Might think I'm an expert at sports the way I canvas for some dramatic changes in the game on the field or court. An expert I'm not, but I'll spout off anyway.
Take baseball : needed ; some openers, less closers. Once, starting pitchers were expected to pitch an entire game, 9 innings, well over 100 pitches every couple of days, 150 pitches per game was not uncommon. Today, after 100 pitches the starter is generally done and the manager sends in someone from the bullpen about the 7th inning. I contend, a game controlled to its end, is best controlled by a seasoned long inning pitcher who will close out the game. The opener would start the game and throw about 30 pitches, no more than 40, I suggest, and hopefully pitch a least once through the batting order. At this time, from warming up in the bullpen, the long inning pitcher would come in the game to finish it out.
A lot of young arms these days are peppering 100mph and cold bats in the early innings don't seem to catch up with pitches from these flame throwers. In fact, maybe the game would move along more rapidly because, I sense, the game is getting too long, especially, since TV replay. A change like I suggest wouldn't take any league interjection just some progressive manager to break the established norm of the game of baseball. Of course, this could become enormous.
Ronald C. Downie