Jared Max: How Would You Change Professional Sports?
By Jared Max
» More Columns
If you could implement one new rule in the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL, what changes would you make?
One reason the NFL maintains a one or two-score lead over other North American pro sports leagues is that it applies William Zinnser's literary golden rule to football: "The essence of writing is rewriting."
Once again, the NFL has trumped all other leagues in being earnest about improving its product. While MLB probably has a sore back from incessantly patting itself over its new pace-of-game initiative, the NFL is in top-combine shape following six changes to the 2015 rulebook, approved by league owners two days ago. More alterations may be coming in May. Though fans are unlikely to benefit from the new rules -- largely focused on player safety and protection -- we should be optimistic that our Sunday, Monday and Thursday autumn/winter pastime will not become stale.
Which bores you more: watching an extra point in football or an intentional walk in baseball? I am entertained by the fact that MLB has refused to address this time killer while the NFL continues to trim fat from its game like a kosher butcher preparing a lean corned beef sandwich.
While I'm encouraged by MLB recognizing it need to improve the pace of its games, I am dissuaded by its soft approach. Issuing fines to batters and pitchers who dilly-dally for more than 20 seconds between pitches is like telling your obese child he is permitted to eat only one sleeve of Thin Mint Girl Scout cookies. If MLB was as secure with itself as the NFL or the NHL, it would not pussyfoot around its pacing problems, but instead implement a bona fide proposal to penalize offenders with balls and strikes — much like football's five-yard delay-of-game penalties.
The NHL announced this month that beginning next season, overtime may be played with only three skaters per team. If the league's board of governors approves this change recommended by NHL general managers, there will be added excitement next season. Since the NHL installed shootouts following scoreless overtimes in 2005-06, the once-exciting penalty shot has lost its luster. More than 14 percent of NHL games are decided in shootouts, and that figure has increased annually since '05-'06. If the league passes the three-on-three overtime proposal, it will open the ice to even more scoring than when the league addressed this matter 15 seasons ago by making sudden-death play four-on-four.
If I could institute one change to the NHL, I would eliminate the awarding of one point to teams who do not lose in regulation. This "trophies for everyone" mentality reminds me of the SAT, which awards points to anybody who can properly fill his name in those little boxes. Losing in overtime should be worth zero points. It would add a greater element of reckless abandon to close regular-season games tempered by teams' drive to not lose.
As I have stated before, I believe the NBA needs to experiment with significant changes to make its game more attractive. Like unused data on most monthly phone plans, NBA timeouts should be eliminated in the final minute of games, aside for one or two allowed stoppages by each team. Intentional fouls in the final 90 seconds should yield three free throws to deter teams from losing their audiences. And the basket should be raised by at least six inches. Players would be challenged, and in turn, the games would become more interesting. If there is one glaring element missing from the NBA on a nightly basis, it is suspense.
Still, the NBA and MLB need to recognize that tippy-toeing into a chilly pool is not the answer. Regardless of whether or not new rules will swim, the leagues must dive in, accepting a willingness to change. And a willingness to change back.
Not all actions require logical explanations. As a child, it always irked me when a proposal I made was shot down "because I am your mother, and I said so." Nobody wants to be dismissed "because this is the way it has always been." These are lazy responses that breed a losing mentality.
Even if the NFL is window dressing concern about keeping its players safe, the league instituted parameters that call for greater checks and balances. This coming season, games may be paused by a medical professional in the press box who witnesses a player appearing disoriented or unstable. Sounds great. But I am skeptical because the league did something similar when it fattened its concussion protocol.
Two years after the Redskins allegedly ignored the presence of Dr. James Andrews on their sideline and allowed Robert Griffin III to re-enter a game with a busted knee, the Steelers did it, too. In a playoff game this January, Pittsburgh allowed two of its most important offensive players to breeze through concussion tests like NCAA athletes who receive passing grades despite attending few classes, if any. Considering the revenue that Ben Roethlisberger and Heath Miller generate for the Steelers and the NFL, it would be prudent for governing parties to protect their greatest investments. I hope the NFL is learning this.
One thing is for sure — the NFL keeps running toward the end zone with other leagues trailing like 395-pound linemen in fruitless pursuit.
As somebody who draws life lessons from musical lyrics the way many quote scripture, I wonder if some of my favorite prophets' words are written on the walls -- and bathroom stalls -- of the NFL league office. I can envision the advice of Bob Dylan sprawled 10 yards along an NFL hallway.
"Get out of the new world if you can't lend a hand, for the times, they are a-changin'."
I see Rush lyrics posted above urinals.
"Changes aren't permanent, but change is"; "Constant change is here to stay"; "The time is now again."
What changes do you propose?
