was unbelievable.
Has the college game reached the point where coaches preach shooting threes because even if you make only 35 to 40 percent of them you’re at least earning one more point per goal?
Ball State defeated Kansas by two points in Hawaii mainly because the Cardinals were launching and, for the most part, hitting their threes. Arizona almost came back from a 17-point deficit against the Jayhawks with its three-point shooting.
After five games, KU’s foes are averaging 27.6 three-point attempts per game. That’s astonishing. Sure, that number will diminish over the long haul, but I’m expecting KU’s opponents to crack the 700 plateau for the first time in 2001-2002.
KU’s foes came close last year with an all-time high of 697 three-point attempts, or an average of 21.1 per game. Two years ago, KU’s opponents averaged 18.7 three-point tries per game. Three years ago, it was 19.2. Four years ago 17.3.
The numbers haven’t climbed every year, but a trend is clear.
Meanwhile, the Jayhawks are shooting fewer and fewer three-point goals. From a high of 610 attempts during that memorable 35-4 season of 1997-98, the Jayhawks dipped to 483 attempts the next year, 463 two years ago and 465 last year.
Hard to believe, but in 33 games last season, KU’s foes attempted 232 more three-point goals than the Jayhawks the widest gulf for a KU team since the three-pointer was legislated prior to the 1986-87 season.
More and more coaches, it would seem, are committed to living or dying by the three-point goal because the odds are with them. Unless a coach simply doesn’t have any three-point shooters and shame on him if he doesn’t trading two points for three is like shooting fish in a water glass.
Football has been cheated because regardless of the length of a placement it still counts for just three points. If a field goal in basketball is worth one more point from a mere 19 feet, nine inches, shouldn’t a football field goal from 40 yards and beyond be worth four points?
I’m not laboring under a misconception the NCAA will abolish the three-point goal in basketball. No way will the trey be trashed. It’s too much of a fan favorite and it’s too much of an equalizer. Thanks to the three-point goal, no lead is safe.
Mediocre players become good players if they have the knack for hitting the long-ranger. Good players become great players if they can nail the three.
Take Arizona’s Jason Gardner a good playmaker, a good defender and a good passer. But Gardner is also a born three-point shooter. Gardner possesses an amazingly quick release and his range is well beyond the painted stripe.
Gardner is one player who wouldn’t be affected if the arc were moved back two or three feet. Most players would be, however, and that’s why coaches will always balk at extending the arc. Potential reductions of firepower do not enhance a coach’s livelihood.
KU has enough weaponry that it doesn’t need the three. And it doesn’t take a scouting report to convince a coach the best way and perhaps the only way to defeat Kansas is to shoot three-pointers by the gross and hope enough of them go through the net.
Not too many years ago, a bug-eyed mystic who called himself Baghwan accumulated such a cult following that he was able to afford 50 Rolls-Royce automobiles.
Asked why the Baghwan needed so many luxury cars, a cult spokesman replied: “Because life is a joke.”
Well, I guess that proves not all silly answers are preceded by silly questions.
Speaking of silly, I’m beginning to think the three-point field goal at least at its current college distance of 19 feet, nine inches has become a joke.
If you think Kansas University’s opponents have been cranking threes at a ridiculous pace, you’re right. The 38-trey fusillade Arizona unloaded against KU on Saturday afternoon was unbelievable.
Has the college game reached the point where coaches preach shooting threes because even if you make only 35 to 40 percent of them you’re at least earning one more point per goal?
Ball State defeated Kansas by two points in Hawaii mainly because the Cardinals were launching and, for the most part, hitting their threes. Arizona almost came back from a 17-point deficit against the Jayhawks with its three-point shooting.
After five games, KU’s foes are averaging 27.6 three-point attempts per game. That’s astonishing. Sure, that number will diminish over the long haul, but I’m expecting KU’s opponents to crack the 700 plateau for the first time in 2001-2002.
KU’s foes came close last year with an all-time high of 697 three-point attempts, or an average of 21.1 per game. Two years ago, KU’s opponents averaged 18.7 three-point tries per game. Three years ago, it was 19.2. Four years ago 17.3.
The numbers haven’t climbed every year, but a trend is clear.
Meanwhile, the Jayhawks are shooting fewer and fewer three-point goals. From a high of 610 attempts during that memorable 35-4 season of 1997-98, the Jayhawks dipped to 483 attempts the next year, 463 two years ago and 465 last year.
Hard to believe, but in 33 games last season, KU’s foes attempted 232 more three-point goals than the Jayhawks the widest gulf for a KU team since the three-pointer was legislated prior to the 1986-87 season.
More and more coaches, it would seem, are committed to living or dying by the three-point goal because the odds are with them. Unless a coach simply doesn’t have any three-point shooters and shame on him if he doesn’t trading two points for three is like shooting fish in a water glass.
Football has been cheated because regardless of the length of a placement it still counts for just three points. If a field goal in basketball is worth one more point from a mere 19 feet, nine inches, shouldn’t a football field goal from 40 yards and beyond be worth four points?
I’m not laboring under a misconception the NCAA will abolish the three-point goal in basketball. No way will the trey be trashed. It’s too much of a fan favorite and it’s too much of an equalizer. Thanks to the three-point goal, no lead is safe.
Mediocre players become good players if they have the knack for hitting the long-ranger. Good players become great players if they can nail the three.
Take Arizona’s Jason Gardner a good playmaker, a good defender and a good passer. But Gardner is also a born three-point shooter. Gardner possesses an amazingly quick release and his range is well beyond the painted stripe.
Gardner is one player who wouldn’t be affected if the arc were moved back two or three feet. Most players would be, however, and that’s why coaches will always balk at extending the arc. Potential reductions of firepower do not enhance a coach’s livelihood.
KU has enough weaponry that it doesn’t need the three. And it doesn’t take a scouting report to convince a coach the best way and perhaps the only way to defeat Kansas is to shoot three-pointers by the gross and hope enough of them go through the net.
Not too many years ago, a bug-eyed mystic who called himself Baghwan accumulated such a cult following that he was able to afford 50 Rolls-Royce automobiles.
Asked why the Baghwan needed so many luxury cars, a cult spokesman replied: “Because life is a joke.”
Well, I guess that proves not all silly answers are preceded by silly questions.
Speaking of silly, I’m beginning to think the three-point field goal at least at its current college distance of 19 feet, nine inches has become a joke.
If you think Kansas University’s opponents have been cranking threes at a ridiculous pace, you’re right. The 38-trey fusillade Arizona unloaded against KU on Saturday afternoon was unbelievable.
Has the college game reached the point where coaches preach shooting threes because even if you make only 35 to 40 percent of them you’re at least earning one more point per goal?
Ball State defeated Kansas by two points in Hawaii mainly because the Cardinals were launching and, for the most part, hitting their threes. Arizona almost came back from a 17-point deficit against the Jayhawks with its three-point shooting.
After five games, KU’s foes are averaging 27.6 three-point attempts per game. That’s astonishing. Sure, that number will diminish over the long haul, but I’m expecting KU’s opponents to crack the 700 plateau for the first time in 2001-2002.
KU’s foes came close last year with an all-time high of 697 three-point attempts, or an average of 21.1 per game. Two years ago, KU’s opponents averaged 18.7 three-point tries per game. Three years ago, it was 19.2. Four years ago 17.3.
The numbers haven’t climbed every year, but a trend is clear.
Meanwhile, the Jayhawks are shooting fewer and fewer three-point goals. From a high of 610 attempts during that memorable 35-4 season of 1997-98, the Jayhawks dipped to 483 attempts the next year, 463 two years ago and 465 last year.
Hard to believe, but in 33 games last season, KU’s foes attempted 232 more three-point goals than the Jayhawks the widest gulf for a KU team since the three-pointer was legislated prior to the 1986-87 season.
More and more coaches, it would seem, are committed to living or dying by the three-point goal because the odds are with them. Unless a coach simply doesn’t have any three-point shooters and shame on him if he doesn’t trading two points for three is like shooting fish in a water glass.
Football has been cheated because regardless of the length of a placement it still counts for just three points. If a field goal in basketball is worth one more point from a mere 19 feet, nine inches, shouldn’t a football field goal from 40 yards and beyond be worth four points?
I’m not laboring under a misconception the NCAA will abolish the three-point goal in basketball. No way will the trey be trashed. It’s too much of a fan favorite and it’s too much of an equalizer. Thanks to the three-point goal, no lead is safe.
Mediocre players become good players if they have the knack for hitting the long-ranger. Good players become great players if they can nail the three.
Take Arizona’s Jason Gardner a good playmaker, a good defender and a good passer. But Gardner is also a born three-point shooter. Gardner possesses an amazingly quick release and his range is well beyond the painted stripe.
Gardner is one player who wouldn’t be affected if the arc were moved back two or three feet. Most players would be, however, and that’s why coaches will always balk at extending the arc. Potential reductions of firepower do not enhance a coach’s livelihood.
KU has enough weaponry that it doesn’t need the three. And it doesn’t take a scouting report to convince a coach the best way and perhaps the only way to defeat Kansas is to shoot three-pointers by the gross and hope enough of them go through the net.
Not too many years ago, a bug-eyed mystic who called himself Baghwan accumulated such a cult following that he was able to afford 50 Rolls-Royce automobiles.
Asked why the Baghwan needed so many luxury cars, a cult spokesman replied: “Because life is a joke.”
Well, I guess that proves not all silly answers are preceded by silly questions.
Speaking of silly, I’m beginning to think the three-point field goal at least at its current college distance of 19 feet, nine inches has become a joke.
If you think Kansas University’s opponents have been cranking threes at a ridiculous pace, you’re right. The 38-trey fusillade Arizona unloaded against KU on Saturday afternoon was unbelievable.
Has the college game reached the point where coaches preach shooting threes because even if you make only 35 to 40 percent of them you’re at least earning one more point per goal?
Ball State defeated Kansas by two points in Hawaii mainly because the Cardinals were launching and, for the most part, hitting their threes. Arizona almost came back from a 17-point deficit against the Jayhawks with its three-point shooting.
After five games, KU’s foes are averaging 27.6 three-point attempts per game. That’s astonishing. Sure, that number will diminish over the long haul, but I’m expecting KU’s opponents to crack the 700 plateau for the first time in 2001-2002.
KU’s foes came close last year with an all-time high of 697 three-point attempts, or an average of 21.1 per game. Two years ago, KU’s opponents averaged 18.7 three-point tries per game. Three years ago, it was 19.2. Four years ago 17.3.
The numbers haven’t climbed every year, but a trend is clear.
Meanwhile, the Jayhawks are shooting fewer and fewer three-point goals. From a high of 610 attempts during that memorable 35-4 season of 1997-98, the Jayhawks dipped to 483 attempts the next year, 463 two years ago and 465 last year.
Hard to believe, but in 33 games last season, KU’s foes attempted 232 more three-point goals than the Jayhawks the widest gulf for a KU team since the three-pointer was legislated prior to the 1986-87 season.
More and more coaches, it would seem, are committed to living or dying by the three-point goal because the odds are with them. Unless a coach simply doesn’t have any three-point shooters and shame on him if he doesn’t trading two points for three is like shooting fish in a water glass.
Football has been cheated because regardless of the length of a placement it still counts for just three points. If a field goal in basketball is worth one more point from a mere 19 feet, nine inches, shouldn’t a football field goal from 40 yards and beyond be worth four points?
I’m not laboring under a misconception the NCAA will abolish the three-point goal in basketball. No way will the trey be trashed. It’s too much of a fan favorite and it’s too much of an equalizer. Thanks to the three-point goal, no lead is safe.
Mediocre players become good players if they have the knack for hitting the long-ranger. Good players become great players if they can nail the three.
Take Arizona’s Jason Gardner a good playmaker, a good defender and a good passer. But Gardner is also a born three-point shooter. Gardner possesses an amazingly quick release and his range is well beyond the painted stripe.
Gardner is one player who wouldn’t be affected if the arc were moved back two or three feet. Most players would be, however, and that’s why coaches will always balk at extending the arc. Potential reductions of firepower do not enhance a coach’s livelihood.
KU has enough weaponry that it doesn’t need the three. And it doesn’t take a scouting report to convince a coach the best way and perhaps the only way to defeat Kansas is to shoot three-pointers by the gross and hope enough of them go through the net.
