Some on here have proposed eliminating the bonus for a long-range shot altogether. I disagree for two reasons. First, as
@MaximumSam pointed out, it is the "most successful gimmick in sports history." As such it simply is NOT going to be eliminated so discussing eliminating it is pointless. Second, I actually like it because I think that Basketball is best (from a spectator perspective) when there are three distinct facets to the game:
- An Inside Game,
- A Mid-Range Game, and
- A Long-Range Game.
IMHO, the mid-range game has more-or-less disappeared from the NBA and the major college game because it has been squeezed from both sides:
Inside Game:There are two issues here. Players are obviously MUCH taller than they were in 1891 but they are taller even than they were 20-30 years ago as well. Secondly, players today can jump higher than players of old even relative to height. As workouts have gotten more sophisticated and scientific, guys today can much more readily train for leaping ability and BB stars obviously do. This compounds the increased height issue and makes the inside game more appealing to more players than it was decades ago.
Long-Range Game:There are two issues here as well. The first is simply accuracy. As the three has gained in prevalence more young players have spent more time working on this aspect of their games which has increased the accuracy of the major players. I checked stats and there are 42 NCAAM players currently shooting 40%+ from three. In the NBA there are 45 players currently shooting 40%+ from three. This is a bigger issue in the NBA because the average NBA team has about 1.5 guys who shoot 40%+ from three and counting those who shoot close to that it is safe to say that nearly all NBA teams have at least two guys that shoot better than or at least close to 40% from three.
Within the B1G, the guys shooting 39%+ from three are:
- 44.4 Battle, tOSU
- 39.0 Sandfort, Iowa
Both should probably be shooting more. Battle is averaging 3.1 makes on 6.9 attempts and Sandfort is averaging 2.7 makes on 6.9 attempts per game.
In a league where (I assume) literally everyone can dunk and around 40% of the guys on the court at any given time can shoot ~40% or better from three there is simply no reason to take a mid-range shot. You aren't going to make it as frequently as a dunk and it isn't worth as much as a three so the coaches (who are all data driven now) teach their players to forgo mid-range shots in favor of either more accurate inside shots or more valuable outside shots.
Even if eliminating the three was possible (it isn't), I wouldn't be in favor because that would simply eliminate the long-range game.
I think both aspects should be addressed in order to bring back the mid-range game and thus return to a game in which all three facets are viable.