Semi-OT: What sports would you fix?
I was reading an article on Yahoo Sports about MLB attendance problems and how it might not just be the horrible weather. Writer offers some solutions. I'm not a big baseball fan, but I enjoy sports. I know many people feel that college athletes should be paid, but if you could enact 3 changes/rules to any sport, what would they be?
Not necessarily sport-specific, but I would love for ESPN to adopt something similar to the "crystal ball" rankings when it comes to their on air talent. I'll admit, I don't watch or read ESPN much anymore, but I'd love to see an SEC shill make a prediction, then see underneath his name and obscure accomplishments, a stat that he is only correct on 24% of his predictions.
Also, of interest to Detroit sports fans. I was born in Detroit, and raised in DC so my sports loyalties outside of the Wings and Wolverines are very casual. Great article on why sports should have more fair weather fans as a way to force competency by owners for those interested.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/05/in-praise-of-fair-weather-fandom/556841/
April 17th, 2018 at 10:28 AM ^
April 17th, 2018 at 10:19 AM ^
1. Limit video reviews in football/basketball to 60 seconds. If it's not definitve by then, stay with the origional call.
2. Goddammit, call traveling in the NBA. There was a highlight of James Harden's 'excellent' footwork the other night where he makes a 3 off a double(!)-step back move in which he takes 4 steps after he has picked up his dribble. Come on.
2. Reduce the NBA season to 76 games, not a drastic change, but a balanced schedule.
4 other teams in your division 4 times = 16 games
10 other teams in your conference 3 times = 30 games
15 teams in the other conference 2 times = 30 games
April 17th, 2018 at 10:22 AM ^
The video replays is a good one. I think they're necessary, but it is also necessary to put a time limit on them.
April 17th, 2018 at 10:26 AM ^
1) end of game fouls in basketball are all technicals
2) clock keeps running in football after kickoffs (eliminates TO-kick-TO) and more often in general
3) 30-second pitch clock in baseball
April 17th, 2018 at 10:30 AM ^
Tickets for tonight's game against the Orioles are like $16 for upper deck way down the baseline. To even get into the lower deck, you are looking at $26 a ticket. And before someone starts, I know you can buy tickets and move down during the game, but that's not the overall point.
Put people in the seats. It may not be the way to make the most immediate profit, but it brings a family to the game. RIght now, a family of 3 is going to the game for ~$70 once you factor in parking and no food and the cheapest seats. A family of 4, with parking and some food in lower level seats and you're looking at over $150, which is going to keep a lot of people away because a lot of people aren't just going to pick up and go and drop that kind of money when one of their kids may throw a huge fit in the 2nd inning.
Let people buy tickets for a crappy team and have their family have good seats to watch. And let them grab a meal affordably so the kids are happy. Now you have a happy family having a good time and enjoying a game together, even on a cold, crappy night. You start selling packages for <$50 all included, you will see attendance go back up.
And that's just for baseball. Can do similar things for bad NBA teams and hockey teams (yay Detroit!). Football is just going to suffer. All sports are getting priced out for attending in person, and football is the worst because of the limited number of games. Reducing prices may not turn the most immediate profit, but in 20 years when the kids of today are adults and only a limited number of kids of the thrill of tradition and tailgating and seeing games with their family and all the rest don't have that so don't really care about going to the games or not (or may have those traditions, but those traditions were always at home in front of the TV), then who was to blame?
April 17th, 2018 at 12:22 PM ^
April 17th, 2018 at 11:06 AM ^
This is my #1 answer as well. I'll gladly sit through tv timeouts, mascot races, and replay reviews but I have a hard time justifying increasing costs of attending games. Teams recognize what they're doing and they still don't care. I held Lions season tickets since 2014 but dropped them before last season they increased the price by 20 percent in 3 seasons. Michigan charges insane seat license fees and you even have to "donate" to even have the privilege of buying season tickets. Eventually all the blue hairs will stop going to games and I doubt that demand will keep up. We aren't too far removed from the Retail Activation days
April 17th, 2018 at 12:24 PM ^
This is an easy thing to say but it makes sense. Ironically, you are discussing by far the cheapest sport to attend--it's much more expensive to get into hockey, basketball, and football games.
I took my wife and two oldest kids to a game at Comerica last summer when we were on vacation. I had been dying to get back there for years, living in MInnesota. I love the park, I love the area around it, I love watching the Tigers. It was a perfect evening.
It was also brutally expensive, and that expense still gives me second thoughts to this day. I don't have a lot of money, and even for a once-in-every-five-years kind of thing it was a bit steep.
It won't be perfect. When a baseball team is good and the weather is good in the summer, people are going to want to spend to get in, and a team is just throwing money away if they don't price accordingly. But even with dynamic pricing there is room for more flexibility. Instead of charging $16 for those "skyline" seats, charge $4. Advertise it. It's a school night, it's chilly, people aren't going to want to take their kids... but if they can do it for $20, that's suddenly a sensible option.
I took one of my kids to a Tigers-Twins game in Minneapolis a couple of years ago in September. The Tigers were out of the hunt, playing out the string, the Twins were bad, the weather had been lousy, and I was fully engaged in football season. But it was a Thursday evening and I got seats behind the dugout for a pittance and I couldn't resist. It was a blast. Baseball has something to sell if they make the price right.
April 17th, 2018 at 10:28 AM ^
April 17th, 2018 at 12:20 PM ^
April 18th, 2018 at 12:03 AM ^
Social injustices aren't politics, fwiw.
April 17th, 2018 at 10:30 AM ^
Football: refs have to call equal number of penalties on either team.
edit: as mentioned above, require it be a profession. either way, refereeing is what i see as the primary problem with college sports, sometimes sports at large.
April 17th, 2018 at 10:43 AM ^
Ref's don't need to call an "equal nuymber of penalties" on both teams. It's common for one team to actually commit a disproportionate share of fouls during a game.
I think you mean to say that refs need to call games fairly.
April 17th, 2018 at 10:31 AM ^
April 17th, 2018 at 10:42 AM ^
I think a major flow problem towards the end of games in the 3 major sports (baseball, football, and basketball) is really impacting things. It happens more towards the end of seasons, but the basketball foul rule, the baseball changing of relievers every batter, expanded reviews towards the end of the games in football and basketball, all hurt the product on the field to a degree.
I also think limiting the reliever options (force them to face a couple batters or get a couple outs) would also (perhaps articifially) result in more runs/comebacks. People want runs, that means not having the perfect pitching matchup. That means someone who isn't on has to stay out there and tough it out. Could make end of games more interesting.
April 17th, 2018 at 10:37 AM ^
Because it's deliberate pace is also part of the feature. So I get to a degree having a "pitch clock", and part of that may help, but you also don't want to fundamentally change the game. It isn't intended to be a fast paced game, don't shoe horn it into trying to be one, because then it will be the worst of both worlds.
- Agree with a lot of people that stoppages need to be more limited. It's hard enough on TV cutting to commercials all the time, but in person it's brutal. Limit basketball and football replays to 60 seconds and only allow them to be viewed at real speed (this prevents the unnatural nitpicking that currently exists that changes how games are played).
- Try to implement more advertising like soccer (ads in the corner of the screen, perhaps on the sideline where available, etc.) to take out a couple commercial breaks. Don't do what happened during the OSU game, where some company "proudly buys all this advertising space so you only have to watch our ad for longer", because that's the same thing it's just one company doing the add. Actually eliminate the ad time.
- Cost, as I discussed above.
Those are more focused on fixing sports for those in attendance rather than the sport itself. But I don't personally feel like any of the sports need major overhauls in game play for me to enjoy them, it's how they are structured within TV that makes it difficult to justify some of the time/money. And the overall cost, as I discussed above.
...research has found that people tend mind the number of commercials more than the length. So three 60 second commercials is considered less intrusive than 4 (or 6) 30 second spots.
April 18th, 2018 at 11:48 AM ^
but far less lucrative for those selling the ad space.
Believe me, the networks would LOVE to sell 18 10-second ads in that same space.
April 17th, 2018 at 10:39 AM ^
Reduce the number of timeouts a team can call per game to 3 (max 2 in one half). Timeout may only be called during a true dead ball situation--the clock is stopped and the referee is holding the ball.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:11 AM ^
April 17th, 2018 at 10:45 AM ^
1. Full time professional referees for Power 5 college sports with their grades posted
2. MLB Baseball - May - September including the World Series. Also 1 minute between innings for commercials rather than 2. Put advertising everyeher on the uniform to offset the loss of TV revenue.
3. For nothern college baseball. Leave the NCAA and play with wooden bats in May-August
4. For NCAA basketball. Either direct to the pros or stay 3 years. Same for college hockey.
There's no way you could play any college sport from May-August. There's hardly anyone on campus during those months.
In the old days, maybe. But nowadays summer term at many schools is a lot bigger than it used to be. And the local fan base tends to live near there year-round, With younger kids out of school, a lot more families can attend- at prices much more affordabke than Major League games.
April 17th, 2018 at 10:50 AM ^
April 17th, 2018 at 12:30 PM ^
1. This would murder summer leagues and, given that the college season remains the same length, might be bad for the players who lose that extra development time. Seems like fall games would be an option, though.
2. I'd love people who follow college baseball more closely to comment on this, because it sounds like a good idea. It means the teams are away from home more frequently, but given how B1G schools start away from home as it is, maybe they can make it work without reducing home dates? Because holding a couple of round robins in baseball and softball seems like a great idea to get more matchups. Perhaps open the season with a couple (hello, US Bank Stadium) of those weekends and then go into the meat of the schedule.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:02 AM ^
MLB- Cut the season down, if not by 1/2, by 40 games. Cut out the long breaks between innings, have the players move onto the field immediately. Create the same rules for AL and NL.
NHL- Cut the season by 20 games. Expand rinks to Olympic size. Top 16 make playoffs, do away with conferences for seeding.
NBA- Cut the season by 20 games. Less timeouts, or you can only call a max of 2 timeouts in the last 5 minutes. Top 16 teams make playoffs, do away with conferences for seeding. Eliminate the entire "Superstar has earned fouls" BS narrative. Call the game the same for everyone.
NFL- Stop the commercial breaks between every kick, keep the flow going. Decide on what a catch is. Chop off 2 preseason games
For all of them, stop pricing the fan out. It's hard enough to incentivize fans to come to the park/arena/field. Have replays done in a central area, have 15-20 people review said replay. If it cannot be changed within 1-2 minutes, call stands.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:49 AM ^
I like all of it, but having 15-20 people reviewing a call is certainly going to ensure that they'll almost never reach a concensus within 1-2 hours.
I'd say the leagues should have 3 (or maybe 5) officials review a play in some league office. After 60 seconds there's a vote, maybe you say a 2-1 decision can overturn it or maybe you say it has to be a unanimous 3-0 to overturn. Replay decision is communicated at field level within 2 minutes.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:54 AM ^
It's not a perfect formula. My thought is that you have a set amount of people reviewing a play, we'll say 10 for example, they watch it once, and then vote after a viewing or two. And then say, we need 7 or 8 people to overturn. If it's split, or close to split, it stays.
I like the idea of multiple reviewers and voting. My tweak would be to have 5 reviewers, after 1 minutre of review, each of which cast a vote based on what percentage likeliehood they think it is that the call on the field was incorrect. Throw out the high and the low (or use some other methodology to limit the impact of one outlier vote) and take the average of the remaining votes. If average is above 80% likely that the call on the field was wrong, the call is overturned.
Keep track of the reviewer's votes and any reviewer showing a consistent and significantly bias to keeping or overturning the call (relative to the panel's average) is no longer a reviewer.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:02 AM ^
This is an unpopular opinion but I would like to see replay taken away from all sports or at minimum, modified. Honestly, I still think they get the call wrong half of the time because it is not "indisputable". So we are supposed to defer to the referee's call on the field who saw it at full speed instead of making the call based on the 3 or 4 camera angles that we have in super slow motion. I just think, if you are still getting the call wrong don't have it at all, especially because some of these reviews take way too long.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:04 AM ^
Max of 2 minutes for review. Can't overturn? Don't.
I think you have to keep replay. Just do it right. Have it done in a central area that's reviewing every play non-stop. Once you are buzzed, have 10-15 people review the play. If you don't get an overall majority that wants to reverse, leave alone.
The fact that the NFL is a billion dollar industry and the refs have to look into a screen the size of my phone is silly.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:11 AM ^
I would be good with a compromise, which is why I mentioned that at a minimum it should be modified. I am a younger guy (27), and it probably has to do with the fact that I am a huge baseball fan, but I have always been a traditionalist with sports. I don't think that the game would really suffer all that much if we were to eliminate replay, but I do like th idea of capping the maximum time of replay.
I would also like to see the replay time used towards a TV timeout.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:46 AM ^
To think, I am also a younger guy (32). But the younger, younger generation is already leaving baseball behind. The NBA has been seeing ridiculous growth because of the drama, and the sport letting the players be unique.
Sadly, I think MLB is in trouble. We will always have "baseball," but the sport is just not exciting for the majority of young people. And for me, it's a tough watch to this day. I think if the season got a substantial reduction, it would make each series that much more important.
As it stands, nothing really matters until like July/August. As long as you are within shouting distance, you can make a run. There's rarely any drama other than the post-season.
But, that's a bigger issue with sports in general. The regular season just doesn't matter as much anymore. It's too watered-down.
That's probably true for fans regarding most sports. Which reminds me, isn't it almost that time of year to start thinking about the pro basketball and hockey, and maybe who to root for? Have they started their playoff season yet by any chance? Who's playing?
April 17th, 2018 at 11:10 AM ^
you linked, I don't care for fair weather fans. Pick a team you like when you young. Doesn't have to be a home town team, but then stick with them. That is what a fan does. Don't just cheer for a good team because they are good. That always drives me crazy when I see fans like that.
You see them walking around with brand new shirts of the championship teams, in different sports and act like they are true fans. It's a lot more satisfying for a long suffering fan to see their team finally win it all, then some bandwagon yahoo out there.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:29 AM ^
I've been a Detroit/Michigan fan all my life because I live here and that's what I grew up with. But over the years, I've adopted a liking to a few college programs because of the way they play and the success they've had. Is that wrong?
The bottom line is, professional sports don't give a damn about their fans. They make 99.99 percent of their money through TV. They don't have ANY loyalty for the common person. Why is that fan required to give some fake pride back to the organization if they suck? During the playoffs, I always find another team to root for if Detroit teams are out. I don't go all out and buy shirts, but why can't I do that?
That whole, "You need to be a fan, thick and thin" stuff is BS. Just understand, pro organizations don't care about us. They never have, and they never will. I can understand hardcore fandom for colleges, but pro is silly.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:33 AM ^
but his article was pretty good. The loyalty creates lethargy by owners and no incentive to improve. If bad teams didn't make as much money, I think they might be more competitive. Also...a lifetime of disappointment for 1 or 2 championships ,from the outside, sounds like a shitty deal lol.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:11 AM ^
Change the targeting rules. Leading with the helmet is a 15 yard penalty and the review occurs post-game to determine if a player is suspended for the following week. If a player leads with his helmet and causes significant injury, he must be held out until the other player returns to play.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:13 AM ^
April 17th, 2018 at 10:42 PM ^
Upvoted for the funny , Champs :)
April 17th, 2018 at 11:17 AM ^
Soccer
-- Fix the clock -- stoppage time is just silly and rife for abuse. If there is an injury, stop the clock. Clock keeps running if the ball goes out of bounds, but for the items that would add stoppage time, just, you know, stop the clock.
-- Fix the Flopping -- Yellow and red cards have a massive impact and flopping has the potential to draw a card. Get rid of cards and use the basketball approach of a certain number of foulds get you thrown out of a game. It could be a major or minor infraction, but either way it is one foul. And if a player fouls out, it doesn't affect the next game.
-- Up the Intensity -- The players have to run so much and they need to conserve their energy when off ball. I understand that and I don't blame the players. They system is the issue. Free, on the fly substitutions like hockey and lacrosse. Hockey players are going full speed for 45-60 seconds at a time. Let's get soccer to do the same.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:33 AM ^
Clock is so stupid. Have someone stop/start for every stop. It's not that complicated. Out of bounds? Click. Ball thrown back in. Click, start again. Free kick? Stop clock. As soon as ball is kicked? Start clock. It will eliminate a massive problem that soccer has with the arbitrary time wasting.
I think with flopping, you have to have another on-field ref. The field is so massive, one guy can't pay attention to everything. The assistants are usually watching for where the ball is and offsides.
I wouldn't say "on-the-fly," but a system to make it faster. I think in free kicks and stoppages, it would be cool just to make a sub and not have to go through the whole process of checking in, waiting for a legit stop, and then the player slowly trots off to waste another minute.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:17 AM ^
I can't even name them all. Just have an Eastern & Western Conference in each, and balance the schedule accordingly.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:39 AM ^
Go back to the weird old division/conference names in hockey, and come up with similar names for basketball.
April 17th, 2018 at 12:10 PM ^
Actually, I'd double down on the hockey divisions. Make them eight of four each, just like the NFL (once Seattle joins and I'm calling them the Metropolitans because that's what they should be called.)
Adams: Bruins, Rangers, Islanders, Capitals
Patrick: Devils, Flyers, Penguins, Jackets
Selke: Canadiens, Leafs, Senators, Sabres
Norris: Wings, Preds, Blackhawks, Blues
Ziegler: Canes, Panthers, Lightning, Stars
Jennings: Wild, Jets, Avalanche, Coyotes
Smythe: Oilers, Flames, Canucks, Metros
McLaughlin: Sharks, Kings, Ducks, Knights
The top two in each division make the playoffs - period. No wild cards. They play each other in the first round. The second round is Adams-Patrick, Selke-Norris, Ziegler-Jennings, Smythe-McLaughlin. The next round is matched up again in that same order. Or, I would not be opposed to a re-seed, as the NHL has done in the past.
The divisions are named as they were before. The original four represented four of the six O6 "founders" (not necessarily actual founders, but builders) so two more for the last two O6 teams and two more for drivers of NHL expansion (Jennings, Ziegler.)
Oh, and games are worth three points, the way they are internationally.
April 17th, 2018 at 12:32 PM ^
Regulation W = 3 points
OT W = 2 points
OT L = 1 point
April 17th, 2018 at 12:56 PM ^
I don't like four-team divisions. That waters them down too much. Winning a four-team contest doesn't seem that exciting.
Understandable, but my guess is you'd be in the minority. A big part of the NFL's mass appeal is the belief in its parity, and a big part of that is that you only have to envision your team beating a tiny handful of others and boom, playoffs.
Plus, the NHL is trying, with the kind of dumb format it has now, to push rivalries. It's been trying that for years. First it tried a horribly unbalanced schedule, which people hated. Now it's trying the current playoff format, and people don't like it either. It doesn't work because the divisions are too big and even though they try to put you in the playoffs against the same teams all the time, that's not what happens. Do it this way and I think it'd be more popular. I can barely tell you who is in the Wings' division at the moment. People want to be able to know that. Simplicity helps big-time.
April 17th, 2018 at 11:31 AM ^
April 17th, 2018 at 11:40 AM ^