This seems like a bad idea because it is too broad and will punish non-intentional walks. Plenty of 4 pitch walks where the pitcher was just wild.

Baseball - automated balls and strikes called with a “k zone” like graphic.

Basketball and football - give the coaches 2 opportunities to review calls throughout the game. Other than that, eliminate instant replay

This was my first thought too, there are a lot of 4-pitch walks. I feel like as written, there'd be a crazy amount of extra runs scored, not just from the walks themselves but from pitchers laying one in there in desperation on 3-0 counts. Could change the game to the point where it'd become a different era stat-wise (i.e. pitchers making the HOF with >4.50 career ERA or something).

Someone should do a study on non-intentional (do they score that?) 4-pitch walks with runners on and see how big the impact would be.

My other idea was maybe a team could get 1 to 3 runner pushed scenarios per game, specified before the AB. So if Barry Bonds comes up in an obvious intentional walk scenario, the batting team can play the anti-IW card.

Basketball

If a player takes more than one step while holding the ball (without dribbling), "travelling" is called, the play is blown dead, and the ball is awarded to the other team side out of bounds.

You'd have to put in a grandfather clause exempting existing players. It wouldn't be fair to force them to completely remake their game from scratch.

Absolutely! After a couple months both pitchers and batters would have it down cold. The computer would not know who the batter or pitcher is, what the score is, what inning it is, even wouldn't know if it's 2 teams playing that are out of it or if it's a post season game 7. No more umps thinking "Can't be strike 3 Votto didn't swing " or "I'm gonna give him that because he's Pedro ". Just simply ball or strike, complete consistence every pitch for every player in every situation. Would be awesome.

I feel like you'd have to have the system secretly in place alongside the umps for a while (maybe even a full season) to debug it and make sure it's 100% free of phantom calls before going live, but I like it.

Of course you'd keep the home plate umpire for swing/no swing calls, foul tips, interference calls and regular plays at the plate. And to still be watching every pitch and be prepared to make a call if the bot stops working.

But what about all that work catchers put into learning how to frame pitches?

Why do you hate craftsmanship?

It's been in place alongside the umps for like, over a decade. Umpires are evaluated against it. I believe it's like 1 out of every 5,000 pitches or something registers a no call. So rare that it makes virtually no difference.

So, as far as I can tell, there's really no reason they couldn't go ahead and implement it right now. My guess is MLB thinks human umpires and the resulting arguments about balls and strikes add emotion and interest to the game and are a net positive. They might be right.

Baseball get rid of the appeal play. Silly rule. In basketball if a guy steps on the line it isn't the other team's responsibility to tell the ref. Same with football if a team has 12 men on the field it isn't on the other team to point it out. If a guy misses a base the umpire should just call him out once he touches the next base.

All sports- You can make use of whatever your team nickname is. The Chicago Bears can use actual grizzly bears as offensive linemen. The Houston Rockets can shoot RPGs at their opponents. The Red Sox can block the baselines with millions of rose colored socks, thus making it impossible for opponents to reach base.

Washington requests to revert their name back to Bullets.

The Orlando Magic would probably benefit the most

What about the Browns? They get to throw turds or something? So business as usual I suppose.

The Miami Heat can turn the AC off

if you step with the ball more than two times without dribbling, the ball should go over to the other team

Groundbreaking, trailblazing, earth-shattering idea: In every sport, there will be several people there who will enforce the rules and ensure that the games are played fairly. These people will be known as "Referees." They will do their best to judge the game in an unbiased fashion, instead of constantly rigging it against whoever I'm rooting for

Actually a rule change to snooker that would make sense is to eliminate the stupid free ball rule, especially at the end of a frame when the trailing player needs snookers.

They should also eliminate the 'tuck up' behind a balk color. You gain too much of an advantage from what was essentially an error on the shot prior.

I think the team that finishes first in the division/conference whatever, should get to choose their first round opponent from the 5-8 group. (thinking NHL or NBA, but could work in other sports). #2 would get second choice of what's left, #3 would choose and #4 would get whoever is left.

So if you think the 8th place team is coming in hot, and/or the 5th place team has key injuries etc., you can choose to play them instead.

No sense letting the 4th place team have an easier round 1 than the team that dominated the regular season. Would also be awesome incentive to the team that got chosen, second guessing of choice, discussion etc...

Just to put it on the record, I am not a Tampa Bay Lightning fan.

Salary cap only applies to players you get in free agency and or trade.

If you drafted the player, there is no salary cap on what you spend to keep him. The drafting team can always match any free agency offer for the career of the player.

More players will play their entire career with one team, fans will feel closer to teams since the stars don't just bolt after a few years for the $$$$. Draft becomes much more important than now.

I like the choose-your-opponent idea but it'll never happen in the NHL because everyone hates fun and would get butthurt. Maybe it'll work in the NBA, they seem more open to drama.

Same with the salary cap one. It seems like in the NBA stars bolt to one of the same five teams asap, so maybe it'd help. No need in the NHL as long as teams like Edmonton can convince players like McDavid to sign long term

The salary cap one would be better for the NFL where there are deeper pockets and almost all the teams are actually restrained by the salary cap.
Obviously the players wouldn't like the salary cap idea since it would mean other teams would have less cap space to try to steal away the better players.

Basketball: Blocked shot that goes out of bounds is a turnover regardless of who touched it last. Tired of monster blocks that are meaningless, good defense should be rewarded.

Yes and no. I mean you can also play amazing defense to force a bad shot that happens to turn into an offensive rebound, that's just part of the game.