Picks and Bans (Mostly Bans)

I rarely post, usually bugs, never before on new boards. I've been sitting on this for about a year, and maybe it's been mentioned before.

A lot of people complained that the champion pool was becoming too large, and we needed and "extra" ban per side. Some argue that the checks and balances of revolving champion nerfs take care of this. I feel there is a solution in the middle.

Make draft bans blind.

The theory follows:

Each team chooses 3 bans with a single timer. Any copies are banned and re-picked once.

Example: Team Blue bans Warwick, Fizz, and Gnar. Team Red bans Warwick, Braum, and Lee Sin.

All 5 of these champions are banned, but then each team gets an effective "refund" if 1 ban each, for Warwick. Each team picks another champion to ban, and that's the end. In this case, if they pick the same champ, then only that champ is banned. You still end up with a minimum of 6 champs banned, but a possiblity of 7.

This fits 2 needs, the first being problematic or overpowered champions. Teams aren't penalized for "biting the bullet" and picking that obviously overpowered champion that SOMEONE has to burn a ban on. It's self-policing, and the community at large will determine and highlight those champions. This happens while combating the second need, the growing champion pool. A maximum of 9 bans is possible, only 1 more than the 8 proposed by so many. And you will only achieve this under specific circumstances, which indicates a general sense of agreement by everyone participating in the game.

The competitive scene will remain largely unchanged, as picks are generally made against specific players' champions. Even if a double-pick did occur, this would only reinforce the argument against that champion in the greater scope of the game and current meta.

I invite all to poke holes and ask questions.

Thanks much.