TBT - four minute rule

[General20]

Guess I just disagree that the problem that the rule is trying to solve is as big a problem as you feel that it is. As I said in an earlier post, I'd be all for it in a game where one team has a double digit lead at the 4:00 minute mark. But in a close game like yesterday it takes away more than it adds and it is a terrible rule. No buzzer beater, no over time, no sense of urgency where the team that is down feels a need to push tempo in order to make up a deficit in the limited time remaining.

#1) Isn't a buzzer beater just a shot that wins you the game? The Elam Ending provides you with that EVERY TIME. If you are talking about a true buzzer beater that is thrown up as the clock is expiring, how many true buzzer beaters have there been in SU history? 5 or fewer? Its hard to miss something that happens .00001 percent of the time.

#2) I guess no overtime could be considered a bad thing, but for the life of me I can't figure out why. Personally, I'm a busy guy and I love the idea of completely predictable game lengths.

#3) Its ludicrous for you to couch this as something positive. There is no way anybody wants to watch one team playing faster than optimal basketball while the other team plays slower than optimal basketball when (with the Elam Ending) we can watch both teams simply playing the best basketball they can possibly play. I refuse to believe that anybody actually wants to see one player stand in place for 20 seconds dribbling the clock out on one side of the court and then watch the other team run down and jack up a bad shot on the other side of the court. I think people are just scared of change.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

#1) Isn't a buzzer beater just a shot that wins you the game? The Elam Ending provides you with that EVERY TIME. If you are talking about a true buzzer beater that is thrown up as the clock is expiring, how many true buzzer beaters have there been in SU history? 5 or fewer? Its hard to miss something that happens .00001 percent of the time.

#2) I guess no overtime could be considered a bad thing, but for the life of me I can't figure out why. Personally, I'm a busy guy and I love the idea of completely predictable game lengths.

#3) Its ludicrous for you to couch this as something positive. There is no way anybody wants to watch one team playing faster than optimal basketball while the other team plays slower than optimal basketball when (with the Elam Ending) we can watch both teams simply playing the best basketball they can possibly play. I refuse to believe that anybody actually wants to see one player stand in place for 20 seconds dribbling the clock out on one side of the court and then watch the other team run down and jack up a bad shot on the other side of the court. I think people are just scared of change.

Dilly dilly!

 

[Knicks411]

As i said in the other thread I kind of like the rule, but overtime is no more. With no overtime we never have Syracuse/UConn in 2009.

I somehow never thought of this

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I somehow never thought of this

I don't consider that a bad thing.

 

[General20]

I don't consider that a bad thing.

That UConn game was special because of the circumstances. Two great rivals playing for a Big East Championship that actually meant something.

If Syracuse went to 6OT's against say North Carolina in the ACC tournament, all I'd be thinking now is how we'll be more tired for the NCAA tournament. The ACC tournament means nothing.

That UConn game was a one time thing. Even if it happens again its never happening again, if you know what I mean. Its certainly not something you should construct your rules around.

And for the people saying we would miss out on the John Gillon shot ... that goes both ways, SU has lost on banked in half court shots, and it sucks. Personally, I think if you can construct the rules to ensure that the team who plays best wins, and remove things like lucky half court shots deciding games, you've done something right.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

That UConn game was special because of the circumstances. Two great rivals playing for a Big East Championship that actually meant something.

If Syracuse went to 6OT's against say North Carolina in the ACC tournament, all I'd be thinking now is how we'll be more tired for the NCAA tournament. The ACC tournament means nothing.

That UConn game was a one time thing. Even if it happens again its never happening again, if you know what I mean. Its certainly not something you should construct your rules around.

And for the people saying we would miss out on the John Gillon shot ... that goes both ways, SU has lost on banked in half court shots, and it sucks. Personally, I think if you can construct the rules to ensure that the team who plays best wins, and remove things like lucky half court shots deciding games, you've done something right.

You and I are in complete agreement.

 

[Knicks411]

I don't consider that a bad thing.

I'm not sure it is either, just I hadn't realized it.

 

[Cusefan0307]

If any sport needs this rule it is college football and their dumb overtime rules that exist.

 

[General20]

If any sport needs this rule it is college football and their dumb overtime rules that exist.

Both college and NFL football has the same problem. Teams take knees, teams run out the clock, teams play prevent defense. It all sucks. Its just wasting time instead of playing real football. Not to mention the fact that overtime in both college and the NFL suck. Solutions to fix football will be harder though, I think. Its a game with a lot of fundamental flaws and few clear solutions. This is a sport that after 100 years of playing they're still trying to figure out exactly what a catch is.

 

[Tom K.]

#1) Isn't a buzzer beater just a shot that wins you the game? The Elam Ending provides you with that EVERY TIME. If you are talking about a true buzzer beater that is thrown up as the clock is expiring, how many true buzzer beaters have there been in SU history? 5 or fewer? Its hard to miss something that happens .00001 percent of the time.

Don't limit that to Cuse games only. It would be a rule change for all if it took hold in college and NBA (It won't. Shorter games = less air time = less money). And many of us watch more ball than just Cuse.

 

[sufandu]

Both college and NFL football has the same problem. Teams take knees, teams run out the clock, teams play prevent defense. It all sucks. Its just wasting time instead of playing real football. Not to mention the fact that overtime in both college and the NFL suck. Solutions to fix football will be harder though, I think. Its a game with a lot of fundamental flaws and few clear solutions. This is a sport that after 100 years of playing they're still trying to figure out exactly what a catch is.

Everything you mentioned only occurs when one team has a big lead. People pretty much have stopped watching by then anyway. Football doesn't have anything simlar to the foulfest comback attempt that basketball has.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

If any sport needs this rule it is college football and their dumb overtime rules that exist.

I like the college overtime rule. I'd just get rid of the kicks. No field goals, no extra points.

 

[sufandu]

I like the college overtime rule. I'd just get rid of the kicks. No field goals, no extra points.

I think I'd move the starting point back to the 40 too.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I think I'd move the starting point back to the 40 too.

I'd be ok with that if it meant getting rid of all kicks in OT.

I mean, I think we're done here. Just solved college football overtime.

Nice work.

 

[sufandu]

I'd be ok with that if it meant getting rid of all kicks in OT.

I mean, I think we're done here. Just solved college football overtime.

Nice work.

Sure. I'm good with no kicks. Ok, where do I pick up my consultation fee?

 

[pfister1]

#1) Isn't a buzzer beater just a shot that wins you the game? The Elam Ending provides you with that EVERY TIME. If you are talking about a true buzzer beater that is thrown up as the clock is expiring, how many true buzzer beaters have there been in SU history? 5 or fewer? Its hard to miss something that happens .00001 percent of the time.

#2) I guess no overtime could be considered a bad thing, but for the life of me I can't figure out why. Personally, I'm a busy guy and I love the idea of completely predictable game lengths.

#3) Its ludicrous for you to couch this as something positive. There is no way anybody wants to watch one team playing faster than optimal basketball while the other team plays slower than optimal basketball when (with the Elam Ending) we can watch both teams simply playing the best basketball they can possibly play. I refuse to believe that anybody actually wants to see one player stand in place for 20 seconds dribbling the clock out on one side of the court and then watch the other team run down and jack up a bad shot on the other side of the court. I think people are just scared of change.

I suspect there is just a little bit of hyperbole in your 3rd point or maybe you didn’t enjoy the ending of the SU v UGA game in the ‘96 NCAA tournament, the excitement of both the end of regulation and end of OT get wiped away with the Elam Ending.

In my mind their isn’t anything more exciting than the last minute or so of a close game regardless of the defensive/offensive strategy. I don’t mind that sometimes a game is won by a great final seconds defensive stand. How about Hak’s late game heroics to end the NC game?

Actually the reality is we may not win that game under Elam rules. The first under 4:00 TO the score was 76-67. Over the last 3:38 we only put up 5 to KU’s 11.

 

[Townie72]

I was referring to the last few minutes with a lead, not a general slow pace of play.

Stalling with a lead is definitely a JB strategy and one that he might not give up, even with the TBT rule.

What college coach doesn't take some of the air out of the ball with a lead at the end of a game?

 

[CusefanATL]

Unfortunately Scarlet and Gray are running away with this thing regardless of how they play the final 4 minutes.

 

[kuethstheman]

What college coach doesn't take some of the air out of the ball with a lead at the end of a game?

Some more than others. JB more times (and for more minutes) than many.

Not sure why we're still talking about this. When he does it, it gives me heartburn but I'm not complaining, just pointing out that he's a strong believer.

 

[Alsacs]

Unfortunately Scarlet and Gray are running away with this thing regardless of how they play the final 4 minutes.

Onuaku is the type of big to slowdown Sullinger.
I think the Ohio State team looks good but until someone knocks off the 3 time champs that team should be the favorite.

 

[Cusefan0307]

People make definitive statements about teams in single elimination tournaments are always right.

 

[realorange]

I actually think that's a pretty interesting idea.

Especially for college hoops.

If teams had to play first one to 85 let's say, you'd sure see offense open up. No benefit in ugging up the game.

With that rule we would have been lucky to finish .500 last year.

 

[realorange]

Doesn't necessarily have to be a huge play. It could be a bad bounce and an uncontested layup.
You get those now in regular games.

But what I can guarantee will go away are half court heaves and insane buzzer beater shots that just go in. Players take these shots because they have to get it off before the clock expires. With no clock, there is no reason to take them. Reset and get a better shot.

Say goodbye to John Gillon's buzzer beater to beat Duke.

Why is that much different than DNics shot yesterday?

 

[General20]

Don't limit that to Cuse games only. It would be a rule change for all if it took hold in college and NBA (It won't. Shorter games = less air time = less money). And many of us watch more ball than just Cuse.

This is exactly why I have to think that the only reason to be against the Elam Ending is fear of change. There is no legitimate criticism of it. Only silliness. ESPN does not pay the ACC by the hour. They buy the whole league as a package. There won't be any less money because overtimes get taken away.

 

[General20]

Everything you mentioned only occurs when one team has a big lead. People pretty much have stopped watching by then anyway. Football doesn't have anything simlar to the foulfest comback attempt that basketball has.

What do you consider a big lead? Because wasting time and fouling occurs whenever there is a 4 point lead or more. I'll bring up the 6 OT game just because we were talking about it and the whole game is on Youtube. Nobody would call that a blowout, yet if you fast forward to the last 3 minutes or so its pretty much all fouling and wasting time. Its garbage basketball.