Ken Denlinger's proposal (in his column of March 4) to saddle college basketball with the clock and the three-point ring is based on the odd belief that shooting at baskets with riflearm rapidity is the essence of the game. Fortunately, he stated his principles of evaluation: "The customer ought to get what he paid for," that he finds a game of strategy and elegant defense a kind of "boredom." If Mr. Denlinger wants that sort of thing, let him watch the pros and leave college basketball to those of us who appreciate other talents and skills besides shooting.
College basketball is interesting in proportion that it does not imitate the box-office tactics of the pros. I find a score of 132-128 infinitely more ridiculous than one of 35-32. The present college rules still have some of the spirit of defensive basketball that enhances dribbling, passing, stealing and strategy, talents not necessarily located only in those over two meters tall.Georgetown was applauded this year for preventing shots.
When a Coach Smith of Carolina comes up with a neat four-corner tactic, the other teams will sooner or later devise a way to defeat it, by playing basketball, not by changing the rules.