Possibility of reducing freethrow shots to only 1 shot to decrease game duration

[fairweatherfan]

They could limit 30 second time outs to 30 seconds?

Replay is the other thing that is dragging out games.   Maybe do away w the review of flagrant vs normal fouls?   In the moment, does it really matter?  That gets a bit ridiculous sometimes...

Yeah, I'd love to see some technicals called early in the season when teams don't get back on the court fast enough.  They get far too much slack in my opinion.

As far as replay, I think like other sports they'll eventually move to a replay booth to trim down the amount of time it takes. 

Maybe they could also stop with the policy of having refs call flagrants for anything questionable so that it can be reviewed.  Just let the ref call their honest opinion and the league will decide whether or not to change it afterward.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Dumb.

In the Philippines we have a 5 second violation on free throws. You dont shoot it withing 5 seconds, you lose the FT. Easy enough.

That's a much better solution than cutting a potential 1 point all together.

[317]

Dumb.

In the Philippines we have a 5 second violation on free throws. You dont shoot it withing 5 seconds, you lose the FT. Easy enough.

That's a much better solution than cutting a potential 1 point all together.

or they could actually enforce the 10 second violation that is already in place. who else remembers Jermain O'Neal taking 15-20 seconds per attempt from the time he got the ball in the playoffs? cut it to 8 seconds like the half court violation if you really want to speed it up. speaking of which why does a foul reset the shot clock to 14 seconds and not 16 now that the half court violation is 8 instead of 10?

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Stop calling so many stupid fouls, and don't take so many stupid TV timeouts.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Dumb.

In the Philippines we have a 5 second violation on free throws. You dont shoot it withing 5 seconds, you lose the FT. Easy enough.

That's a much better solution than cutting a potential 1 point all together.

or they could actually enforce the 10 second violation that is already in place. who else remembers Jermain O'Neal taking 15-20 seconds per attempt from the time he got the ball in the playoffs? cut it to 8 seconds like the half court violation if you really want to speed it up. speaking of which why does a foul reset the shot clock to 14 seconds and not 16 now that the half court violation is 8 instead of 10?

10 is actually still too long. It doesnt take you 10 seconds to get in rhythm to shoot. 5 is fine.

Also, they should only allow a team to call a timeout on DEAD BALLS. You want to speed up the game, don't allow players or coaches to call timeout in the middle of a possession.

[86MaxwellSmart]

What REALLY needs to happen, is that we Stop Micro-managing Every aspect of our lives.

No reason for this and most other things that get changed because some Numbers Crunching Idiot decides our fate because of some online Poll.

[bdm860]

10 is actually still too long. It doesnt take you 10 seconds to get in rhythm to shoot. 5 is fine.

Also, they should only allow a team to call a timeout on DEAD BALLS. You want to speed up the game, don't allow players or coaches to call timeout in the middle of a possession.

But with only 5 seconds, how will I have time to slap hands with all my teammates in between free throws?

[GreenWarrior]

how about having less rules and less refs on the floor? that's the biggest problem with everything that's wrong about the NBA.

-they have what 4 on the court? that still can't get the call right.

-the explanation during the playoffs(Clippers game) from one of their head officials why the ref standing right in front of the play who missed a call was all I needed to hear. "he didn't miss the call it wasn't his responsibility to make this call, it was this guys responsibility(ref on the other side of the court, who couldn't see anything) to make that call.

-they constantly make new rules that are band-aids to rules already in place. and they still can't get it right.

less rules, less refs. problem solved.   

[wiley]

Stop calling so many stupid fouls, and don't take so many stupid TV timeouts.

You just nailed the two biggest problems with the NBA...
Especially the fouls.

[JBcat]

I think the flow of the game is just fine up until the last 2 minutes of a game from what the non NBA fans say.  I'm actually ok with how the last 2 minutes go, but I could see improvement there to capture a wider audience. 

However I also hear from some people only the 2 minutes of a game counts, and don't bother watching the rest.  I see their point too but I enjoy watching the up and down flow to a game.

Maybe to appease both areas shorten the game to 40 minutes, and limit a team to only 1 timeout in the last 2 minutes.  I don't think everyone would agree to a shorter game, but limiting a team to 1 timeout with 2 minutes left in each half you might get more people on board. 

[D.o.s.]

Two referees on the floor, replay referee who has final authority over calls.

Boom. Game speed increased.

[fairweatherfan]

Two referees on the floor, replay referee who has final authority over calls.

Boom. Game speed increased.

I agree with the latter, but it seems like dropping a ref is basically conceding that it's ok for players to get away with more if it speeds up the game. 

That's why they added the third ref in the first place, though there were issues with the players (*cough*Pistons*cough*) getting away with a lot of dirty and dangerous play, which is probably less of a concern with everything digitally recorded now.

[Donoghus]

They don't need to get rid of a referee.

The professional game already is fast enough this day & age to necessitate the third referee.  As much as people constantly complain about refereeing on this board, it'd be ten times worse if they went back to two referees.  The number of missed calls would jump as would the dirty antics.

[hpantazo]

They don't need to get rid of a referee.

The professional game already is fast enough this day & age to necessitate the third referee.  As much as people constantly complain about refereeing on this board, it'd be ten times worse if they went back to two referees.  The number of missed calls would jump as would the dirty antics.

Both Bill Russell and Tommy Heinson told me in person on separate occasions, that the way to fix today's NBA officiating is to get rid of the third referee. I asked them each this question separately, and they came up with the same answer, so there must be something to it.

[D.o.s.]

If there was any way to implement it with any sliver of feasibility, I'd say that only the ref closest to the action could call the foul (which is really the impetus behind culling the number of referees back down to two). Nothing's lamer to me than the ref who can't see what's going on calling the foul when the one that's nearby doesn't whistle anything.