For a long time MLB has allowed the tail to wag the dog by giving TV the authority to set start times and the length of between-inning breaks. I have to accept that this will never change since all teams generate necessary income that way but I wish we could have 60-second between-inning breaks like in the olden days. That alone would cut about 20 minutes from every game, more in the postseason. Regarding pace of play I don't support anything that would fundamentally change the way the game is played or managed. While the pitch clock has some proponents I would accept it only when the bases are empty and only if there's a similar clock for a batter to step into the batter's box. I think it could give an unfair advantage to a baserunner to use it with runners on base. I still say the only acceptable changes that could speed games up are to raise the upper boundary of the strike zone and to lower the height of the mound. A larger zone means fewer balls and more swings sooner in the count. A lower mound prevents a concomitant increase in strikeouts. Fewer walks, no increase in strikeouts, shorter at-bats, more balls put in play, faster pace of play. By the way, there's no guarantee that this would shorten game times but my guess is that it would. As for challenges I think they are here to stay. One way to eliminate the pause while a manager decides whether to challenge a call would be to allow teams to wait until after the following at-bat to make a challenge. However, if a challenge overturns a call it means an at-bat would have to be repeated. It would require some study to see which way uses more time, and it probably wouldn't make more than a couple minutes difference in a game anyway.