All The Crying About Teams That "Foul Up 3" While Demanding The NBA Change The Rules To Prevent It Is Extremely Embarrassing

Stephen Maturen. Getty Images.

One common theme among fans during the 2024-25 NBA season was their obsession with the NBA changing the rules of the game, all because they "don't like" something or if they find an aspect of NBA basketball "boring". It really doesn't matter what it is, it's all embarrassing to see if you ask me.

"Wahhhh Team X take too many 3s, the NBA has to change the rules! Nobody else can shoot like this!"

"Wahhhhh NBA games are so boring, all they do is just shoot 3s wahhhh"

Those were two of the most common complaints you heard during the year, which I always found to be pathetic. People declaring the NBA needed to change the court, or push back the line etc, all terrible ideas that, for some reason, you couldn't stop hearing. No, the NBA doesn't shoot too many 3s. No, they don't need to remove the corner 3 or change the lines on the court. If you don't want a team to shoot a bunch of 3s against you, I dunno, how about trying to play defense? Take it away? 

When it came to this type of complaining, much of it was nostalgia-driven. People who believe this should happen will also probably tell you the NBA was a much better game to watch in the 90s and early 2000s, which is objectively false, but that's the thing with nostalgia. We always think the past is better than it actually was, and that's DEFINITELY true when it comes to the NBA product of the 90s-early 2000s.

I bring this up because of what took place at the end of another phenomenal playoff game, this time between the Wolves and Thunder in their massive Game 4. While the previous 3 games had been pretty one sided, this was our first true haymaker type of game with both sides executing some incredible shotmaking, neither side backing down and caving under pressure, it was about as good as things get in terms of a playoff game with the Thunder securing the narrow 2 point win

The issue, came in the final 30 or so seconds with the Thunder up 5, 123-118. After a Jaden McDaniels 3PM to bring things within 2 point with 23 seconds left, the game turned into a foul/FT contest. Down 2? Immediate foul. SGA goes to the line and knocks down both. Gobert eventually scored on the next possession to bring things back within 2 with 9 seconds left. Immediate foul. SGA goes 1 for 2, opening up the door for a potential game tying shot right?

Wrong. The Thunder did WHAT EVERY SINGLE BASKETBALL TEAM ON EARTH should be doing in that position, and fouling up 3 before the Wolves can even get a look. This happened a couple more times down the stretch before the Wolves eventually ran out of time and possessions and that was that. 

The "foul up 3" debate certainly isn't new, but I honestly cannot remember a time when we got so much crying about it after the fact. These are playoff games! The entire point is to win and advance! Was it a bummer that such a good game came down to that type of ending? I guess? That's the sport! Strategy is part of winning, and in the playoffs, winning is all that matters.

Instead, all the talk was about how the NBA needs to change the rule when it comes to fouling up 3 because it "ruined the entertainment" or whatever. 

An endless amount of tweets just like this, from all corners of the internet. Fans, talking heads, media people etc

Listen, I am fully aware this may make me a boomer or whatever. I understand the masses may not agree, but I'm sorry, this is pathetic. I also push back that the foul up 3 approach robs us of enjoyment and awesome playoff moments. I'm sorry, did nobody watch this?

Guess who tried the foul up 3 approach? The Thunder! Guess who also did the foul approach, given they were trailing? The Nuggets! Guess what happened? OKC's approach backfired! 

Are FTs the most exciting possession in basketball? No. But it's a part of basketball. Stepping up to the line and being required to make high leverage FTs with the game on the line is a skill, and has its own level of drama. Maybe they make both, maybe they don't. That's sports! I'm sorry if you don't find those situations tense or "entertaining", but that's a YOU problem, not a basketball problem.

The idea that the NBA has to change its rules because some fans find the fouling up 3 scenario "boring" or that it "ruins the entertainment" are just not serious people in my opinion. You don't have to be fully entertained for a full 48 minutes! You are not a child! You know what's fun? Winning. 

Over the last 12+ hours, we've seen it all as a potential solution. Banning the winning team from being able to foul, but the losing team can (????). Or maybe you penalize the winning team for fouling by giving the other team 1 FT and the ball, but then they can turn right around and foul to stop the clock? I also saw an idea that if the winning team does it, the other team gets 3 FTAs (?????????)

If you don't want to be in this type of position, I dunno, play better? Why is there a need to change the rules to make things easier for the team that has been outplayed for 47 minutes, all because the other team is using a strategy that is within the rules to secure victory? I view this as just as embarrassing as anyone who wants to ban the Push Tush. Grow up and stop it. Same thing when players get bent out of shape when someone dunks the ball in a blowout at the end. Don't like it? Prevent them from scoring! 

I get it, people want to see end of game possessions where a team has to get a defensive stop in order to win the game. You know when that happens? All throughout the game! I just think it's a loser's mentality to complain about the fouling up 3 all because of "entertainment" or whatever. I have no rooting interest in who won Game 4 last night, but I found it entertaining as fuck. SGA missing the FT to leave the window open, why can't things also be put on the team down 3? Why couldn't MIN run an inbounds play that got them right into an open 3 so OKC couldn't foul? 

Look, here's an example of what that can look like!

Notice how nobody ever talks about that? We've seen creative end of game tying/winning shots created with an inbounds play where a player goes right into his shot. You can still have those moments even knowing OKC was going to try and foul! But because they didn't execute that way and OKC was able to foul and prevent a 3PA, the rules should change?

I know this may not be the popular opinion. I know I'll probably get roasted for taking a stand against this bizarre obsession with people demanding the NBA change the rules of the game because it's not something they "like". Hate the approach all you want, but that's part of it. Winning in the NBA is hard enough, especially in the playoffs. You don't need to penalize teams that are in a position to win all because of what "might" happen. Be better in the previous 47 minutes.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk.