Reply With Quote
Pity post for a pitiful thread
Shorten the games from 48 to 36 minutes; 9 minutes per quarter.
This would do a lot of things. Aside from reducing fatigue, it would also naturally correct the scores so they would resemble the scores from yesteryear when you factor in the extreme change in pace of today's basketball compared to past generations'. You wouldn't have scores averaging in the 120s and 130s. They would be in the 90s on average where they belong. Some games in the 100s, some in the 80s etc like before.
It would go a long way towards preserving the integrity of long-term official records because it would end the era of watered-down high offensive statistics due to the modern pace of the game.
I believe the players would definitely go for this, and also the owners should too because it would help viewing because it would shorten the duration of the games to 2 hours or less, even factoring in official time outs.
Another idea: contract the 2 most failing teams in terms of attendance and popularity, the Hornets and Pelicans. Go back to having 28 teams, 2 conferences and 4 total divisions. Division winner guaranteed top 2 seed in conference. Bring back the significance of winning your division. Also, each team gets an even 4 games against every conference opponent and 2 against the opposite conference like before, so no excuses of "but it's not fair they won the conference by 1 game only because they played team X only 3 times but we had to play team X 4 times this year".
What say you guys?
Pity post for a pitiful thread
NBA is a business. As long as NY and LA can make billions without winning, and there are lucrative TV contracts in both (and profit sharing in the NBA), "everything is fine".
How about, instead of lottery, make post season tournament for all that didn't make the playoff, to determine who gets first pick.
82 game regular season is ing re ed
Especially in a league with little parity
I can't blame players for being bored with it
But it's a business so it's not gonna change anytime soon
That and/or increase cap/no tax penalties or provide free agency incentives for losing teams so they build up.
How about a hard salary cap like the NFL? No mid level exception. You have to get under the cap to sign any FAs including vet min and draft picks.
Focus of response to horseshue was on bottom tier teams being incentivized to make them more compe ive vs higher standing teams.
Poor performing, high salary teams would be negatively impacted by salary caps (like Lakers).
Hard cap is way to go. Right now cap rules are ridiculosly complicated, and for those willing to pay premium (tax) it is nonexistant. Salary and tax combined, gsw is spending 4x the money spurs are paying.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
