Ball State Professor Proposes End to Fouling Late in Games

by **VUGrad1314** » July 10th, 2018, 2:27 pm

What does everybody think of this? Is it a good idea? I say no in large part because trailing teams often don't start fouling until the final 60-90 seconds, not in the final 4 minutes. Also, it diminishes the importance of free throw shooting. Lastly, I think the "target score" should be increased from 7 points more than the leading team's total to 10 or 12.

https://www.thestarpress.com/story/spor ... 737906002/

**Sponsor**

by **VUGrad1314** » July 10th, 2018, 4:00 pm

Here's another strike against the "Elam Ending:" It doesn't actually fix the problem it seeks to address. Instead of the foul barrage by the trailing team occurring at the end of the game, it will begin much earlier in the half as the trailing team attempts to narrow the gap before the game opens up again at the 4 minute timeout. You'll start seeing teams start trying to pile up team fouls much earlier in the half so that the team in the lead still has to go to the line a lot. Teams will begin to use their end of game strategies much earlier. And if teams are thinking about and employing end-of-game strategy closer to halftime, then what is the point of having a halftime period to make adjustments if you have significantly less time to implement and judge the efficacy of those adjustments . Sure, the ending might be more exciting , but getting to that ending will be the same boring slog, except this time it's spaced much closer to another extended stoppage. This would make the second half more boring for fans on balance,especially those watching on TV. What we have may not be a perfect system but neither is this. In the face of two imperfect systems, I will throw my support behind the one that has served the game just fine for decades. This is college basketball. By and large these kids are playing because they love the game. We don't need gimmicks here, and that's really all this "Elam Ending" is.

by **BravesBU** » July 10th, 2018, 5:32 pm

I heard about this on ESPN today, and I'm not a fan of the idea, at least not as it's current set up. I wouldn't mind it in overtime (Give a target score for each team to get to), but it really seems to be seeking to solve something that isn't really a problem. The fouling at the end of the game is annoying, sure, but it doesn't kill the entertainment value. I feel like this ending could. Let's say we get two teams that go really ice cold from the field. I've seen stretches of basketball where neither team scores 7 points over a 10 minute period. It's rare, but in that scenario it'd be super boring and extending the game for no reason.

by **musiccitybulldog** » July 10th, 2018, 6:21 pm

Fix officiating. That would be worth while.

by **Majik45** » July 11th, 2018, 7:58 am

They are using this ending scenario in every game this year of TBT (The Basketball Tournament). They used it in the "play-in" games last year for TBT and it was ok. Bradley fans probably know a little more about it because we have had a Bradley Alumni team playing in this tournament the last 3 years. It's a great distraction and something to watch in the summer. I honestly hate this ending as it gets rid of buzzer beaters. And how many times will a game end on a free throw because if someone is about to get a lay-up to win the game, you just foul him to make him earn it at the free throw line.

by **Aces44** » July 11th, 2018, 8:13 am

To be fair, part of the allure of this ending is that it ALWAYS creates a game winning shot. Not necessarily a buzzer beater, but Always a game winner.
There are rarely buzzer beaters in regular games and there are consistently times when teams dribble out the clock; and even a few times when lunatic coaches instruct their teams to foul when there realistically no chance for a comeback even with a miracle.

So, in theory, this removes the anti-climactic nature of a blowout

That being said 10 points feels like the number to me, not 7; and I
only like it in summer league games.