Elam Ending.
- Thread starter Dr. H Lecter
- Start date
All in. Eliminates nonsensical, intentional fouling. Every game ends with a game winning shot.
The last four minutes of close college basketball games don’t even resemble the first 36 minutes. They devolve into free throw shooting contests.
The last four minutes of close college basketball games don’t even resemble the first 36 minutes. They devolve into free throw shooting contests.
I’d like to see it in exhibition games in both college and the NBA. Maybe even in the NIT before I judge it. I like the concept but I love the end of game drama missed free throws and buzzer beaters bring.
Hell I thought something happened to big Matt Elam.
From an article:
At the first dead-ball whistle after the time goes below four minutes in the final quarter, the clock gets turned off. At that point, a target score is set, equaling the leading team’s point total plus seven. Then, the first team to hit that target score wins.
So, if my team is up by 10 when the Elam Ending activates, I need to score seven points before my opponent scores 17. It’s still an uphill climb for the trailing team, but it eliminates the parade of intentional fouls that can make the end of games interminable free-throw contests.
This is one of the best descriptions I’ve seen.
This is new and complicated. Therefore I fear it. Therefore I reject it.
I thought we were talking Hell On Wheels
Umm no that would be terrible and thank God it won’t happen. Good grief. What is this flag basketball? Indian basketball?
Just start awarding 2 shots and the ball for intentional fouls or something. You don’t have to resort to gimmicky Super Nintendo nonsense.
Just start awarding 2 shots and the ball for intentional fouls or something. You don’t have to resort to gimmicky Super Nintendo nonsense.
I like it for this event. For college and NBA basketball, no thanks.
I think I get it.
So, four minutes BEFORE the final four minutes, you start intentionally fouling and stopping the clock every way possible, in an effort to cut the lead down before the Elam Ending commences at the 4 minute mark.
But there is even more incentive to disrupt the game and keep fouling, and stopping the clock, because even if you are going to come up a few points short, you’ve still got a chance and being down three when the Elam Ending commences is better than being down seven.
Right?
So, four minutes BEFORE the final four minutes, you start intentionally fouling and stopping the clock every way possible, in an effort to cut the lead down before the Elam Ending commences at the 4 minute mark.
But there is even more incentive to disrupt the game and keep fouling, and stopping the clock, because even if you are going to come up a few points short, you’ve still got a chance and being down three when the Elam Ending commences is better than being down seven.
Right?
Last edited:
Funny enough, the TBT tournament on TV is a "first to 83 points" game. Gotta love basketball's ability to keep evolving.
Last edited:
It's not always 83. The "first to" number depends upon what the leading team's score is at the four minute mark.
I know it sounds like a kooky idea, but it's actually been working well. These games have had exciting endings WITHOUT any of that painfully boring intentional fouling and constant stopping of play that has so marred college ball in recent years.
Last edited:
This!!! The only reason it hasn't happened yet in these games is these coaches aren't even high school JV level.
Last edited:
A
anon_013cn8yrfncx2
Guest
Remember when Seton Hall went like 12 minutes without scoring and the Cats went 10 during the same stretch.
So you can stall until you get a layup?
Maybe pass it around for 10 minutes without shooting.
This is probably the most inane suggestion I've ever seen.
Leave well enough alone.
So you can stall until you get a layup?
Maybe pass it around for 10 minutes without shooting.
This is probably the most inane suggestion I've ever seen.
Leave well enough alone.
Umm... NO. Have you not heard of a shot clock?
The 30 second shot clock obviously prevents that from happening.
Nobody is asking the only question that matters; will this make the NCAA and NBA more money? Because they won't change anything unless there is a financial incentive.
It’s great for TBT but not for college or NBA. All it will do is make teams with actual coaches do what a previous poster said and start fouling before the Elam ending, or some teams will start hack a shaqing the worst free throw shooter on the floor after the Elam ending goes into effect.
Is an Elam ending similar to a happy ending? Asking for a friend.
Yeah let's totally eliminate any chance of any buzzer beater ever, plus cut at least two minutes of good basketball out of almost every single game.
That's exactly what fans want.
That's exactly what fans want.
I'm not so sure about this. Teams are still going to foul like crap in the last four minutes. Fouling isn't only about stopping the clock, it's the gamble of hoping the guy you foul misses and then the hope that you can score on the other end. This rule doesn't change that at all, in fact with no time to worry about it probably extends the game.
? who is Elam and why is he ^%**$%$ing with the ending of games . Go away Elam , whoever you are .
If a game is tied 77-77, and the target score is 79, does that not make that period of time extremely exciting? A game winning shot is the equivalent of a buzzer beater there.
And by good basketball, do you mean intentionally fouling or holding the ball out until the shot clock runs down? Unless a game is extremely close, the last 4 minutes are the worst in a basketball game. Setting a target score also ensures the leading team to continue playing to win rather than not to lose. It also means the game isn’t over until that final point is scored.
Whatever argument you come up with against it, there is an argument to be made for it.
The team behind is the one that typically fouls.
Are you saying that the losing team is going to intentionally put a guy at the free throw line when they only need 8 points to win the game?
Unless a guy is shooting under 50%, that seems really unlikely.
why don't we just play knockout to decide who wins 
except in very rare cases or games where the outcome is 99.9% decided anyway, intentional fouling doesn't start until there's less than a minute remaining. Most sports are played differently in the final moments, basketball is not a special case in need of a fix
except in very rare cases or games where the outcome is 99.9% decided anyway, intentional fouling doesn't start until there's less than a minute remaining. Most sports are played differently in the final moments, basketball is not a special case in need of a fix
You can play the shot clock for a defensive stop. No need at all to foul and give up points. A lot of you need to think it through.
Why just the final four minutes... why not every game be the first to 100 wins and do away with the clock just have a shot clock and half time occurs when a team scores 50 or if you have quarters 25/50/75/100. Oh and win by 2 so 100-99 doesn't end it. Oh the possibilities!
That is true with the way things are now but it doesn't play out that way. Most teams feel they can score easier than they can stop the other team. Once you know you can't stop them the next step is to limit their opportunities to score. No one fouls with the hope of giving up points unless they think that they can score more on their end. Granted it's more risky if it's a close game but the concept of fouling at end of games isn't just to say you the played the game longer than you would have.
We see it all the time, a team down four ends up losing by ten. When you're behind you become desperate and take more risks in hope of getting lucky. I just don't think this would change the fouling problem at all and could extend games even more since there is no clock to run out.
Well, yea. I mean they always look to foul the worst ft shooter and if your team isn't a great ft shooting team you're going get fouled a lot. Who wouldn't trade possibility of one or no points for the chance to score three on the other end?
Because now there's a finite score. Even a bad shooter is going to make around 50%. Every one he hits puts you closer to the final score instead of trying to maximize the offense/defense possessions so you can trade 3-for-2.
Trying to trade buckets 15 times in the last few minutes by fouling and forcing the clock to stop on their offensive possession makes sense. Immediately conceding a chance at two points when a set number of points beats you doesn't.