Rob Manfred, newly minted commissioner of Major League Baseball, stayed mostly quiet after his election allowing Bud Selig to close the book on his storied, if not controversial, tenure. However, since the official passing of the torch, Manfred has been looking to make a name for himself right away. He has already stirred up debate with his suggestion that baseball do away with the defense shift. The message was loud and clear. Manfred is taking a page from the NFL and is looking to boost offensive production in a game that has been lacking it since it tightened up its performance enhancing drug testing.

Another rule change proposed around the same time went largely unnoticed; however I believe it stands the best chance of being implemented immediately. Manfred would like see relievers being required to face a minimum of two batters, unless the one batter they face ends the inning.

This rule change falls in line with some of the more common sense rule changes in other games to facilitate faster and more active play, such as switching the time limit from 10 seconds to 8 second to cross the halfway line with the ball in the NBA, or not stopping the game clock after a quarterback sack in the NFL. The obvious benefit of the rule is to reduce the number of pitching changes thus speeding the game.

According to Baseball Prospectus, in 2004 an average MLB game went 2 hours and 51 minutes. Last year, it was 3 hours and 8 minutes. Offense is declining while games are lasting longer. That strikes me as a recipe for disaster when trying to court casual fans to the game. After all, the common lament in America about soccer is that it lacks scoring and is thus boring. Soccer lasts about two hours, including a half time, with no commercial breaks. If America thinks that that combination is boring, it is no wonder the casual fan feels the same way about baseball in 2015.

While the change would likely not be dramatic, possibly affecting about one to two pitching changes per game, it is an easy step in the right direction. The pitching change always comes with a slow, drawn out meeting at the mound, followed by minutes of warm-up. Removing one or two of those a game is definitely better than nothing. Further, this change is certainly less controversial and more easily implemented than the pitching clock which has also been suggested recently. Where a pitching clock or enforcement of Rule 8.04 (pitcher must pitch within 12 seconds of receiving the ball) requires wholesale changes to how half the players in baseball prepare and perform, requiring a middle reliever to face two batters at the start or middle of an inning rather than just one requires no adaptation at all by the players, simply the ability for the to execute against whoever is standing in the batter’s box.

Sure, it impacts the true strength of sabermetrics, requiring a manager to let a situation play out that may not be maximized for the manager, which is among the complaints about the elimination of the defensive shift. But, this rule does not impact the specialization this game has enjoyed over the last two decades. Two out middle relievers are not starters or closers. They are still a specialized player, like the pinch runner, or the defensive replacement. This does not alter a team’s bullpen, only its strategy in using it. Ultimately this rule would help better distinguish the good bullpens from the bad, and help further distinguish the good teams from the bad. A bullpen of pitchers who can survive pitching to both right handers and left handers will boost a team’s bottom line more than a bullpen of pitchers who can only pitch to one type of hitter. This is the type of meritocracy I love in sports.

There is a hidden gem in this proposed rule change. I think it will also have an unintended effect of boosting offense. When a team has to turn to a bullpen of specialists, unless it’s a Craig Kimbrel or Aroldis Chapman, there is always a fear the reliever just will not be good enough that night. They are in the bullpen for a reason. Leaving a pitcher out there for multiple batters, possibly against a right- or left-handed type hitter they struggle against, increases the possibility of those ever exciting bullpen meltdowns. Watching Clayton Kershaw duel to a 2-1 advantage prior to leaving in the 7th inning is always fun, maybe even for the casual fan. But, watching the Los Angeles Dodgers bullpen hold the lead is far less exciting than seeing a team come back and win 3-2 in the last two innings when the bullpen blows it. A rule that has a chance to increase that possibility, however slight, will increase offense, and increase excitement.

This is ultimately what Manfred is trying to do, increase excitement. If he can shorten games while increasing excitement, however slight, it is a good first step toward courting the casual fan again. This is long needed after the tenure of Bud Selig left most casual baseball observers feeling like baseball is too slow to change with the times. This change is made even simpler by the fact that implementation of the rule requires no extra hardware in the stadium, requires no complication lessons for either umpires or teams, and simply doesn’t change the way a team prepares. This is one rule change in which the Commissioner has my full support.