Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 61

Thread: Rules changes?

  1. #1

    Default Rules changes?

    Do you have any suggestions for rules changes that would make NBA basketball better? Here's a few specific questions:


    1. Is NBA basketball a contact sport or a collision sport? What should it be?

    Basketball was conceived as a strict non-contact sport. Over time it changed to allow some touching and leverage -- making it a contact sport. But today the NBA allows so much contact that it is almost a collision sport. If you think it is currently on the wrong side of that divide, what rules changes could help?


    2. What rules changes would make NBA basktball easier to officiate?

    This question relates to the Doneghy scandal. Some people believe that, though it cannot be proven, the NBA is clean except for one or a few rogue refs who get caught. Others believe that, though it cannot be proven, the NBA is rotten.

    The problem is not just Donaghy, but the fact that good officiating "cannot be proven." No doubt a lot of fans are ignorant, and some of us (me, particularly) can't see the quick action clearly enough to second guess the refs. But even a very thorough and expert assessment like that presented by 82games.com (link below) finds a significant number of "bad" calls, leaving fans to dispute whether they were deliberate cheats or just mistakes because the ref saw the action from a bad angle.

    http://www.82games.com/lakerskingsgame6.htm


    The way to break this knot is to make the game more black and white. For the sake of its reputation, the NBA needs to allow fewer situations where the right call is unclear. How can this be done without harming the game?


    3. How about raising the rim to 12 feet?

    I'm just asking!

    Raising the rim might shift the game from pure athleticism, back to skill and
    team play. Would you welcome that? Rick Carlisle has suggested raising the rim, so it isn't a totally loopy idea.

    This thread, as ChicagoJ would say, "is built for the off-season." This is the lowest time of year, so it is an opportunity to think outside the box. Many people hate the idea of any change. But the game we enjoy has changed a lot from Dr. Naismith's peach basket game, and there's no saying that the time for changes has ceased.

    Final word: We've discussed many ideas affecting the fan experience (parking, food, sound effects, etc.) in other threads. For this thread, please stick to the game itself as it happens on the floor.
    And I won't be here to see the day
    It all dries up and blows away
    I'd hang around just to see
    But they never had much use for me
    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

  2. #2
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    31,981

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    I guess I have some radical ideas.

    1) Over the past 5 or 6 seasons restrictions have been placed on contact and the game isn't nearly as phyical as it was during the 90's. I wish the refs would use better judgment in making the calls, knock off the ticky tak calls on the
    perimeter

    2) OK, here is the radical part and I fully am aware that it will never happen, in fact things are moving in the exact opposite direction. It is the refs job to make the correct call given the situation. Yes I'm taking about situational officiating.

    The best ref in my lifetime was Earl Strom and he certainly didn't work a game by the book. He was good enough, talented enough to know how to work the game - and every game is different, every team is different and Earl knew how to make it a good game. (know hold on a minute, he never favored one team over another, he never favored the home team, he never helped the team that was down by 20 points get back in --- but he knew how to keep control of the game and yet let the teams play - and if that meant calling a game involving two very physuical teams differently than a game between two finnese teams, - then dso be it.

    Today refs are taught to make calls, 20-30 years ago refs were taught to work a game. I know no one will agree with me - but I think that is the biggest problem with the refs today.

    3. I don't see the point in raising the rim. Rick suggested making the rim larger, so shooting % would go up

  3. #3
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    8,830
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Hand Checking either needs to go or be called.

    I would like to see the key enlarged. That would create spacing would it not.

    Watching the Colts game I feel that over officiating detracts from the experience for the casual fan. Avid fans want the sanctity of the game preserved, but that will slow things down.

    The rim should never exceed the size it is right now. Leave the 3pt line the same.

    Like UB I think that the refs should do their jobs and things should improve.

  4. #4
    Member idioteque's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    washington dc
    Age
    27
    Posts
    9,001

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    All I have to say is basketball needs to be more of a contact sport. Like UB said, there have been rule changes during this decade that have made large facets of the more physical play of the 1990's illegal. Look at the guys on the court. They're big guys that can take a little contact. Ticky tack calls on the perimeter need to be stopped. In sum, that's bull****.
    Already stoked for 2013-2014.

  5. #5
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,585
    Mood

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    UB, how did he control a game with one physical team and one finesse team? Did he also control the game by not calling fouls on the best players?

    As for the question at hand, I think I can sum my feelings up by saying I don't believe in throwing mud on the game's intentions just because it makes someone or something look "cooler".

  6. #6
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    I don't see value in rule changes. You cannot legislate quality of play. The rules should be enforced, as they exist, and the players and coaches should learn to play within them. That, to me, is the best way for the game to improve.

    I don't agree with "situational officiating" from three different perspectives:

    1. If it's a foul with 5 minutes left in the second quarter, then it damn well better be a foul with 5 seconds left in the fourth. This, to me, is the exact opposite of "letting the players decide the game."

    2. To this day, I believe one of the contributing factors to the brawl that has never, ever been pointed out properly was the way this variable officiating created such a toxic atmosphere. The Pacers-Pistons ECF in 2004 was one of the most brutal displays I've ever seen. The two teams were in a constant rugby scrum and it created tension (and outright hatred) amongst the players, but more importantly between the teams and the fanbase. Am I mitigating Artest or anyone else's responsibility here? No, absolutely not. I'm just saying that this was never, IMO, properly explored.

    3. "Situational officiating" invariably ends up favoring one team or another. What happens when a finesse team plays a physical team. How do you decide which team you're going to allow to play "their game"? The gold standard for officiating should be consistency. As much as humanly possible, officials should strive to make the same call every time. The players and coaches should adapt to the rules. They are good enough to do well within their framework. (Note: this doesn't mean that the game should be called like a junior high dance...just that part of each game shouldn't be trying to figure out what's a foul and what's not.)

    However, there is one rule that I'd like to see either enforced the way it's written or removed entirely: the restricted area.

    An offensive foul should never be called if the contact is with a secondary defensive player who has established a defensive position within a designated "restricted area" near the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul.

    The "restricted area" for this purpose is the area bounded by an arc with a 4-foot radius measured from the middle of the basket.
    This circle under the basket was meant to clearly delineate a common practice rule: that charges were never called when the defensive player was "too far under the basket". I thought it was a great idea, because it would (largely) remove question about why the charge wasn't called. The problem is that now, instead a making a no-call when a defender gets good position, but has his heels on or inside the arc, the officials are calling blocking fouls. If the guy has position, then he should not be called for a foul. He can't draw the charge, but he shouldn't be penalized further with a defensive foul. A lot of wasted fouls here.

    Also, I've always preferred the old illegal defense rules to the new zone/defensive 3-second rules, and I'd love to see the bonus free throws go back to 1+1, but I'm not pushing horribly hard for an actual rule change.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Help me out here, please. When I posed the question in the OP, I tried to distinguish between "contact" and collision" according to the definitions below:


    Current medical terminology in the United States uses the term collision sport rather than contact sport to refer to Rugby, American football, lacrosse, and ice hockey. The term contact sport is used to refer to sports, such as basketball and association football that allow limited contact. For example, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement in 2001 entitled "Medical Conditions Affecting Sports Participation" that included the following definitions:
    In "collision" sports (eg, boxing, ice hockey, football, and rodeo), athletes purposely hit or collide with each other or inanimate objects, including the ground, with great force. In "contact" sports (eg, basketball and soccer), athletes routinely make contact with each other or inanimate objects but usually with less force than in collision sports.


    Committee on Sports Medicine and Fitness, American Academy of Pediatrics,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_sport


    The question is, where should basketball be on the continuum from non-contact sport (tennis) to collision sport (football), and how can possible rules changes get it to and keep it in the right place?
    And I won't be here to see the day
    It all dries up and blows away
    I'd hang around just to see
    But they never had much use for me
    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

  8. #8
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,585
    Mood

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    It's closer to non-contact than it is to collision, as it should be. Make a new game if Joe Fan wants more contact, but don't *******ize basketball.

  9. #9
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,748

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    The blocking foul is ridiculous. If you have position, who gives a crap where you are. They need to get rid of the restricted area and make blocking/charging foul more subjective.

  10. #10
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    31,981

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    However, there is one rule that I'd like to see either enforced the way it's written or removed entirely: the restricted area.

    This circle under the basket was meant to clearly delineate a common practice rule: that charges were never called when the defensive player was "too far under the basket". I thought it was a great idea, because it would (largely) remove question about why the charge wasn't called. The problem is that now, instead a making a no-call when a defender gets good position, but has his heels on or inside the arc, the officials are calling blocking fouls. If the guy has position, then he should not be called for a foul. He can't draw the charge, but he shouldn't be penalized further with a defensive foul. A lot of wasted fouls here.

    I could not agree with you more. I thought when the rule went into effect that if the defensive player was set and ready to take a charge, but was within in the restricted area - then a no call was made. Sure a collision resulted - but no call - in fact that is the way it was usually called prior to the restricted area being put in officially. And it seemed like the first year or two of the rule it was a no call, but no more, now it is a blocking call everytime. It bugs me, not sure if the rule was changed or if the interpretation was.

    Overall though there are way, way, way too many charges called. it used to be that players wouldn't try to try charges, a big guy would try to block shots and others would player position defense. Jeff van Gundy whose teams often draw more charges than anyone, because he teaches it, - he said on the telecasts that he thinks it hurts the game, but it is the way you have to play defense these days

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Frankfort, IN
    Posts
    8,892

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The blocking foul is ridiculous. If you have position, who gives a crap where you are. They need to get rid of the restricted area and make blocking/charging foul more subjective.
    I've always believed this - not sure about more subjective but getting rid of the restricted area.

    Also, get rid of defensive 3-seconds. If you're going to allow a zone, allow a friggin' zone and if that means double teaming Tim Duncan off the ball, so be it.

    The biggest thing they could do though to improve the purity of the game is enforce palming. I know that's not a rule change but allowing a player to carry the ball while he takes 2 steps makes him close to impossible to defend individually.
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

  12. #12
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    31,981

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The blocking foul is ridiculous. If you have position, who gives a crap where you are. They need to get rid of the restricted area and make blocking/charging foul more subjective.
    Standing right under the basket is horrible defense, so why reward horrible defense by calling a charging foul. that is the thoery behind the restricted area and I agree with the rule by the way. Refs have never allowed charging when the defender was under the basket even prior to the line actually being there

  13. #13
    Well lubricated Skaut_Ech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,389

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    I'll tell you my biggest gripe. Over everything else.

    Moving picks.

    I know some of you may laugh, but I think it's part of the foundation of so much bad play. Used to be you had to set your feet for a screen/pick. You couldn't initiate the contact.

    It seems thse days that screens are set the same way as a tight end in football. You see the screener put his arms up, run up and push/lean/shove on the defender. WTH is that??

    Because it never gets called anymore, it gives a huge advantage to the offensive player with the ball.

    And I think it was a conscious effort by the league to boost scoring.

    I also thjink it was part of what UB and count55 are talking about with the restricted area. I think an effort was made to speed up the game and boost scoring. Part of the effort was by giving offesive players less impedimint in getting to the basket (allowing screeners to throw "blocks") and I think they felt their counterbalance was teh restricted area and charging calls.
    Last edited by Skaut_Ech; 08-04-2008 at 11:35 AM.
    Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

  14. #14
    Member idioteque's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    washington dc
    Age
    27
    Posts
    9,001

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It's closer to non-contact than it is to collision, as it should be. Make a new game if Joe Fan wants more contact, but don't *******ize basketball.
    I think I agree with this post. Do you think there is too much, not enough, or the right amount of contact allowed in basketball right now?

    I think calls both inside and on the perimeter need to be reduced. The perimeter of obvious reasons, and waaay too many times you see guys get fouls called on them when they get "all ball" inside. No, I don't think you should be able to hack someone when they go inside, but I don't think it should be a call if you push the ball back in the guy's face, either.
    Already stoked for 2013-2014.

  15. #15
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,748

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Standing right under the basket is horrible defense, so why reward horrible defense by calling a charging foul. that is the thoery behind the restricted area and I agree with the rule by the way. Refs have never allowed charging when the defender was under the basket even prior to the line actually being there
    That is what I meant by more subjective. Although this won't make the game easier to officiate, a ref should be able to tell when it's a charging foul, a blocking foul or a no-call.

  16. #16
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Standing right under the basket is horrible defense, so why reward horrible defense by calling a charging foul. that is the thoery behind the restricted area and I agree with the rule by the way. Refs have never allowed charging when the defender was under the basket even prior to the line actually being there
    Also, there was an aspect of protecting the offensive player from injury. The closer to the basket, the more likely the offensive player was to be in a vulnerable position in the air, and an unintentional undercut to occur.

    As to there being way, way too many charges being called, I would argue it's because there are way, way too many charges being committed.

    One area that could cut down on charges is on the pass. Players, by now, should understand that when they go hard to the basket, it's often whether they pass or shoot that determines the call. If they shoot the ball, it's more likely to be a block or no call, but when they get run over a guy on the pass, it's called a charge almost 100% of the time.

    Going back to the old illegal defense rules could also keep big guys from hanging around the lane, making it harder for them to get charges. Officials should also be more sensitive to flopping, but that's a can o' worms. (The only thing that irritates me more than flopping is the constant whining about "floppers and flopping".)

  17. #17
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    If I were king for a day, a dunk shot would only be worth one point.

    If I got a second day of reshaping the rule book, I would eliminate the stupid half-circle under the rim. If it is a charge somewhere else on the court, it should be called a charge at the most important part of the court.

    Frankly, the court needs to be wider and the three-point line pushed out to 25/26 feet. But I don't think current arenas could handle a 65-foot wide court, so that will never happen.

    I would put the original illegal defense rules back in.

    The other stuff isn't a rules change, per se. But the game of basketball is supposed to be free-flowing. Illegal (moving) screens should be called consistently. I guess if I were to make a rule change, it would be for offensive fouls to count as "2" personal fouls for a player, instead of one.

    In that vain, I'd also eliminate the "bonus" (I guess it is now called the "penalty". All fouls (offensive or defensive) result in two free throws.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  18. #18
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    31,981

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Oh, another one, No foul outs.

  19. #19
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,748

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Oh, another one, No foul outs.
    Then what's to stop me from fouling Duncan or Shaq etc. every time down?

  20. #20
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,585
    Mood

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by dcpacersfan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think I agree with this post. Do you think there is too much, not enough, or the right amount of contact allowed in basketball right now?

    I think calls both inside and on the perimeter need to be reduced. The perimeter of obvious reasons, and waaay too many times you see guys get fouls called on them when they get "all ball" inside. No, I don't think you should be able to hack someone when they go inside, but I don't think it should be a call if you push the ball back in the guy's face, either.
    Well I certainly don't think it's thug-ball anymore.

    Honestly I could answer this question in December when I'm watching games better than I could now.

    I'm of the "call the foul if it's actually a foul" mentality, so I'd only support less fouls on the perimeter if it's calls that were made under the suspicion of contact, and not actually seen contact.

    I don't, however, agree with letting guys make contact other than of course on the ball.

    As for the post, the purist side of me thinks even the idea of posting up and backing people down goes against the original spirit of the game, but I'll accept that as here to stay and simply say this: If the offensive player elbows his man, shoulders his man, pins his man, grabs his man, or he knocks him (legitimately; not a flop) on his ***, there damn well better be a whistle.

    As for the no-charge zone, I'm not a fan. If the defender is under the basket, his failure to keep his man further away is failure enough. No need to compound it by letting the offensive player run him over. He doesn't need the help if he's 1 or 2 feet from the bucket. And if he truly does need help, that's his problem.

    As I understand it, the only thing, generally speaking, that is supposed to matter when it comes to an offensive foul is that the defender is at a spot on the floor before the offensive player.

    He doesn't actually have to be standing still, he just can't be denying the offensive player his own spot on the floor by moving into him or sliding in front of him laterally.

    The defender can actually be moving backwards and still have his opponent called for an offensive foul if he runs him over. He just can't move into him or towards him to deny him position when he's moving.

    I'd prefer the NBA leave it at that and don't worry about a no-charge zone.

  21. #21
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    31,981

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Then what's to stop me from fouling Duncan or Shaq etc. every time down?
    This gets back to my earlier discussion on the refs. Earl Strom is likely to have gone over to the coach who was instructing his team to fould Shaq or any other player off the ball and on purpose - earl would have told the coach, don't waste your time because I'm not calling it.

    Of course that won't work today, so a new rule is needed - no intentional fouls off the ball at any point of the game - they have that rule in the last 2 minutes, so just extend it to the whole game.

  22. #22
    Member OakMoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    35
    Posts
    3,030

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I could not agree with you more. I thought when the rule went into effect that if the defensive player was set and ready to take a charge, but was within in the restricted area - then a no call was made. Sure a collision resulted - but no call - in fact that is the way it was usually called prior to the restricted area being put in officially. And it seemed like the first year or two of the rule it was a no call, but no more, now it is a blocking call everytime. It bugs me, not sure if the rule was changed or if the interpretation was.

    Overall though there are way, way, way too many charges called. it used to be that players wouldn't try to try charges, a big guy would try to block shots and others would player position defense. Jeff van Gundy whose teams often draw more charges than anyone, because he teaches it, - he said on the telecasts that he thinks it hurts the game, but it is the way you have to play defense these days
    I agree. The one rule change I would make is not even really a rule change. I would just say tell refs that there need to be more no calls in questionable charge/block situations. I realize this would favor the defense a bit, but it also might stop some of the ridiculous drives just to draw blocking fouls that we see about 6-8 times a game.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  23. #23
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Oh, another one, No foul outs.
    I think I would be forced to seriously consider to stop watching the NBA if this happened.

    I believe we've had this conversation once before, and I believe we're about to veer of into a discussion of why don't they disqualify NFL linemen for holding, etc.

    Rather than re-making the previous argument, I'm going to try to find it again.

  24. #24
    It Might Be a Soft J JayRedd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Age
    33
    Posts
    12,158

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    The game is mostly fine.

    I'm not a big fan of the generaly p*ssyification on contact allowed. I do like to see more scoring just like the next guy, but I've always believed that contact should be allowed up to the point that it significantly affects a players ability to score. Obviously, it's a lot easier to score when no one can touch you and it's impossible to score when someone is maiming you...but there is a line in the middle, and that's where fair competition lives.

    My biggest beef is that there are waaaay too many charge calls. When a guy is 250 lbs and falls down from petty contact, he's a liar. This isn't Cameron Indoor and they shouldn't be bailing out crappy defense. Belly up like a man and try to deter the guy from scoring...don't tumble to the ground with an ouchie like a five-year-old.

    Moving screens are annoying, but calling them extensively would only slow down the game. Maybe they should do a "no tolerance" policy for like two months like they did with technicals a few years ago and it would help cut it down for the long-term.

    Traveling is getting a little excessive too. The three-step, double-jump stop stuff that LeBron does and the drag-my-pivot-foot-half-way-down-the-lane spin move of Flash are a little absurd. The only reason that I don't really have a problem with it is that everyone in the League is allowed to get away with it if they're just athletic, coordinated and graceful enough that it doesn't look awkward in real-time. So it's not really like they're given more leeway than, say, Matt Harpring...it's just that bumble-foots like Matt Harpring look awkward enough taking two steps to fool anyone into thinking an extra step is a natural part of their move.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChicagoJ
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If I were king for a day, a dunk shot would only be worth one point.
    There's no way a 38-year-old just used that word.
    Last edited by JayRedd; 08-04-2008 at 12:44 PM.
    Read my Pacers blog:
    8points9seconds.com

    Follow my twitter:

    @8pts9secs


  25. #25
    Member Taterhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,065

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Rules changes?

    The one thing I would like to see them do is change up to a single elimination, all in playoff to rival the NCAA tournament. Then maybe the 2 finalists play a best of three to decide the champ.

    I think the current format is bad for the league. The series are too long, and most are boring. Over half the teams are left out, and their fans become uninterested. The most exciting sports competition is the NCAA tourney, and it's because of the format.

Similar Threads

  1. SAVE THE NBA! SPREAD THIS POST!
    By SamBear in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 06-19-2008, 06:54 PM
  2. Bball's Indy 500 thread: Photos plus Rants and Raves
    By Bball in forum Market Square (General Non-Sports Discussion)
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-28-2008, 11:23 PM
  3. REPORT: Mayo violated NCAA rules
    By Ownagedood in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 05-23-2008, 09:04 AM
  4. The Official 2007-08 IU Basketball Thread
    By Shade in forum Market Square (General Non-Sports Discussion)
    Replies: 290
    Last Post: 03-22-2008, 01:41 AM
  5. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-11-2008, 02:20 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •