Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: TBT

TBT 1 week 6 days ago #355601

  • Section9
  • Section9's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 1707
  • Thank you received: 383

Logen wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote:

Amaseinyourface wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote: First time I watched this tournament was tonight. Good game and surprisingly because I don’t like “gimmicks” (still hate the DH and replay) I liked the end of game format very much.


A team with a 10 pt. lead when the EE goes into effect likes the rule very much, the team that's behind, not so much. Although I like it from the standpoint of avoiding an on going parade to the line, the team that's behind often resorts to throwing up long threes to try and get back in it. That changes the flow of the game.

I'm still not convinced it's the way to go and I hope it's a loooong way from being adopted by the NCAA.


It’s the opposite. The team that’s behind likes it because they always have a chance. Get a stop and you keep playing.


Totally agree, I would much rather see the team behind dig in to get stops than foul repeatedly. If they can’t figure out that is the way to get back in, too bad.[/quote

So instead what's been happening is that the team's that behind rush down court don't try to set up a play and jack up long distance 3s that have little or no chance to go in. So that's better than watching fouling to get back in it? Both solutions suck, but at least fouling forces the team that's ahead to make fts.

Has anyone checked to see how many teams that were up by 10 or more when the EE went into effect actually lost? Probably none. Maybe we should have the section9 ending. If a team's up by 10 + at the 4 minute mark, invoke the mercy rule and end the game!:) ;)

It'd save us the agony of fouling and rushed chucked shots.


Except throwing up threes is still within the context of the game. I see a lot of poor basketball regardless of time, score, etc. Fouling on purpose is just not a natural part of the game; digging in and getting stops certainly is. While I wish there was less of it, dopey play is also part of the game.


Fouling at the end of the game is also "within the context of the game" as defined by most coaches, who think they've got nothing to lose by fouling and forcing the other team to win it at the FT line.

Neither solution is ideal. I think the EE is a unique approach by I doubt it has any chance of being enacted by the NBA or NCAA.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Section9. Reason: bad juju

TBT 1 week 6 days ago #355612

  • richard A Steinfeld
  • richard  A Steinfeld's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 3435
  • Thank you received: 734
Overseas Elite lost.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

TBT 1 week 6 days ago #355618

  • NCJohnnie
  • NCJohnnie's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Posts: 3041
  • Thank you received: 3376
Richard A Steinfeld wrote: Overseas Elite lost.

Tough one, but OE's streak couldn't last forever. Proud of DJ, Justin & Paris' (until this year) success together over past few years. They were part of a Johnny team that gave us some great thrills as seniors!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

TBT 1 week 5 days ago #355626

  • Logen
  • Logen's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 2963
  • Thank you received: 1182

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote:

Amaseinyourface wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote: First time I watched this tournament was tonight. Good game and surprisingly because I don’t like “gimmicks” (still hate the DH and replay) I liked the end of game format very much.


A team with a 10 pt. lead when the EE goes into effect likes the rule very much, the team that's behind, not so much. Although I like it from the standpoint of avoiding an on going parade to the line, the team that's behind often resorts to throwing up long threes to try and get back in it. That changes the flow of the game.

I'm still not convinced it's the way to go and I hope it's a loooong way from being adopted by the NCAA.


It’s the opposite. The team that’s behind likes it because they always have a chance. Get a stop and you keep playing.


Totally agree, I would much rather see the team behind dig in to get stops than foul repeatedly. If they can’t figure out that is the way to get back in, too bad.[/quote

So instead what's been happening is that the team's that behind rush down court don't try to set up a play and jack up long distance 3s that have little or no chance to go in. So that's better than watching fouling to get back in it? Both solutions suck, but at least fouling forces the team that's ahead to make fts.

Has anyone checked to see how many teams that were up by 10 or more when the EE went into effect actually lost? Probably none. Maybe we should have the section9 ending. If a team's up by 10 + at the 4 minute mark, invoke the mercy rule and end the game!:) ;)

It'd save us the agony of fouling and rushed chucked shots.


Except throwing up threes is still within the context of the game. I see a lot of poor basketball regardless of time, score, etc. Fouling on purpose is just not a natural part of the game; digging in and getting stops certainly is. While I wish there was less of it, dopey play is also part of the game.


Fouling at the end of the game is also "within the context of the game" as defined by most coaches, who think they've got nothing to lose by fouling and forcing the other team to win it at the FT line.

Neither solution is ideal. I think the EE is a unique approach by I doubt it has any chance of being enacted by the NBA or NCAA.


No, fouling on purpose in certainly not within the context of the game. It can easily be remedied within the current rules if refs enforced the intentional foul penalties on the books. And I never once talked about whether it would be adopted, I just said I liked it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

TBT 1 week 5 days ago #355645

  • Section9
  • Section9's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 1707
  • Thank you received: 383

Logen wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote:

Amaseinyourface wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote: First time I watched this tournament was tonight. Good game and surprisingly because I don’t like “gimmicks” (still hate the DH and replay) I liked the end of game format very much.


A team with a 10 pt. lead when the EE goes into effect likes the rule very much, the team that's behind, not so much. Although I like it from the standpoint of avoiding an on going parade to the line, the team that's behind often resorts to throwing up long threes to try and get back in it. That changes the flow of the game.

I'm still not convinced it's the way to go and I hope it's a loooong way from being adopted by the NCAA.


It’s the opposite. The team that’s behind likes it because they always have a chance. Get a stop and you keep playing.


Totally agree, I would much rather see the team behind dig in to get stops than foul repeatedly. If they can’t figure out that is the way to get back in, too bad.[/quote

So instead what's been happening is that the team's that behind rush down court don't try to set up a play and jack up long distance 3s that have little or no chance to go in. So that's better than watching fouling to get back in it? Both solutions suck, but at least fouling forces the team that's ahead to make fts.

Has anyone checked to see how many teams that were up by 10 or more when the EE went into effect actually lost? Probably none. Maybe we should have the section9 ending. If a team's up by 10 + at the 4 minute mark, invoke the mercy rule and end the game!:) ;)

It'd save us the agony of fouling and rushed chucked shots.


Except throwing up threes is still within the context of the game. I see a lot of poor basketball regardless of time, score, etc. Fouling on purpose is just not a natural part of the game; digging in and getting stops certainly is. While I wish there was less of it, dopey play is also part of the game.


Fouling at the end of the game is also "within the context of the game" as defined by most coaches, who think they've got nothing to lose by fouling and forcing the other team to win it at the FT line.

Neither solution is ideal. I think the EE is a unique approach by I doubt it has any chance of being enacted by the NBA or NCAA.


No, fouling on purpose in certainly not within the context of the game. It can easily be remedied within the current rules if refs enforced the intentional foul penalties on the books. And I never once talked about whether it would be adopted, I just said I liked it.


Let's agree to disagree about the fouling thing. There's a difference between fouling to force the other team to make fts, which just about every college coach uses when they're behind, and intentional fouling which is often called when a player either commits a hard foul or fouls a player who has a clear path to the basket on a fast break.

Maybe the solution would be awarding free throws and possession of the ball to the fouled team in the last two minutes?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

TBT 1 week 5 days ago #355680

  • austour
  • austour's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 5339
  • Thank you received: 797

The Palpable Buzz wrote: I reached out to Paris Horne. He is not playing with overseas elite this year because he is recovering from a torn patella tendon.


Yes, that was reported in the lead up to the tourney. He was an AC and on the bench, saw him on the coverage f ew etimes. Hewould have received a share of winnings.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

TBT 1 week 5 days ago #355684

  • Logen
  • Logen's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 2963
  • Thank you received: 1182

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote:

Amaseinyourface wrote:

Section9 wrote:

Logen wrote: First time I watched this tournament was tonight. Good game and surprisingly because I don’t like “gimmicks” (still hate the DH and replay) I liked the end of game format very much.


A team with a 10 pt. lead when the EE goes into effect likes the rule very much, the team that's behind, not so much. Although I like it from the standpoint of avoiding an on going parade to the line, the team that's behind often resorts to throwing up long threes to try and get back in it. That changes the flow of the game.

I'm still not convinced it's the way to go and I hope it's a loooong way from being adopted by the NCAA.


It’s the opposite. The team that’s behind likes it because they always have a chance. Get a stop and you keep playing.


Totally agree, I would much rather see the team behind dig in to get stops than foul repeatedly. If they can’t figure out that is the way to get back in, too bad.[/quote

So instead what's been happening is that the team's that behind rush down court don't try to set up a play and jack up long distance 3s that have little or no chance to go in. So that's better than watching fouling to get back in it? Both solutions suck, but at least fouling forces the team that's ahead to make fts.

Has anyone checked to see how many teams that were up by 10 or more when the EE went into effect actually lost? Probably none. Maybe we should have the section9 ending. If a team's up by 10 + at the 4 minute mark, invoke the mercy rule and end the game!:) ;)

It'd save us the agony of fouling and rushed chucked shots.


Except throwing up threes is still within the context of the game. I see a lot of poor basketball regardless of time, score, etc. Fouling on purpose is just not a natural part of the game; digging in and getting stops certainly is. While I wish there was less of it, dopey play is also part of the game.


Fouling at the end of the game is also "within the context of the game" as defined by most coaches, who think they've got nothing to lose by fouling and forcing the other team to win it at the FT line.

Neither solution is ideal. I think the EE is a unique approach by I doubt it has any chance of being enacted by the NBA or NCAA.


No, fouling on purpose in certainly not within the context of the game. It can easily be remedied within the current rules if refs enforced the intentional foul penalties on the books. And I never once talked about whether it would be adopted, I just said I liked it.


Let's agree to disagree about the fouling thing. There's a difference between fouling to force the other team to make fts, which just about every college coach uses when they're behind, and intentional fouling which is often called when a player either commits a hard foul or fouls a player who has a clear path to the basket on a fast break.

Maybe the solution would be awarding free throws and possession of the ball to the fouled team in the last two minutes?


We can certainly agree to disagree but I prefer your solution which is the rule on the books for intentional fouls. I agree all coaches do it, which means all refs can recognize it, so call it that way. I prefer that to the gimmick but I prefer the gimmick to watching 30 minutes of intentional fouling.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: mkras99SJUFAN2espkengmanlawmanfankranmarsOhioFanotisredmannorthKnight

Follow redmen.com on Twitter