100% agree.

NFL draft: Whenever a team makes a pick, they have to wait for Riverman's reaction. If he isn't supermad or loling, they must repick.

Hockey

If you want to protect your lead, you can take one player off and sub in an extra goalie for him.

Ok j/k but it would be funny.

Using slightly bigger tennis balls would do the same thing

if you take out the 2nd serve in tennis... what is the alternative? like if you fault your first serve you lose the point? seems like that would make it worse.

I think he is just trying to slow the game down a bit by making players only having 1 serve so they wouldn't bomb it 130, most would probably use kick serves at like 110. That is why a bigger ball would work slow it down a little, they already make them.

ah ok. i assumed that bombed high speed serves were one of the positives of the game

A coach tried it back in the day. It went badly, and the rule was reworded shortly thereafter.

In men's tennis it reaches a point where the 1st serves are so powerful that the receiver has to guess where it's going (like a soccer goalie on a penalty shot).

Better raquets and more athletic players and the balls just kept being hit harder and harder.

Some of the servers became so good that 75% or more of their first serves would be unreturnable. They made some modifications to slow things down.

Most tennis fans agree that somewhat longer rallies are more exciting, as opposed to just watching 2 guys take turns blasting unreturnable serves. If you only got one chance at the serve (like how it is in volleyball) you would have to hit a more conservative serve, something like what 2nd serves are hit.

In poker words, it would lead to more post flop play as opposed to just all in preflop shoves that don't get called.

Yep, definitely need as many poker analogies as possible

That poker analogy was as bad as getting 100BB all in on a rainbow flop with TPTK against a nit

speaking of bigger balls...

i could see american football significantly changing the ball at some point. can't see them ever giving the defense back any of the safety related concessions. you may just see arena ball as the continuing trend but i wouldn't be shocked if they tried a change in the ball as a way to balance out offense/defense and run/pass.

Dominant offenses are a feature, not a bug.

it probably has its limits. if it ever gets to be straight arena ball, worst team in the league scores a td 8-9/10 times, you run maybe twice a game, etc. you'll probably see some changes. wouldn't bet even money but if somebody wanted to throw odds out i definitely think there's a real chance you see some anti offense and particularly anti passing rules within the next 10 seasons.

i'm fairly sure nba basketball went to a somewhat more difficult to grip ball 10-15 years ago. don't want to quote that because i'm not positive but think they did. nfl did the thing w/ kicking balls or whatever. a minor change there isn't exactly unprecedented. chicks dig the longball but coors field uses the humidor.

Every purposeful foul in the last two minutes of an NBA game is a technical foul. 2-shots and the ball. The way games end is an absolute joke.

only having one serve in tennis would be absurd and breaks would happen 90% of the time

I'm fine with making outfield walls higher if they are made easier to climb so there are still crazy homerun denials

eh, spot the server 9-1 and you can get all the live action you want I'm sure...

As that's not likely to happen might as well let on that it's about a flip between most evenly matched top players. That would be dull as all get out though...

what about walls that are somewhat high, like 15-30 feet, but they are at like a 45 degree angle so the outfielders can scale them and still do home run robberies.

Make the nba court bigger and space out the 3-point line to a uniform 25 feet.

make the nba disclose the exact tipoff time of every nba game (like mlb). it is so tilting to get ready to watch a game at 8 and the tip off occurs at 8:17.

Seems cool I guess but with both that proposal and mine as well the chance for injury is so high that it will almost never happen. If you put a steep incline like that it puts too much pressure on an outfielder to scale it and make a play risking injury.

Fouling in a lot of spots would still be +EV. I question if some coaches would realize this though.

Eliminating the 2nd serve in tennis possibly the dumbest brain dead suggestion in the lot. In tennis serving is supposed to be an advantage. Not all men bomb it on their first serve either, it's just as much about placement and precision to get yourself into a winning position early on in the rally. It allows a player to be aggressive however they seem fit and the idea of taking that away is a good thing? In no shape or form would such a change improve the sport but you are talking about changing the sport and the way it would be played entirely which isn't the purpose of this discussion. I'm merely thinking about the men's side of things here and can't even being to wrap my mind around women having only 1 serve and the crap fest some of those matches would turn into.

u mad bro?

we could go play some squash together if that wouldn't be too insulting (they eliminated their second serve some years back...if that would bring you to tears we could try bowling maybe).