- Abolish the three-point shot.
I know it’ll never happen, but I’d like to see shots inside the arc — even inside the paint — count for more than shots outside the arc.
Why? Because the further and further you get from the basket, the easier it is to get an uncontested shot. It’s much harder and requires much more work and effort to get the ball closer to the basket for higher percentage shots.
That’s historically what the game of basketball has been about. Working as a team to get the best, highest
percentage shots possible. Which are always going to be closer to the actual basket.
Now, I realize it’s harder to actually convert shots further from the basket. I’m not stupid. But those are also the easiest shots to get. Why are lower percentage, easier to get attempts (bad shots) rewarded with more points??
I mean, do we really want to see a game of back and forth half court shots one day because they are worth 4 points???
That’s no fun.
I’d rather see teams rewarded for working together to get the highest percentage shots closest to the basket.
Again, I know it’ll never happen. But it’d make the same much better to watch.
All we’re largely seeing now is a glorified pre-game shootaround. Whichever team converts the highest number of long distance attempts win the game. Boring.
Imagine if the NFL/NCAA started awarding more points for longer FG’s because, well, they are harder to make. Teams would have far less incentive to drive the ball the length of the field.
Take it even further by awarding more points for TD passes over 30 or 40 yards. Imagine how that would change the focus of offenses and how it would devolve the game.
That’s what the 3 pt shot has helped do to the game of basketball. That, and head coaches no longer being able to really run the team. The players run everything now.