Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Brooky03, post: 4993537, member: 8594"]
The upshot is that disqualification is an overly steep penalty when better options exist that would equally disincentivize excessive fouling.

Set a player foul limit that puts an extra penalty in play.  Maybe that penalty applies as soon as that player is over X fouls and any team foul after that for the half has the extra penalty applied.  Easy to track, easy to follow and apply.  Maybe the penalty is an extra FT, depending on bonus, shooting v. non-shooting foul.  Maybe the penalty is possession and shots, like a technical foul that doesn’t count toward disqualification.

There are ways to do this where no coach would want a player hacking all game, unless he’s dead set on losing that game.  Practical, feasible ways.  This introduces the strategy of whether or not you want your star in the game, knowing that him being in the game will cost you something when he fouls too much, but he gets to stay in the game.  Currently, you decide whether you want your star in the game with 4 fouls, knowing that if you’re playing against Duke and he sneezes, he’s gone and you lose.

My solution results in a slightly more physical game (I reject that it would be overly physical.  It wouldn’t be like the BE experiment) and more of the players fans came to watch staying in the game.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?