I mean, is it really any different or more fair that the losing team couldn't respond to a game winning shot cause the clock ran out?


One thing you haven't considered is an Elam Ending can make 20 pt come backs in the "final minutes" possible. And it's made possible with a team doing this: buckling down and playing some of the most amazing defense you've ever seen

vs this:

foul, spend a minute walking to the free throw line, spend two minutes at the free throw line as subs are made, quick possession, foul and repeat.



"But it's kind of boring cause a team makes a bucket and suddenly the game's over." I don't see how that's more boring than a team draining the shot clock for a violation, having a stoppage in play, and then forcing the losing team to inbound the ball just to officially claim the loss.


There's quirks to the current ending that can make for a boring final 5 minutes. An argument can be made that at least with the Elam
Ending a team with a 30 pt lead has to actually keep trying to end the game. There's also quirks to the Elam Ending in that there would be no more half court buzzer beater lucky winning shots. Those would most definitely be gone as nobody would ever take such a shot in an Elam Ending. But at least it always ends with teams still playing offense and defense to the very last shot no matter the score.