Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="auror, post: 2795163, member: 1329"] Normally when you say something discusses pros and cons, they actually discuss pros. This is just a hater's rant with only cons. Most of this is pointless paranoia. Do you know how I know this is actually a good idea? Because DeCourcy hates it. My remarks in (-x-) [U]Stuff nobody cares about or might even be good things:[/U] [LIST] [*]It would have a huge impact on gambling markets and scoring and point spread evaluations. (-Nah-) [*]It could lead teams to make personnel and substitution decisions when up comfortably that are now considered unsporting [*]Trailing teams could play slowly [*]Teams would not need to press or try to speed teams up (if that wasn’t their standard practice). [*]Elam Ending game winners might be when already up, with some reduced drama. (-Because blowouts are so exciting currently-) [*]Miss this one, get the next one. (-Tension is a thing this author is unaware of-) [/LIST] [U]Stuff I've already debunked:[/U] [LIST] [*]For example, it would probably lead to fouling [I]before [/I]the stoppage to determine the Elam score target. If you are trailing, you may want to extend the game and see if you can close the margin before that target is set. [/LIST] [U]Stuff some people might care about, that I think would be worth the tradeoff due to no more endless fouls and more game winning shots:[/U] [LIST] [*]There would never be overtime, or tying shots to send it to overtime. [/LIST] [U]Stuff that would probably be addressed by tweaks or just become accepted strategy:[/U] [LIST] [*]Teams leading by 1 and within 2 points of the target could intentionally foul to prevent game-winning three pointers (-This already happens under current rules when up 3-). [/LIST] [U]The real tradeoff:[/U] [LIST] [*]Take away the clock and you lose all those time-crunch-inspired magical moments. Duke doesn’t need to throw a baseball pass to Christian Laettner, they can just dribble it up. Tyus Edney doesn’t need to go coast to coast. The Bryce Drew play doesn’t need to be drawn up that way. [*]... decided at the expense of the greatest moments and drama. [*]Further, most of the best game endings would have been lost. Yes, the game winners could still happen. But removing the time factor takes out a lot of drama. [/LIST] I'll address this last point, because it's a holdup for a lot of people. The following things don't have timers or clocks ticking down or really any relevant clocks at all and yet they manage drama just fine: [LIST] [*]Overtime sudden death playoff hockey. [*]Walk-off baseball home runs, or bottom of the 9th home team trailing or tied in general. [*]Penalty kicks or shootouts in general. [*]Tennis final set tiebreaker. [*]Golf major playoff holes. [*]Like half the sports in the Olympics. [/LIST] Underdog UConn is playing Pittsburgh in the Big East tournament, and UConn needs 2 points to win. And if UConn doesn't score and Pitt gets the ball back, they're almost assuredly going to win themselves. Pitt is the better team, but UConn has Kemba. Kemba is taking the shot. Everyone knows it. But oh , Pitt switched the screen. UConn clears out. Pitt can't help because a lapsed D layup ends the game. Kemba sets his sights on McGhee. He goes after him. He crosses him up. He steps baaaack. McGhee falls over! Kemba rises! Kemba HIT IT! UCONN WINS ON THE GREATNESS OF KEMBA! Is it really that different without the buzzer? The result is the same, the stakes are 90% the same. And you potentially have multiple game winning shot attempts. Overtime playoff hockey is my favorite comparison. The teams go back and forth. The tension is high because it is a fast paced sport and you feel like you're holding your breath the whole time because the end could come at almost any time. A turnover, a steal, a crazy shot etc. could change a whole game or a whole season. The shootout comparison is interesting as well. People hate shootouts because they're not the real game. They're just 1 element that's given more importance than the actual game. But sports use them because they're decisive and exciting as hell. Well the Elam ending is like a shootout using actual gameplay. Best of both worlds. Picture a different game this time. Where the buzzer beater DIDN'T go in. Now instead of fouling immediately and shooting anticlimactic free throws with 0.3 seconds left on the clock, the other team needs to score to win. Our hearts are pounding after that game winner that just missed. But now our team needs to play defense. We're digging our nails into our thighs. All the players are LOCKED IN. Weakside D takes a risk and comes over for a huge block! We grab the board. Our fastbreak is on! We're going the other way! The guy who made the block is sprinting down court. He's got a step on his man! The point guard's penetration is stepped at the wing, but he sees him! Alley-oop DUNK FOR THE WIN! Great plays will happen. Drama will happen. Will there be less full court heaves that miss 99% of the time? Yes. But there will always be crazy shots to win it. There will be plenty of plays equivalent to Ray Allen's "game winner" against Georgetown. That had 12 seconds left, but could actually be a game winner with the Elam ending. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach