If you were to be able to go back to the early fifties when I began to watch basketball, it was a different game. You actually had fouls called for contact. The first team that I noticed that changed that was Red Auerbach's Celtics. Their "great defense" was considered no more than the acceptance of a lot of fouls, especially out front. Since it won, it began to be copied. It also seemed that other teams may have pushed a lot with shoulders trying to establish position, but the Celtics were able to get away with slapping of an arm or wrist just enough to free the ball. Once they got the reputation of being a good defensive team, they could get away with it. The other team would be called for a foul if they retaliated. It is that aspect that irritates me.
I agree with MsProud that some coaches take it a bit further than others, and they get the reputation as great defensive coaches. So be it. I think it is simply a tolerance of a given amount of breaking of the rules.
Two years ago, the NCAA said they had told the officials to clean up the game in order to help scoring and create more interest in the game. I saw it for about one half. Then, it was back to normal.
Different conferences tolerate different levels of contact. I hated watching the Big East games when they got three teams in the Final Four. They just beat everyone up, inside and outside the conference.
If officials from the fifties were to call a game today, I doubt either team would have enough players left to play the second half.
I guess that it is a matter of choice. But, I don't want to have different standards for teams with "great defensive coaches." One of the reasons that I love Geno is that while other teams may get to the Elite Eight by fouling and being physical, he just teaches position basketball and passing to set up shots and proceeds to slaughter the defensive geniuses.
