What about this rule change

[STEVEHOLT]

You are allowed 5 fouls for a 40 minute game. So if the game goes into OT, shouldn't you be allowed back in if you fouled out in regulation.

 

[twinight]

You're allowed 5 fouls per game. Not per "40-minute game."

 

[bnoro]

Who is asking for this?

There are barely overtime games as it currently is.

 

[SU94]

You are allowed 5 fouls for a 40 minute game. So if the game goes into OT, shouldn't you be allowed back in if you fouled out in regulation.

There is some logic to this. Won't happen (nor should it), but if it did, I'd only give an extra foul to those that were still in the game at the end of regulation.

• One of the things I loved about the 6OT game (behind winning it) was we won with a walk-on playing competitive minutes. Justin Thomas (not of the PGA) had one rebound and one block in seven minutes.
• I have the 6OT win as the second-best SU moment of the Boeheim era. Many won't and that's understandable.

 

[Brooky03]

I’ve never been a fan of fouling out being a thing at all.

The strategy of the offense attacking a player prone to committing fouls or already with a few fouls on him makes for bad basketball. It’s not a clever or interesting way to win a game.

If you must have a foul limit, make it like 10, so a guy fouling out is a once in a blue moon type of thing. If the fear is that teams will happily send the opponent to the line for 2 shots all game long (unlikely), just make it so any player committing his 6th+ foul, while a team is in the bonus or double bonus, results in an extra FT. So, the bonus is 2 shots automatically, then a 3rd shot if he makes one of the two. Double bonus is 3 shots

While we’re at it, eradicate the 1-and-1. That rule sucks. Just straight to the double bonus.

 

[Millhouse]

I’ve never been a fan of fouling out being a thing at all.

The strategy of the offense attacking a player prone to committing fouls or already with a few fouls on him makes for bad basketball. It’s not a clever or interesting way to win a game.

If you must have a foul limit, make it like 10, so a guy fouling out is a once in a blue moon type of thing. If the fear is that teams will happily send the opponent to the line for 2 shots all game long (unlikely), just make it so any player committing his 6th+ foul, while a team is in the bonus or double bonus, results in an extra FT. So, the bonus is 2 shots automatically, then a 3rd shot if he makes one of the two. Double bonus is 3 shots

While we’re at it, eradicate the 1-and-1. That rule sucks. Just straight to the double bonus.

Not sure how old you are but the extra foul the big east tried a hundred years ago sucked

 

[Brooky03]

Not sure how old you are but the extra foul the big east tried a hundred years ago sucked

I was a young kid when that experiment occurred. Regardless of how it went, my position against a foul limit is not swayed.

There should not be a foul limit. I’m fine with adjusting other rules around FTs to make that work.

 

[Brooky03]

ar inj

 

[upperdeck]

so just let the big guys hack everything that moves around the basket all game long? Can you imagine how many blocks Patrick would have gotten if he could never have fouled out.

Although the foul limit would have helped us keep Pearl in some very important games since refs always targeted him early in every big game we seemed to play.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Elam Ending !!!

 

[tbonezone]

The strategy of the offense attacking a player prone to committing fouls or already with a few fouls on him makes for bad basketball. It’s not a clever or interesting way to win a game.

athleticism makes the game fun to watch. strategy makes the game clever and interesting.

 

[sufandu]

I’ve never been a fan of fouling out being a thing at all.

The strategy of the offense attacking a player prone to committing fouls or already with a few fouls on him makes for bad basketball. It’s not a clever or interesting way to win a game.

If you must have a foul limit, make it like 10, so a guy fouling out is a once in a blue moon type of thing. If the fear is that teams will happily send the opponent to the line for 2 shots all game long (unlikely), just make it so any player committing his 6th+ foul, while a team is in the bonus or double bonus, results in an extra FT. So, the bonus is 2 shots automatically, then a 3rd shot if he makes one of the two. Double bonus is 3 shots

While we’re at it, eradicate the 1-and-1. That rule sucks. Just straight to the double bonus.

You think attacking a bad foul prone defender is bad basketball but watching teams shoot a crazy amount of freethrows wouldn't be?

 

[sufandu]

There's some logic to the OP, but I don't like the idea of teams trying to match fouls to game length. The idea of fouls is to punish a player/team for doing something wrong. I want teams to try to defend without fouling. A team that does that better than their opponent should be rewarded if a game goes into OT. Play better without fouling in regulation and you get to have all your players. If you need to foul in regulation, you don't. Maybe fouling less would have allowed the other team to score more in regulation and then the game doesn't go to OT.

 

[two3zone]

I’ve never been a fan of fouling out being a thing at all.

The strategy of the offense attacking a player prone to committing fouls or already with a few fouls on him makes for bad basketball. It’s not a clever or interesting way to win a game.

If you must have a foul limit, make it like 10, so a guy fouling out is a once in a blue moon type of thing. If the fear is that teams will happily send the opponent to the line for 2 shots all game long (unlikely), just make it so any player committing his 6th+ foul, while a team is in the bonus or double bonus, results in an extra FT. So, the bonus is 2 shots automatically, then a 3rd shot if he makes one of the two. Double bonus is 3 shots

While we’re at it, eradicate the 1-and-1. That rule sucks. Just straight to the double bonus.

 

[Red Holzman]

Not a fan -example why:
A team attacks the paint the whole game that ends in a tie after fouling out the opposing team's star 5.
That team, IMO, earned the right to play OT vs the "next man up", not the rested star 5 who fouled out.

 

[Brooky03]

You think attacking a bad foul prone defender is bad basketball but watching teams shoot a crazy amount of freethrows wouldn't be?

I think you can tweak the FT rules to incentivize against ‘let’s foul all day’ being a good strategy.

Attacking a player to force him into foul trouble is as annoying as Joe Flacco under throwing a go route by 15 yards and being rewarded with a PI call.

 

[Brooky03]

athleticism makes the game fun to watch. strategy makes the game clever and interesting.

Agreed.

I assume that we’re on the same page that going at the guy in foul trouble isn’t strategy, it’s bull poo disguised as strategy.

 

[JustPherU]

Foul limit is fine the way it is.Id rather they get rid of the 3 point shot and go back to working for the best shot you can get as a team. Bring the big guy back in the game.
Now get off my lawn !!!

 

[tbonezone]

au contraire mon frère. like a pack of orcas we coordinate to attack the most vulnerable player.
cuz that's what smart mammals do. and say if i'm the enemy , #1 i'm taking down brown.

 

[upperdeck]

One big flaw. Right now you have fouls on plays and fouls on shooters..

Currently on shots you try to block it without fouling, sometimes you do sometimes you dont.

Going forward if every time a guy is going to make a basket you foul and those fouls don't add up then why would every you give up a layup, just foul thru the man,. You would end up with very few and 1s.

The prospect of fouls adding up means you try to make more plays on the ball. No need to worry about that any more.

 

[Brooky03]

Foul limit is fine the way it is.Id rather they get rid of the 3 point shot and go back to working for the best shot you can get as a team. Bring the big guy back in the game.
Now get off my lawn !!!

I appreciate you one-upping my hot take haha.

 

[Brooky03]

One big flaw. Right now you have fouls on plays and fouls on shooters..

Currently on shots you try to block it without fouling, sometimes you do sometimes you dont.

Going forward if every time a guy is going to make a basket you foul and those fouls don't add up then why would every you give up a layup, just foul thru the man,. You would end up with very few and 1s.

The prospect of fouls adding up means you try to make more plays on the ball. No need to worry about that any more.

That’s why you’d scale the penalties for fouls above a certain threshold. That’s better than taking players off the floor.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

You're allowed 5 fouls per game. Not per "40-minute game."

Then why do they give you an extra TO when the game goes overtime ? It’s logical to treat both the same. To give you an extra time out because the game went over the regulation allotment of time, but to then hold you to the same foul limit is inconsistent

 

[STEVEHOLT]

One big flaw. Right now you have fouls on plays and fouls on shooters..

Currently on shots you try to block it without fouling, sometimes you do sometimes you dont.

Going forward if every time a guy is going to make a basket you foul and those fouls don't add up then why would every you give up a layup, just foul thru the man,. You would end up with very few and 1s.

The prospect of fouls adding up means you try to make more plays on the ball. No need to worry about that any more.

The original post does not ask for unlimited fouls. Just one more if the game goes OT. Would add alot of fun if you star who had fouled out was suddenly back in business. Sort of like those old WWF tag team matches when the one guy was being pummeled for 5 minutes while his partner was itching to get into the match. Then miraculously on deaths door, the beleaguered wrestler is able to tag out and the fresh combatant flies into the ring and starts whooping’ everything in site

 

[Brooky03]

STEVEHOLT sorry for hijacking your thread. Adding an extra foul to each player’s limit (and bringing back fouled out players) for OT is a good step in the right direction.