3 Point line Rule History?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

And mathematically speaking, the margin for error (and therefore, difficulty) increases the further away from the goal the shooter is.

At my height, and age, the "margin for error" for me to dunk the ball is 100%. If I ever dunk the ball, it should be worth about a bazillion points.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

One can shoot long field goals all day, every day. Jerry Lucas could turn a game around by shooting from outside because it brought the other team's big guys out of the lane.

Shoot outside all you want, no rule has ever prohibited or discouraged the practrice.

I just do not now,nor have I ever, understood why such a shot deserves more points than other successful field goals.

Shall we award a run and a half on a successful steal of home? How about nine points for a touchdown on a run from scrimmage from inside your own 20? Maybe unassisted goals ought to be worth three goals to make up for the assists not awarded.

It is simple. The rule was created to not only be for those that were bigger, which used to be the case, especially in the UCLA Dynasty era. They had the bigger athletes and the best bigger athletes and they won continuously. Shooters can be of all sizes and if you make the shot it will make the game more exciting. Kind of the reason that football gives 2 points for conversion if you do not kick the ball. I am not sure why it is wrong to make a rule that would actually make the game exciting?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not sure why it is wrong to make a rule that would actually make the game exciting?

"Tradition, tradition! Tradition! Tradition, tradition! Tradition!"

[APG]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not sure why it is wrong to make a rule that would actually make the game exciting?

Peace

Be careful with that line of thinking...the game of basketball might not be basketball to some and rather just entertainment.