(07-16-2018 02:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 01:40 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 12:29 PM)stever20 Wrote:  It's never going to change in real competitive basketball. Never.

I disagree. The foul fest at the end of the games today has made basketball far less watchable. The beauty of basketball is in watching the motion offense and watching really stingy defense being played. It's the movement and flow of the game that attracts viewers.

The last several minutes of sending the big kid with no touch to the line to frustrate not only himself but all of the viewers as well and just simply stinks as an ending. And it ruins the other ever how many minutes of what has been an enjoyable game.

I don't know if I agree about the "7" points but the concept is intriguing and probably wouldn't interrupt the flow of the games.

But there are certainly other factors that need to be addressed as well. If we move back to the quarter system that I grew up with then losing all unused timeouts at the end of each quarter might help some a well. I hate it when a coach has saved all of their timeouts for the last two minutes because the sucker is going to call every danged one of them no matter the situations. Give every coach two per quarter with unused timeouts lost at the end of that time frame. That way each coach has two to use in the final period.

Do that and use the Elam ending in overtime and we might have something. Only I would set the Elam ending total at 10. Head to overtime and the first one to score 10 points wins. That way there are no double and triple overtime foul fests.

You do understand coaches only get 4 timeouts per game now for the game and can only carry over 3 to the 2nd half.

I think the "hatred" for the last 2 minutes is way overstated.

I also think a system that could cut short a 40 minute game is a complete non starter for the networks.

Yes, but 1 less timeout in the final two minutes is 5 minutes minimum that the game doesn't last.

you're assuming the coaches have all 3 timeouts for the last 2 minutes. Often times that's not the case at all whatsoever- as that would mean they've not used one the first 18 minutes of the 2nd half. I'm sure there are games like that out there- but really I think most of those would be games where it's frankly a blowout one way or the other.

Case in point- Duke/Kansas had a great game last year. In regulation- there were no team timeouts taken the last 5:50 of the game. Both teams had taken a 2nd half timeout in the first 6:30 of the 2nd half.

(07-16-2018 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I hate it when a coach has saved all of their timeouts for the last two minutes

The fix for that is to change the timeout limit, so that a team's quota of timeouts can be used only before there are 2 minutes remaining in regulation, and after the 2 minute mark, each time gets one and only one timeout to use in the last two minutes.

(07-16-2018 02:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I hate it when a coach has saved all of their timeouts for the last two minutes

The fix for that is to change the timeout limit, so that a team's quota of timeouts can be used only before there are 2 minutes remaining in regulation, and after the 2 minute mark, each time gets one and only one timeout to use in the last two minutes.

Odds are extremely good that the coaches have at most 2 timeouts left for the last few minutes. That would have given them 1 time out the first 18 minutes of the 2nd half. 2 is a pretty damn good number I think for the last 2 minutes.

(07-16-2018 02:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I hate it when a coach has saved all of their timeouts for the last two minutes

The fix for that is to change the timeout limit, so that a team's quota of timeouts can be used only before there are 2 minutes remaining in regulation, and after the 2 minute mark, each time gets one and only one timeout to use in the last two minutes.

I could go for that as well. My concept, which I probably didn't explain to well, was if we go back to a quarter system then give each team 1 or 2 time outs per quarter (whichever is workable with the TV networks) and have no TV timeouts for commercials. That spreads out the usage of timeouts throughout the game which provides for a commercial break anyway and if the timeouts don't rollover then in the final quarter there can be no more than two per side. While not ideal it spreads out the breaks and cuts down on the hooey that is the final two minutes.

The Elam ending I see a being more pertinent to overtime. Let there just be one and use the Elam system and play until one school hits or breaks 10 points. That adds the element of sudden death but also allows for a relative equal access of opportunity. That way we don't have 2, 3, or 4 overtime games.

(07-16-2018 03:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 02:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I hate it when a coach has saved all of their timeouts for the last two minutes

The fix for that is to change the timeout limit, so that a team's quota of timeouts can be used only before there are 2 minutes remaining in regulation, and after the 2 minute mark, each time gets one and only one timeout to use in the last two minutes.

I could go for that as well. My concept, which I probably didn't explain to well, was if we go back to a quarter system then give each team 1 or 2 time outs per quarter (whichever is workable with the TV networks) and have no TV timeouts for commercials. That spreads out the usage of timeouts throughout the game which provides for a commercial break anyway and if the timeouts don't rollover then in the final quarter there can be no more than two per side. While not ideal it spreads out the breaks and cuts down on the hooey that is the final two minutes.

The Elam ending I see a being more pertinent to overtime. Let there just be one and use the Elam system and play until one school hits or breaks 10 points. That adds the element of sudden death but also allows for a relative equal access of opportunity. That way we don't have 2, 3, or 4 overtime games.

TV though wants the definite known timeouts. If we go to quarters, there's going to be a timeout at the 5 minute mark each quarter. So instead of 16/12/8/4 we'll have timeouts at 5/0/5. That'll speed things up considerably.

Like I said- it's really not broken. The average game length in the 2017-18 season was 1 hour and 57 minutes for all games.

I agree with others that have said often the last 2 minutes of a basketball game can be almost unwatchable and take a TON of 'real' time to get 2 minutes to go off of the clock. It can just be brutal to be a fan at home watching it, especially when I don't have a real vested interest in either team. While I'm not sure that the Elam Ending is the solution to the problem, I'd like to see something(s) done so the free throw/foul fest/constant timeouts are addressed to keep the action flowing in the end of the game.

(07-16-2018 03:13 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 03:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 02:37 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 01:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I hate it when a coach has saved all of their timeouts for the last two minutes

The fix for that is to change the timeout limit, so that a team's quota of timeouts can be used only before there are 2 minutes remaining in regulation, and after the 2 minute mark, each time gets one and only one timeout to use in the last two minutes.

I could go for that as well. My concept, which I probably didn't explain to well, was if we go back to a quarter system then give each team 1 or 2 time outs per quarter (whichever is workable with the TV networks) and have no TV timeouts for commercials. That spreads out the usage of timeouts throughout the game which provides for a commercial break anyway and if the timeouts don't rollover then in the final quarter there can be no more than two per side. While not ideal it spreads out the breaks and cuts down on the hooey that is the final two minutes.

The Elam ending I see a being more pertinent to overtime. Let there just be one and use the Elam system and play until one school hits or breaks 10 points. That adds the element of sudden death but also allows for a relative equal access of opportunity. That way we don't have 2, 3, or 4 overtime games.

TV though wants the definite known timeouts. If we go to quarters, there's going to be a timeout at the 5 minute mark each quarter. So instead of 16/12/8/4 we'll have timeouts at 5/0/5. That'll speed things up considerably.

Like I said- it's really not broken. The average game length in the 2017-18 season was 1 hour and 57 minutes for all games.

Lol, I am confident that if you ran a poll asking fans what they thought of the last 2 minutes of basketball games, a vast majority would believe it is broken.

I am just going to pile on and have to agree that the last 2 minutes of a ballgame are unbearable to watch, and a key reason why I have stopped watching college basketball.

Not all competitive games are miserable to watch but enough are that it is worth experimenting with it in the NIT.

(07-17-2018 01:24 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Not all competitive games are miserable to watch but enough are that it is worth experimenting with it in the NIT.

well, I think it's notable that they experiment every single year in the NIT and haven't come close to do anything for end of games in those packages. So it's pretty obvious that they don't think it's a problem.

(07-16-2018 03:13 PM)stever20 Wrote:  TV though wants the definite known timeouts. If we go to quarters, there's going to be a timeout at the 5 minute mark each quarter. So instead of 16/12/8/4 we'll have timeouts at 5/0/5. That'll speed things up considerably.

They manage with the NBA. It's safe to assume that like in the NBA, the quarter break will be longer than the TV timeouts and shorter than the halftime break.

Quote:Like I said- it's really not broken. The average game length in the 2017-18 season was 1 hour and 57 minutes for all games.

But that's the average of all games, including blowouts where both teams want to get the hell off the court as quickly as possible. The hack-and-hope games are going to be longer, and what's more, they're going to feel a lot longer as the final minute or two is a litany of foul-free throws-quick shot on the other end-foul-free throws and so on until the lead is too insurmountable or, occasionally, the other team has hacked their way back into the game. Legal but not really in the spirit of the law.

It's more about boosting the quality of the game. Untimed play and a target score doesn't adversely affect good games or blowouts and improves the ones in the middle. The buzzer beater is gone but the walk-off shot replaces it. Late-game comeback strategy evolves past "let's find the worst free throw shooter and hack the **** out of him".

It's a radical idea that I don't expect to see implemented for a while, if ever, but it'd be nice to see how it plays out in an equivalent environment, like the NIT or the C-tier tournaments.

(07-17-2018 10:08 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 03:13 PM)stever20 Wrote:  TV though wants the definite known timeouts. If we go to quarters, there's going to be a timeout at the 5 minute mark each quarter. So instead of 16/12/8/4 we'll have timeouts at 5/0/5. That'll speed things up considerably.

They manage with the NBA. It's safe to assume that like in the NBA, the quarter break will be longer than the TV timeouts and shorter than the halftime break.

Quote:Like I said- it's really not broken. The average game length in the 2017-18 season was 1 hour and 57 minutes for all games.

But that's the average of all games, including blowouts where both teams want to get the hell off the court as quickly as possible. The hack-and-hope games are going to be longer, and what's more, they're going to feel a lot longer as the final minute or two is a litany of foul-free throws-quick shot on the other end-foul-free throws and so on until the lead is too insurmountable or, occasionally, the other team has hacked their way back into the game. Legal but not really in the spirit of the law.

It's more about boosting the quality of the game. Untimed play and a target score doesn't adversely affect good games or blowouts and improves the ones in the middle. The buzzer beater is gone but the walk-off shot replaces it. Late-game comeback strategy evolves past "let's find the worst free throw shooter and hack the **** out of him".

It's a radical idea that I don't expect to see implemented for a while, if ever, but it'd be nice to see how it plays out in an equivalent environment, like the NIT or the C-tier tournaments.

The quarter break is just a normal tv timeout I believe.

I think given that they've been experimenting in the NIT for a while now on things, and haven't done anything for end of game, leads me to think that it's a non issue for them.

(07-17-2018 10:19 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 10:08 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 03:13 PM)stever20 Wrote:  TV though wants the definite known timeouts. If we go to quarters, there's going to be a timeout at the 5 minute mark each quarter. So instead of 16/12/8/4 we'll have timeouts at 5/0/5. That'll speed things up considerably.

They manage with the NBA. It's safe to assume that like in the NBA, the quarter break will be longer than the TV timeouts and shorter than the halftime break.

Quote:Like I said- it's really not broken. The average game length in the 2017-18 season was 1 hour and 57 minutes for all games.

But that's the average of all games, including blowouts where both teams want to get the hell off the court as quickly as possible. The hack-and-hope games are going to be longer, and what's more, they're going to feel a lot longer as the final minute or two is a litany of foul-free throws-quick shot on the other end-foul-free throws and so on until the lead is too insurmountable or, occasionally, the other team has hacked their way back into the game. Legal but not really in the spirit of the law.

It's more about boosting the quality of the game. Untimed play and a target score doesn't adversely affect good games or blowouts and improves the ones in the middle. The buzzer beater is gone but the walk-off shot replaces it. Late-game comeback strategy evolves past "let's find the worst free throw shooter and hack the **** out of him".

It's a radical idea that I don't expect to see implemented for a while, if ever, but it'd be nice to see how it plays out in an equivalent environment, like the NIT or the C-tier tournaments.

The quarter break is just a normal tv timeout I believe.

I think given that they've been experimenting in the NIT for a while now on things, and haven't done anything for end of game, leads me to think that it's a non issue for them.

Other than the tournament & NBA playoffs the ratings for basketball of all kinds is down, so Stever there's a problem. I didn't put a watch to it, but it sure seemed like in the tournament last year that we spent half as long to play the final two minutes as it took to play the 18 minutes of the half before the final two minutes. Time outs and commercials and the foul parade all play into it and the audience seems to disagree with those who think nothing is wrong. Those who tout basketball's popularity almost always cite the tournament numbers. The tournament is where everyone gets sick of the endless free throws at the end of the game because they simply don't watch as much during the regular season except for major rivalry games.

(07-17-2018 11:11 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 10:19 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 10:08 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 03:13 PM)stever20 Wrote:  TV though wants the definite known timeouts. If we go to quarters, there's going to be a timeout at the 5 minute mark each quarter. So instead of 16/12/8/4 we'll have timeouts at 5/0/5. That'll speed things up considerably.

They manage with the NBA. It's safe to assume that like in the NBA, the quarter break will be longer than the TV timeouts and shorter than the halftime break.

Quote:Like I said- it's really not broken. The average game length in the 2017-18 season was 1 hour and 57 minutes for all games.

But that's the average of all games, including blowouts where both teams want to get the hell off the court as quickly as possible. The hack-and-hope games are going to be longer, and what's more, they're going to feel a lot longer as the final minute or two is a litany of foul-free throws-quick shot on the other end-foul-free throws and so on until the lead is too insurmountable or, occasionally, the other team has hacked their way back into the game. Legal but not really in the spirit of the law.

It's more about boosting the quality of the game. Untimed play and a target score doesn't adversely affect good games or blowouts and improves the ones in the middle. The buzzer beater is gone but the walk-off shot replaces it. Late-game comeback strategy evolves past "let's find the worst free throw shooter and hack the **** out of him".

It's a radical idea that I don't expect to see implemented for a while, if ever, but it'd be nice to see how it plays out in an equivalent environment, like the NIT or the C-tier tournaments.

The quarter break is just a normal tv timeout I believe.

I think given that they've been experimenting in the NIT for a while now on things, and haven't done anything for end of game, leads me to think that it's a non issue for them.

Other than the tournament & NBA playoffs the ratings for basketball of all kinds is down, so Stever there's a problem. I didn't put a watch to it, but it sure seemed like in the tournament last year that we spent half as long to play the final two minutes as it took to play the 18 minutes of the half before the final two minutes. Time outs and commercials and the foul parade all play into it and the audience seems to disagree with those who think nothing is wrong. Those who tout basketball's popularity almost always cite the tournament numbers. The tournament is where everyone gets sick of the endless free throws at the end of the game because they simply don't watch as much during the regular season except for major rivalry games.

But ratings for everything is down, not just basketball.

ratings last year thru elite 8 were off by only 3% compared to prior year(which was a very strong ratings year). That's the big part of the tourney- given that the final 4 was on cable vs CBS the year before.

Regular season ratings in the NBA were at a 4 year high up 8% from last year.

Bumping this to gauge everyone's reaction after the Elam Ending got its biggest exposure in tonight's NBA All-Star Game.

All I know is that was by orders of magnitude the most exciting quarter of All-Star Game basketball I've seen, and maybe among the most exciting quarters of basketball I've seen in a long time. And social media is no foolproof barometer but there's been a LOT more buzz around tonight's ending than there was for any All-Star Game.

I entered a big fan of the EE, so I'm biased, but did tonight change anyone's mind about trying it out in games with more stakes, like the NIT or CBI/CIT tournaments, to see if it's a viable option?

so no buzzer beaters? give me a break. best part of march and the dumb EE would totally **** that up. no thank you

I would use the Elam Ending in March Madness. Buzzer beaters are great, but for every MM buzzer beater there are 10 games that end in lousy, overlong parades to the foul line. Ending a basketball game with 10+ minutes (in real time) of free throw shots is worse than ending a tied football game with two point conversion attempts.

It seems to me that the current system is designed to give inferior teams a better chance of winning by creating what amounts to an entirely different game in the final two minutes than was played in the first 38. It reminds me of the rule some post season all-star exhibition football games like the Senior Bowl adopted, in which in the fourth quarter, if the trailing team scored, they kept receiving the ensuing kickoff until they caught up.

Maybe a less drastic rule change would accomplish the same thing (that is, eliminating an interminably long last two minutes). During the last two minutes, give whichever team is fouled the option of taking the ball out of bounds at mid-court or shoot two free throws. If the trailing team keeps fouling they will eventually run out of players. That could also be tweaked so that if the trailing team fouls and the leading team opts to take the ball out of bounds there is a ten second runoff.

(02-17-2020 07:59 AM)ken d Wrote:  It seems to me that the current system is designed to give inferior teams a better chance of winning by creating what amounts to an entirely different game in the final two minutes than was played in the first 38.

Nope. Free throws are basketball. If you get beat because you’re unable to make them, you’re the inferior team.

(07-15-2018 10:20 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  Has anyone been watching The Basketball Tournament? It's a winner-take-all ($2 million this year) tournament where anyone can participate, if they get enough support to be included.

The way they end games is pretty unique.

First, have no idea why people are calling this the "Elam ending" when it's just the way that basically 99% of street and park hoops games have ended since well forever. All street games are "first to X points" games, almost none are timed.

Second, I do not like the "plus seven" as it arbitrarily adds or removes points from the leading team. If you lead by 2 or 12 or 20 after the 3rd quarter or whatever, you should lead by 2 or 12 or 20 going in to the final "Elam" phase, and the other team has to make that up.

Third, the Elam thing worked wonders for the NBA All-Star Game last night, produced effort and energy in that game I haven't seen since at least the 1980s, probably 1970s.

(02-17-2020 08:45 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Nope. Free throws are basketball. If you get beat because you’re unable to make them, you’re the inferior team.

First, the Elam ending doesn't eliminate the value of free throws, the NBA game last night was won with a free throw.

But second, I do think that it is a perversion for fouling to be a strategy for a losing team to gain on a winning team. It's not that way in other sports. E.g., in football or baseball or hockey or whatever, intentionally committing a foul that you *want the ref to see and call* almost never happens because it always makes you competitively worse off, it never can benefit you. That's what committing a foul should mean, you are automatically worse off, so basketball has always needed that fix.