I saw it implemented in a game once too (TBT?) and thought it was interesting. Not sure if we want to change 125+ years of basketball history tho. Next thing you know we will have 2 first bases in baseball...
A slight difference is that if a lot of your key players foul out while intentionally fouling in the last minute until the clock hits zero, there is not as much of a penalty unless the score ends up tied. in the Elam ending, you wouldn't go as balls to the wall fouling at the 5:00 minute mark since your team most likely will need its key starters in the game to give you a chance to win in the last 4 minutes.
I like it for the 3 on 3 tourneys, which is really a first to 21 in most playgrounds. But for 5 on5 full court? I hate it. Play the clock. If you want to tinker with the rules, add an extra a free throw after a certain number of fouls in the last few minutes. But the Elam ending punishes a team that plays great basketball for 3/4 of the game, by leaving a large open window for a comeback.
Call me crazy, but I think if we just started calling intentional fouls as intentional fouls, which eliminates the incentive by giving the fouled team the ball back no matter what, that would solve the 99% of the problem. Obviously teams would start actually half-assing for the ball to try to avoid it while making sure to foul. But they don't even do that 95% of that time now. Just straight wrap ups.
I blame commentators for the use of the phrase "intentional fouls." There is no penalty for "intentional fouls" in the rules, and not all intentional fouls are "flagrant." Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
You also risk extending their lead….which really hurts you for that final 4 minute run. It is a desperation strategy when it’s now or never….
Fouling doesn’t help close the gap. It’s done because it’s the ONLY option at the end. In Elam…..fouling at the 5 to 4 minute mark would usually increase the gap, thus hurting you. it’s in the team getting fouled favor, that’s why it’s only done in desperation. So, no, smart coaches would not do that. They would keep it as close as possible, then play the toughest they can to try and keep them from scoring 7.
I don't mind a game that comes down to a free throw contest. It is an aspect of the game that requires a basketball skill and good coaching to have the right players on the court for shooting free throws and not turn it over and on the opposite side having players that can make quick decisions about trying for the steal/trap or foul. It is a chess game. And if your team is a poor free throw shooting team they should be penalized in a close game with a lead. Leave the game alone. It ain't broken.
This was my thought. Folks love to bet the over in ncaa basketball. Love me some FTs at the end when I'm hoping for pts to be scored.
True, but in this case he absolutely yelled, "foul, foul, foul" which clearly meant intentional. No way in this case to get around that. The other options you mention can mean anything, but what he said at that time meant one thing, and one thing only.
It’s a neat idea. But I would hate it for your bench players. Bennett Andersen was able to get in the game against Norfolk State. He even got a rebound. So he’ll always have a stat in an NCAA tournament game. If we went to the Elam system, I wonder how often those guys at the end of the bench would get to play? Even with a 20–25, point lead, would coaches let your end of the bench guys play against the other team’s starters? , Or would they leave their starters in, to make sure the game ends and there’s no chance of the other team getting hot and going on a run.
First to 21. Make it take it. If tied at 20 we play a round of horse using cheerleaders to decide the winner
Yep. That "meaningless" 3pt bomb that Uconn hit at the buzzer flipped the over/under (150.5). That shot took it from 149 to 152 Its why I dont like over/unders very much unless its to sweeten a parlay that I feel good about 2025 March Madness Bad Beats: Last-second 3 in Florida-UConn cashes Over | FOX Sports
I am amazed at how many people don’t hate this idea in the OP. A lot to change in basketball before that. Making the fouls intentional would keep the game the same while easier to stick the dagger in. But this turning the clock off at 4 mins is cray. Maybe 2 mins if anything. Also no changing 10ths of a second which is what caused the majority of the times and the change of reffing at the end. Yeah, not for me.
Elam ending means no more overtime, no more do-or-die shots, no more buzzer beaters at all. The game can end at the free throw line. C'mon, man. Too big a price to pay. Just call any foul on a player dribbling in the open an intentional foul.
I think on any foul, after the other team goes over the limit, you should get the choice of free throws or ball out of bounds. Maybe because I always hated the Hack-A-Shaq.
The downside of this, and the other ideas about charging flagrant fouls, is that many games will be decided quite early with this rule. A team up by 4, with possession and 59 seconds left will almost automatically win the game.
Maybe in the last few minutes we play HORSE to determine the outcome. The game is fine the way it is.
