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. It's called the Elam Ending, the brainchild of a Ball State professor. The way it works is this: At the first deadball after the 4:00 mark of the fourth quarter, the clock is turned off. Seven points are added to the score of the team that's leading, and that becomes the "target score." The teams play until someone reaches that score.

So say Team A is beating Team B 73-67 when the clock stops. The target score is set at 80; whoever matches or beats 80 first wins.

The idea is to eliminate the parade of fouls in the closing minutes, because there's no benefit to fouling: if the target score is 88 and you're down 84-79, you're not going to foul and give them a chance to get closer to the target.

It seems to be working for TBT so far, though it's a small sample size.

Would this work for college basketball, or is it a bridge too far?

(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. It's called the Elam Ending, the brainchild of a Ball State professor. The way it works is this: At the first deadball after the 4:00 mark of the fourth quarter, the clock is turned off. Seven points are added to the score of the team that's leading, and that becomes the "target score." The teams play until someone reaches that score.

So say Team A is beating Team B 73-67 when the clock stops. The target score is set at 80; whoever matches or beats 80 first wins.

The idea is to eliminate the parade of fouls in the closing minutes, because there's no benefit to fouling: if the target score is 88 and you're down 84-79, you're not going to foul and give them a chance to get closer to the target.

It seems to be working for TBT so far, though it's a small sample size.

Would this work for college basketball, or is it a bridge too far?

I don't know. I have seen a few games where the fouls benefitted very much. Especially against a team the has poor free throw shooting.

That is legitimately logical and innovative but too radical for me. Buzzer beaters and overtimes are non-negotiables. This takes away lows (foul marathons) but also the highest of highs (buzzer beaters).

(07-16-2018 02:59 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  That is legitimately logical and innovative but too radical for me. Buzzer beaters and overtimes are non-negotiables. This takes away lows (foul marathons) but also the highest of highs (buzzer beaters).

I agree. It's intriguing and for tournaments like this may work great. But I wouldn't want the change to college bb

I actually love the Elam ending and wish they would experiment with it in the preseason NIT this year. Let's see how it works in real games.

Right now, the last two minutes of a game is a completely different style of play than the rest of the game. There's a lot more 1-on-1 and throwing up airballs. Refs even call fouls differently. I would barely call it "basketball."

(07-16-2018 02:59 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  That is legitimately logical and innovative but too radical for me. Buzzer beaters and overtimes are non-negotiables. This takes away lows (foul marathons) but also the highest of highs (buzzer beaters).

You still get walk-off scores, but instead of beating the buzzer they're beating the other team to the total. There's been at least one game in the TBT so far where a team that was trailing hit the shot to win. So while there's not that tangible buzz from a shot going in right as the horn sounds, you still have that edge-of-the-seat thrill, just coached differently. In fact, you'll get a few more of them because if, say, the score is 75-74 and the Elam target is 76, someone's going to get the dagger.

I do think the idea is such a dramatic departure from how we watch basketball that it would take a long time to warm up to it. But the NIT seems to be the NCAA's research lab for rules changes, so that would be a logical place to test it without causing chaos throughout the sport. Or one of the C-tier tournaments could implement it.

(07-16-2018 09:23 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I actually love the Elam ending and wish they would experiment with it in the preseason NIT this year. Let's see how it works in real games.

Right now, the last two minutes of a game is a completely different style of play than the rest of the game. There's a lot more 1-on-1 and throwing up airballs. Refs even call fouls differently. I would barely call it "basketball."

Pretty much what I'm thinking. Yes, on paper there's validity to hack-and-hope but it's far more likely that you're just prolonging the inevitably.

I think for consistency's sake, the Elam Ending should be an extra period. Run your two halves or four quarters, then add seven to the leading team's score and go with it.

(07-16-2018 10:39 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 02:59 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  That is legitimately logical and innovative but too radical for me. Buzzer beaters and overtimes are non-negotiables. This takes away lows (foul marathons) but also the highest of highs (buzzer beaters).

You still get walk-off scores, but instead of beating the buzzer they're beating the other team to the total. There's been at least one game in the TBT so far where a team that was trailing hit the shot to win. So while there's not that tangible buzz from a shot going in right as the horn sounds, you still have that edge-of-the-seat thrill, just coached differently. In fact, you'll get a few more of them because if, say, the score is 75-74 and the Elam target is 76, someone's going to get the dagger.

I do think the idea is such a dramatic departure from how we watch basketball that it would take a long time to warm up to it. But the NIT seems to be the NCAA's research lab for rules changes, so that would be a logical place to test it without causing chaos throughout the sport. Or one of the C-tier tournaments could implement it.

(07-16-2018 09:23 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I actually love the Elam ending and wish they would experiment with it in the preseason NIT this year. Let's see how it works in real games.

Right now, the last two minutes of a game is a completely different style of play than the rest of the game. There's a lot more 1-on-1 and throwing up airballs. Refs even call fouls differently. I would barely call it "basketball."

Pretty much what I'm thinking. Yes, on paper there's validity to hack-and-hope but it's far more likely that you're just prolonging the inevitably.

I think for consistency's sake, the Elam Ending should be an extra period. Run your two halves or four quarters, then add seven to the leading team's score and go with it.

I actually like that idea. Maybe have 2 18-minute halves and then have the Elam Ending.

I actually like it as a method for the overtime period.

Is the overtime period untimed? I presume in the current form it would have to be. What if neither team got to the target score in the final four minutes? Or does the team who is leading at the end of that time win?

It's an interesting idea, and certainly addresses a major problem with the current model. Sometime it makes for an exciting finish, but more often than not IMO it makes the end of game hard to watch.

It's never going to change in real competitive basketball. Never.

(07-16-2018 12:24 PM)ken d Wrote:  Is the overtime period untimed? I presume in the current form it would have to be. What if neither team got to the target score in the final four minutes? Or does the team who is leading at the end of that time win?

It's an interesting idea, and certainly addresses a major problem with the current model. Sometime it makes for an exciting finish, but more often than not IMO it makes the end of game hard to watch.

The way that it's intended, and the way it's been used in TBT, is that the clock is turned off at the first deadball after the 4:00 mark, at which point the target score is set. The game is untimed from that point forward.

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

Just like the 3-point shot... no way that ever gets used in real competitive basketball, right?

(07-16-2018 09:14 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-16-2018 02:59 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  That is legitimately logical and innovative but too radical for me. Buzzer beaters and overtimes are non-negotiables. This takes away lows (foul marathons) but also the highest of highs (buzzer beaters).

I agree. It's intriguing and for tournaments like this may work great. But I wouldn't want the change to college bb

Yes, it's a clever idea, but IMO the cure is worse than the disease. Part of the drama of college hoops is making or missing clutch FT's down the stretch.

(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.

NCAA only used quarters for men from the 1951-52 to 1954-55 seasons.

The last few minutes of an almost competitive game are pure torture. When teams are playing within 3 points or so the foul fest doesn't happen until the shot clock becomes a factor. When a game is out-of-reach it doesn't matter it's the games where a comeback is plausible that are misery. A few years ago I timed a game on TV and it took right at 15 minutes to play the final two minutes. Now part of that was burning the accumulated timeouts and getting full media timeouts for part of them but the free throws and the substitutions chewed a lot of clock with nothing happening. Throw in stopping the clock after every made basket in the final minute and there was nothing enjoyable about it.

(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.

(07-16-2018 12:59 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

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

Just like the 3-point shot... no way that ever gets used in real competitive basketball, right?

big difference between number of points on a shot and the actual length of a game.

This would be fascinating in a live game.

While beating the clock is fun, the foul fest and free throw shooting contest ending would be very good for the game.

I think you would get the same thrill shooting and making game winning shot b/c if you have 79 and need 81, the next shot you make wins the game, so every shot will be a thrill.

The thought of watching the NCAA Tournament and seeing the scoreboard upscreen of another game switch from “2nd 4:00” to “TS 77” is actually pretty funny.

(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. And I forgot to mention, no TV timeouts. The 2 per coach per quarter suffices for all commercial breaks, spreads them out more equally, and allows for a better overall flow.