UIL on shot clock usage

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

[Tigers94]

Good. Hopefully it'll be fully implemented in a few years.

They should have sent them film from that Silsbee/Lumberton game from a few years ago.

No more trash basketball.

[AggiesAreWe]

I hope Texas high school basketball never gets a shot clock in my lifetime.

[oldman]

15 hours ago, Tigers94 said:

Good. Hopefully it'll be fully implemented in a few years.

They should have sent them film from that Silsbee/Lumberton game from a few years ago.

No more trash basketball.

So using strategy and coaching to give your team a chance to win is trash basketball?

[BBfan061]

16 hours ago, AggiesAreWe said:

I hope Texas high school basketball never gets a shot clock in my lifetime.

Same

[rupert3]

Definitely the same here.  No shot clock

[PlayActionPass]

My dad referees high school basketball in Arkansas and he said the implementation of the shot clock has made the game better across the board.

I hope it happens and soon. Not a fan of watching a dribbling and passing exhibition with ZERO interest in scoring simply because you can't defend the other team. There are much more creative and innovative ways to compete against a more talented or more athletic opponent. 

 

[No-look1]

On 6/13/2026 at 7:37 PM, AggiesAreWe said:

I hope Texas high school basketball never gets a shot clock in my lifetime.

You might want to rethink that because it’s most likely coming soon. lol 

[scoopno1]

The shot clock idea is a terrible idea. Great coaches like the one at Argyle know how to coach and teach players to be disciplined and take great shots. Several times they battled Silsbee to a standstill and coach Sigler once told me the Argyle told me that the Argyle coach once said he would play Silsbee every week if he could. That goes way back. When I was in high school in Arkansas Coach Kaundart had a great team year after year. He was winning state championships and he had a player Almer Lee who was maybe the best high school player I ever saw. HE averaged 13 or 14 points per game. After winning championships he went to the all star game after his senior year and set a new scoring record at around 50 points. In those days freshman did not play in the SWC and there were no black players at Arkansas. He was the first black player at Arkansas and was the sophomore of the year in the SWC. He had a bad knee injury his senior year and his career did not continue. His time is passed but he was great in either style of play. He did not need a shot clock to prove it. 

[Mamba]

On 6/13/2026 at 7:37 PM, AggiesAreWe said:

I hope Texas high school basketball never gets a shot clock in my lifetime.

Every other level of basketball has one, what would it hurt. No one wants to evolve with the times . Not all change is bad !!!!

[AggiesAreWe]

1 hour ago, Mamba said:

Every other level of basketball has one, what would it hurt. No one wants to evolve with the times . Not all change is bad !!!!

Those other levels can go get their talent while most high schools have to play with the talent (or lack thereof) that lives within the district. I think a coach should have the option to play the style that benefits his/her team the most for success. If it's a deliberate style (not holding the ball in a huddle like what Lumberton tried to do with no real intent on running an offense) then so be it. If it takes a minute to a minute and a half to run your offense aka Argyle, Kingwood, Central Heights, etc., then what's the harm?

I want diversity in the game. I like seeing different styles being played. Shot clock basically makes everyone play the same. Most coaches and teams that want a shot clock already put the ball up within 45 seconds of the possession. Doesn't help them offensively. They just don't want to have to defend that long.

The shot clock is just not needed at the high school level.

[Mamba]

14 hours ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Those other levels can go get their talent while most high schools have to play with the talent (or lack thereof) that lives within the district. I think a coach should have the option to play the style that benefits his/her team the most for success. If it's a deliberate style (not holding the ball in a huddle like what Lumberton tried to do with no real intent on running an offense) then so be it. If it takes a minute to a minute and a half to run your offense aka Argyle, Kingwood, Central Heights, etc., then what's the harm?

I want diversity in the game. I like seeing different styles being played. Shot clock basically makes everyone play the same. Most coaches and teams that want a shot clock already put the ball up within 45 seconds of the possession. Doesn't help them offensively. They just don't want to have to defend that long.

The shot clock is just not needed at the high school level.

I understand the district‑talent argument, but let’s be real — lack of talent isn’t the other team’s fault. Every coach has to build around what they’ve got. Some schools have hoopers, some don’t. That’s the nature of high school sports.

But that’s exactly why a shot clock doesn’t hurt the game. It doesn’t force anyone to play fast. It just forces everyone to play basketball. You can still run deliberate offense. You can still control tempo. You can still grind out possessions. A 35–40 second clock gives you more than enough time to run multiple actions.

What it removes is the ability to stall for two minutes without any intent to score. That’s not “strategy.” That’s hiding behind the clock because you don’t have the talent to compete straight up.

And diversity doesn’t disappear. College has a shot clock and you still see:

• Princeton offenses
• Ball‑screen heavy systems
• Motion teams
• Post‑dominant teams
• Pack‑line defenses
All completely different identities. The clock doesn’t erase style — it erases stalling.

Most teams who want a shot clock already shoot within 45 seconds anyway. They’re not asking for help on offense. They’re asking for a rule that keeps the game competitive and keeps kids developing real basketball skills.

High school players deserve:

• More possessions
• Real end‑of‑game situations
• Preparation for the next level
A shot clock doesn’t make everyone play the same. It just prevents one team from turning the game into a freeze‑tag contest because they don’t have the talent to compete possession‑to‑possession.

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

4 hours ago, Mamba said:

I understand the district‑talent argument, but let’s be real — lack of talent isn’t the other team’s fault. Every coach has to build around what they’ve got. Some schools have hoopers, some don’t. That’s the nature of high school sports.

But that’s exactly why a shot clock doesn’t hurt the game. It doesn’t force anyone to play fast. It just forces everyone to play basketball. You can still run deliberate offense. You can still control tempo. You can still grind out possessions. A 35–40 second clock gives you more than enough time to run multiple actions.

What it removes is the ability to stall for two minutes without any intent to score. That’s not “strategy.” That’s hiding behind the clock because you don’t have the talent to compete straight up.

And diversity doesn’t disappear. College has a shot clock and you still see:

• Princeton offenses
• Ball‑screen heavy systems
• Motion teams
• Post‑dominant teams
• Pack‑line defenses
All completely different identities. The clock doesn’t erase style — it erases stalling.

Most teams who want a shot clock already shoot within 45 seconds anyway. They’re not asking for help on offense. They’re asking for a rule that keeps the game competitive and keeps kids developing real basketball skills.

High school players deserve:

• More possessions
• Real end‑of‑game situations
• Preparation for the next level
A shot clock doesn’t make everyone play the same. It just prevents one team from turning the game into a freeze‑tag contest because they don’t have the talent to compete possession‑to‑possession.

Me personally idc if there's a shot clock or not, but after reading this post he's not wrong. 🤷🏾‍♂️ 

[rupert3]

Who is gonna pay for it, cash strapped schools sure can't.  New score keeper, new equipment etc,  It is not needed.

[Texas Hooper]

23 minutes ago, rupert3 said:

Who is gonna pay for it, cash strapped schools sure can't.  New score keeper, new equipment etc,  It is not needed.

They do it in football dont they. They have a play clock keeper at all levels. At most you raise the door ticket $1. 

[Texas Hooper]

Dont understand if its such a big push back. Those same "great" coaches will have a strategy for a shot clock also. I know when I played with one in college our coach had his strategy for making offenses get under 12 seconds on the shot clock. We even had a play where when the clock got to 10 seconds we automictically shifted into a box and one on whomever had the ball. Great coaches will always thrive by exploiting rules. 

[rupert3]

Exploiting rules LOL

[AggiesAreWe]

8 hours ago, Mamba said:

I understand the district‑talent argument, but let’s be real — lack of talent isn’t the other team’s fault. Every coach has to build around what they’ve got. Some schools have hoopers, some don’t. That’s the nature of high school sports.

But that’s exactly why a shot clock doesn’t hurt the game. It doesn’t force anyone to play fast. It just forces everyone to play basketball. You can still run deliberate offense. You can still control tempo. You can still grind out possessions. A 35–40 second clock gives you more than enough time to run multiple actions.

What it removes is the ability to stall for two minutes without any intent to score. That’s not “strategy.” That’s hiding behind the clock because you don’t have the talent to compete straight up.

And diversity doesn’t disappear. College has a shot clock and you still see:

• Princeton offenses
• Ball‑screen heavy systems
• Motion teams
• Post‑dominant teams
• Pack‑line defenses
All completely different identities. The clock doesn’t erase style — it erases stalling.

Most teams who want a shot clock already shoot within 45 seconds anyway. They’re not asking for help on offense. They’re asking for a rule that keeps the game competitive and keeps kids developing real basketball skills.

High school players deserve:

• More possessions
• Real end‑of‑game situations
• Preparation for the next level
A shot clock doesn’t make everyone play the same. It just prevents one team from turning the game into a freeze‑tag contest because they don’t have the talent to compete possession‑to‑possession.

Preparation for the next level? You mean the 10% of all of Texas high school basketball players that actually play next level? A shot clock is needed for those players?

What about the 90% that will not play next level? What about teams across the state that don't have a single college prospect on their roster or haven't had any in many years? I know for a fact that those teams are in the vast majority but we need to implement a rule to benefit the "elite" teams?

I totally understand the complaint about teams that simply hold the ball with no intention of running an offense. Teams that hold it to try and keep the score down and not get blown out. Particularly when that team is behind. (aka Lumberton/Silsbee game). I don't like that as well. It's not basketball. But I have watched plenty of basketball in my 62 years and I can honestly state that those instances are anomalies. You might find 6-10 games per season out of the 1000's of games played where a team holds the ball with no intent on running an offense. But we should implement a shot clock because of that?

I am all for what makes the game better for EVERYONE. Not just for the select few.

[Texas Hooper]

35 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Preparation for the next level? You mean the 10% of all of Texas high school basketball players that actually play next level? A shot clock is needed for those players?

What about the 90% that will not play next level? What about teams across the state that don't have a single college prospect on their roster or haven't had any in many years? I know for a fact that those teams are in the vast majority but we need to implement a rule to benefit the "elite" teams?

I totally understand the complaint about teams that simply hold the ball with no intention of running an offense. Teams that hold it to try and keep the score down and not get blown out. Particularly when that team is behind. (aka Lumberton/Silsbee game). I don't like that as well. It's not basketball. But I have watched plenty of basketball in my 62 years and I can honestly state that those instances are anomalies. You might find 6-10 games per season out of the 1000's of games played where a team holds the ball with no intent on running an offense. But we should implement a shot clock because of that?

I am all for what makes the game better for EVERYONE. Not just for the select few.

I agree with you on the 90% 10% thing, but I do think most argue against it because the think of the 24 second clock. That IS for ELITE players. But watching it in other states and college a 35-40 second clock won't change the game much but will stop the holding of the ball at the end of games like you stated.  Many coaches got away from emphasizing free throw shooting.