Post a rule change that you think would improve a sport
every now and then I see a sport with a rule (or absence of a rule) that I think is a detriment to the sport. bad rules
In large-entry season-long NFL best-ball tournaments (e.g. on DraftKings & Underdog), get rid of the advancement structure where you're assigned to a random pool after the fantasy regular season.
For instance:
Weeks 1-14: top 2/12 or 1/12 advance - you still need to first beat the folks you drafted with!
Week 15: instead of being assigned to random 12-person pools, just have the top 10% of week 15 scores advance to week 16
Week 16: instead of being assigned to random 12-person pools, just have the top 10% of week 16 scores advance to week 17
Week 17: same as usual for final week
new rule (any sport): when you defeat someone in the playoffs you may select 1 opposing player to join for team for the remainder of the post-season
In basketball, hard fouls and technical fouls on the coach result in Non offending team shooting free throws until they miss.
In basketball, hard fouls and technical fouls on the coach result in Non offending team shooting free throws until they miss.
Worst idea of all time. It's entirely possible that a guy like Curry could make 30+ free throws in a row.
Soccer. Penalty takers should be forced to put the ball on the actual centre of the spot rather than on the very edge of it. No other reason than it annoys me.
On impending shot clock violations, I think the referees should be able to play advantage like they do in soccer. There is nothing more frustrating than when your team plays great defense and blocks a shot or pokes the ball away as the shot clock expires, and then the referee blows the whistle for a shot clock violation just as your defense is about to collect the ball for an obvious run out.
MLB: Remove intentional walks completely at the batter's discretion. Remove the automatic IBB, and allow the batter, if pitched ball 4, to instead choose to remove a strike from the count. If the pitcher pitches a ball on a 3-0 count, it's a balk. If there is no one on base, the batter can choose anyone to throw them one meatball home run derby style before the next real pitch.
MLB: Remove intentional walks completely at the batter's discretion. Remove the automatic IBB, and allow the batter, if pitched ball 4, to instead choose to remove a strike from the count. If the pitcher pitches a ball on a 3-0 count, it's a balk. If there is no one on base, the batter can choose anyone to throw them one meatball home run derby style before the next real pitch.
I think the real solution is to just make it so that anytime a batter draws a walk, the team can choose to put any bench player on 1st base, and the batter starts over. Same for HBP obviously.
Pitching around hitters should not be a viable strategy. It basically just denies the opportunity for the best players to perform, and the real losers are the fans.
Just imagine a theoretical hitter so good that he was walked 100% of the time. It's a flaw in the rules of the game that a player can be so good that the other team doesn't let him hit at all. If a batter significantly better than steroid Bonds ever comes along, the fans will be robbed and there will be no highlights of him.
The DR (designated runners) would be already waiting and ready to run during the at bats so it wouldn't slow the game at all.
Sports are for entertainment, and rules are often added or changed as needed. Basketball didn't always have a shot clock, or a goaltending rule. Then they realized they needed those rules, and added them.
Baseball missed that boat on walks 100+ years ago. Guys like Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, and Barry Bonds should not have the walk be their most common batting result.
NBA: shot clock is 10 seconds for any possession starting with fewer than 60
seconds in 4Q/OT. Maybe only if deficit is single digits.
NBA: shot clock is 10 seconds for any possession starting with fewer than 60
seconds in 4Q/OT. Maybe only if deficit is single digits.
Why? Are we just trying to make the outcome of basketball games more random?
Elam Ending still the superior idea to make basketball endgames bearable. They'll never do it because everybody loves a buzzer-beater, but IMO it's just as exciting to see a team go on like a 12-0 run to win with the other team stuck one point away from the target, or a long tense finish with both teams 1-2 points away and playing actual defense.
Nascar playoff season finale:
Assuming a 36 driver field. Have a daytime race, normal distance, but with only the 32 cars not in the championship 4.
Have a nighttime race with only the championship 4. It removes all the possible shenanigans that come in to play where eliminated drivers can still manipulate the outcome; by causing cautions at the right time for their teammates, or the wrong time for their competitors, by blocking cars on pit lane, by wrecking a playoff driver, etc. Just the final 4, no outside nonsense. And it eliminates Nascar officials from the equation as well, where sometimes they throw a caution for a slow car on the apron, and sometimes they don't, etc. Try it one year. It might be a complete dud of an idea. Or it might be amazing.
Bring back 15 rounds for the biggest boxing matches. Get rid of replay in everything but tennis.
This one specifically to reduce the trope where a team is down 4-10 with under a minute left and instantly fouls every defensive possession. Still thinking of how to fix the team up 3 fouling situation.
NFL essentially expands time last 5 minutes of games, stopping clock on OOB plays. This gives team behind a better chance of winning than if the game clock functioned normally. I have never heard anyone criticizing that as being unfair to the leading team.
Shortening 24 second clock achieves basically the same thing, i.e. adding more possessions in the same time frame.
Please noodle on it a bit and let us know where you land
NFL essentially expands time last 5 minutes of games, stopping clock on OOB plays. This gives team behind a better chance of winning than if the game clock functioned normally. I have never heard anyone criticizing that as being unfair to the leading team.
Shortening 24 second clock achieves basically the same thing, i.e. adding more possessions in the same time frame.
fwiw, the NBA already does a version of what the NFL has, by having the clock stop after a made basket in the final minute of 1Q/2Q/3Q and final two minutes of 4Q.
Sure, but tbf stopping clock on baskets last 2 min of 4th qtr probably adds 20 seconds or so. An NFL play takes at minimum 15 seconds to run. With NFL last 5 minute clock rule going OOB just 4 times saves at least a minute, which can lead up to 8 additional plays.
it is a bit apples and oranges comparing the two but the NBA clock rule on baskets should really apply throughout the game. If they want to speed up the game, then shorten the game to 44 minutes or whatever the equivalent time loss would be.
Running clock with no action is a soccer thing.
I get it. Just pointing out that it's not like the NFL clock rules are a unique thing that no other sport had thought of.
With the new CFP system, in the first 5 second round games, the team that has had a 1st round bye has lost all 5 times.
The question of Rest vs. Rust seems to be Rust in these cases.
Proposal: Give the teams the ability to "defer" their bye. Now, if you think this would allow them to pull a bracket shenanigan to play different teams, no.
If the number 1 seed defers, the number 8 seed becomes the number 1, and the number 1 seed becomes the number 8. Since the 1 seed would normally play the winner of the 8 and 9 seed, the original 1 seed would actually have to play both, assuming they win the first game.
If the number 2 seed defers, 2 and 7 swap. If the number 3 seed defers, 3 and 6 swap. If the number 4 seed defers, 4 and 5 swap.
Then, do it again, If 1 deferred, then the original 8 could defer and swap with 9. If 2 deferred, then the original 7 could defer and swap with 10. If 3 deferred, the original 6 could defer and swap with 11. If 4 deferred, the original 5 could defer and swap with 12.
It keeps the same teams in the same bracket "wedge", but just playing in a different order, if the higher ranked seed so chooses.
Would teams have the stones to defer? Unlikely, since a first round exit for a top 4 team that deferred would probably be seen as one of the worst decisions in CFP history. But it would give an option for a coach who has full faith that his team can win the first round, and then play better in the second round than if they had been resting longer.
