Monday, March 24, 2008

Basketball--change the rules!

I have been affected by the "March Madness."

I don't follow basketball very closely, but I do get caught up in the excitement surrounding the NCAA tournament. Try as I might, I just can't watch basketball for more than a few minutes before I start thinking they should change the rules.

This happened again this past weekend. So please allow me to offer, once again, my plan to make basketball more compelling.

So what changes would Commissioner Remy make? Funny you should ask:

* Change/Remove/Amend the 3-point line.

Why is it like 3 feet behind the free throw line? I don't see how it's any more difficult shooting a jumpshot from a few feet behind the foul line than dribbling past three dudes to get a layup.

I think they should either get rid of it, or add more lines. Why not have half-court be a five-point line? Yes, I know, that's ridiculous....but if you're going to have a three-point line, why stop there?

* Fewer time-outs

This should definitely be changed. It's annoying to know once the crowd starts getting loud at a basketball game, a timeout will be called. That's probably because each team has like 40 timeouts a game. I say give them one or two per half. People always say it would allow teams to use momentum to build a big lead but, by that same logic, it would also allow for teams trailing late in the games to mount comebacks if they start playing well.

I feel like the joke is on the fans. Anytime the crowd gets loud and into the game--timeout! How deflating.

* No backcourt violation

Who cares? It's a free country. Let them do what they want. Plus, from where else could you shoot a 5-pointer?

* Play to 100 (or some other arbitrary figure)

I'd rather watch eye surgery than the end of a basketball game. It's so boring. Foul, free throws, foul, free throws, foul, Ron Artest punches some drunk dude, free throws, etc.

If the first team to reach 100 points won the game, you wouldn't see the silly fouling towards the end of games. It seems to me the outcome of many basketball games would be reversed if the game were 15 seconds longer/shorter--so which is the better team? Plus, the game would be tremendously compelling, knowing each team would have to keep playing and not just rely on running out the clock.

* No fouling out

If someone wants to commit a bunch of fouls, why not? The other team will get free throws. Plus, it would create an incentive for teams to find players that can actually SHOOT the ball and make their free throws if fouled. It's silly to have a sport in which some of the professional players make 50%-60% of their free throws. How embarrassing.

By eliminating the "foul-out," there would no longer be a disincentive to foul a guy who can't shoot free throws. However, there wouldn't be an increase in fouls committed, since teams would probably adapt and start better shooters and not just big fat guys that can dunk.

* In sum, a better product!

But, then again, I'm a moron and really have no idea how to play basketball. I'm probably wrong, but I would certainly watch more basketball if these changes were implemented! Let me be commissioner, March Madness!


Tanya said...

You might want to start out on the bottom rung, Remy, say by coaching the Pacers. We need somebody who can weed the thugs out!

joepinion said...

Remy, you think like Dick Vitale: