Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I also think the court is too small, and we started rewarding taking charges.  So why would you ever drive?  There is barely any room, and as long as a guy can slide over, with zero intention to defend, before you can plant, the foul will be on you

As radical as my proposed changes are, this would be an order of magnitude more difficult to institute. 

Changing scoring is easy. Moving the rims up a foot would require some effort and expense but it wouldn't be terribly difficult. Expanding the court would require major building renovations at most arenas and demolition/starting over at other arenas.

The three point shot is the most successful gimmick in sports history. I'm not sure there is any getting rid of it, and if we are talking about changing the sport now I'd start with getting rid of intentional fouling and timeouts. 

Question on getting rid of charging...

Does that make every contact between offense and a defender a blocking foul? Because that won't help the sport much either. 

Or is it going to be more like how defensive pass interference is called in football--there can be a little contact and hand-fighting, you just can't make it egregious? So it's either blocking (if egregious) or no call on anyone if not?

I would take what is now a charging a play on.  95% of charging calls are where a defender is making no attempt to actually play defense.  He looks more like he's trying to block a free kick

So an offensive player can simply run over a defensive player?

Or, as something we actually see quite a bit called as charging, an offensive player can lower a shoulder into a defensive player, knock him on his butt, and then pull up for a short jumper?

Or are you saying that you'll keep charging in the rule book, but not call a charge when a player is "looking for the call" in the way that players do now?

I'm not saying getting rid of charging is a bad idea... Just asking some questions logistically how it'll work because I can see a lot of complexities in how it would actually play out in real games...

Edit: Or another one--a post player who just bumps and bumps and bumps a player trying to play good defense, backing him down to score... At some point isn't that charging?

So an offensive player can simply run over a defensive player?

Or, as something we actually see quite a bit called as charging, an offensive player can lower a shoulder into a defensive player, knock him on his butt, and then pull up for a short jumper?

Or are you saying that you'll keep charging in the rule book, but not call a charge when a player is "looking for the call" in the way that players do now?

I'm not saying getting rid of charging is a bad idea... Just asking some questions logistically how it'll work because I can see a lot of complexities in how it would actually play out in real games...

Edit: Or another one--a post player who just bumps and bumps and bumps a player trying to play good defense, backing him down to score... At some point isn't that charging?

I would keep charging where the offensive player initiates contact, for the purpose of creating contact.  But if the offensive player is attempting to score, and they can go right through a defender to do so, I'd make that a play on.  If they score, they score, if not, that's the defender doing his job.

NBA refs are much better at recognizing a defender going straight up, which is typically the case.  In college, a defender going straight up, almost always gets called for a foul.  So we've incentivized trying to draw a charge over playing defense.

@ELA and/or @847badgerfan could we move the proposed changes to BB discussion to a separate thread?  I think that it is a good and an interesting discussion but, as I see it, there are two problems with it being in this thread:

• I would guess that a lot of posters haven't seen it because they are tired of seeing @MaximumSam and I debate Coach Holtmann so they've just ignored this thread.  I created this thread specifically to put it somewhere that those who aren't interested could ignore it.  That is all well and good but now we have a completely unrelated discussion that some of them might be interested in buried deep within this.  
• It is only tangentially related to the Holtmann discussion so for the posters who ARE interested in THAT discussion it is now buried in a discussion of rim height, the three point shot, charging, and court size.  

The three point shot is the most successful gimmick in sports history. I'm not sure there is any getting rid of it, and if we are talking about changing the sport now I'd start with getting rid of intentional fouling and timeouts.

The success of the three point shot has also entirely taken away a part of the game that was celebrated two decades ago, the mid-range jumper. 15 - 18ft shots are frowned upon now, both analytically and by most offensive system coaches.

I agree with ELA. Beyond the changes to the game, the court just "feels" small, especially along the baseline. Adding 3-4 ft to baselines would facilitate more freedom of movement, allow for an extension of the three point line on the baselines.