I have a radical idea that could “save” bowling.

I put save in quotes because it's hard to imagine bowling going away — it's a fun recreation for tens of millions. What needs saving is competitive bowling, which has been in decline for at least two decades.

To figure out what might be done to “fix” it, I think you first need to look at what each of the major entities needs.

The Bowling Proprietors Association of America needs prosperous centers that will be members of the organization.

The United States Bowling Congress needs members and/or funds.

The Pro Bowlers Association needs money.

Currently, the entities are not truly interdependent so they don’t necessarily work together.

My idea makes USBC and BPAA interdependent and offers PBA the opportunity to become interdependent.

Basically, I think the industry must accept the idea that if they don’t work together, they will perish separately, although many centers will be able to continue to thrive on recreational bowling.

Currently, I believe too many proprietors don’t see how important the sport and a governing body is to the health of the industry, as their centers may be profitable without either, thanks to recreational bowling and uncertified leagues.

And USBC will accept certified leagues and bowlers from non-BPAA centers.

Meanwhile, the PBA sort of sits out on an island, willing to work together but apparently not willing to become interdependent, or at least not offered enough to make interdependence worthwhile.

My idea is not original, as it is similar to others advanced over the years, notably by former USBC executive Pete Tredwell a few years ago and by former USBC president Michael Carroll in a Bowlers Journal International guest column about a year ago.

I'm just aiming to prompt discussion and perhaps action.

My idea can work with or without PBA, but it’s far more impactful if PBA is part of it.

The first thing the industry needs to do is agree on what has been obvious since the 1980s from the battles over lane patterns: proprietors run the industry, and that’s as it should be since they are the people putting their money on the line.

Recognizing that fact, I would create a new entity to manage organized bowling led by proprietors. Let’s call it USA Bowling.

Where do the funds come from?

BPAA member dues could work, but I have what I think is a better idea.

USBC membership is falling for multiple reasons, but a huge one is that many bowlers just don’t see the value in shelling out $20 or $25 or $30 at the start of a season to be a USBC member. Whether they are right or wrong to feel that way, it is indisputable.

And it’s only getting worse with USBC cutting awards and programs — membership has dropped from 2, 071,516 adult members and 253,558 youth members in 2008-09 to 1,597,517 and 191,418 in 2012-13. (In 1979-80, ABC membership was an all-time high of 4,799,195, WIBC membership was 4,187,053 and AJBC membership was 770,460.)

I believe the membership model is broken and must be replaced. If it isn't, USBC will be forced to cut itself to where it can't satisfactorily perform even the core functions it hasn't yet cut.

My idea is that no bowler ever again directly pays a membership fee.

Instead, league bowlers at USA Bowling member centers automatically are USBC members, with their membership fees paid through their weekly league fees.

I don’t know what the exact figures need to be — numbers crunchers can figure that out — but I would take a small amount of every league bowler’s fees every league session and deliver it to USA Bowling.   

I’d also take a small portion of the entry fee of every tournament bowled at a USA Bowling member center and send that to USA Bowling. I've bowled more tournaments in my career than all but a tiny percentage of people on the planet and I've never understood how I don't pay any certification funds to compete in those.

And I’d take a small amount out of every open bowling game at every USA Bowling member center and deliver that to USA Bowling.

The leaders can figure out how much is needed to make USA Bowlng work and the experts and numbers crunchers can set up the system and fees to achieve that.

If former USBC Executive Director Stu Upson was correct when he said at the 2011 USBC convention that there are roughly 10 million bowlers who compete in what might be considered organized competition, raising enough money with a relatively low level of fees should be possible, especially when you add in funds from tournaments and open play.

In contrast to a per-lane fee, the beauty of this model is that a much busier 24-lane center sends much more money to USA Bowling than a struggling 24-lane center. Hopefully, that would encourage more centers to join BPAA.

(Update: I have received a lot of information on the huge logistical issues with such a system, as opposed to a per-lane fee.)

What do the member centers get out of the money they will be delivering to USA Bowling?

The exclusive right to hold certified events and have certified bowlers, as well as all the trade group offerings BPAA now offers its members.

In other words, a center that is not a USA Bowling member cannot hold a tournament that is certified — this would include PBA events if PBA joins USA Bowling — and none of its bowlers can have an average that is recognized by USA Bowling for tournament competition and no scores in non-member centers would be recognized for official records.

I would hope that most competitive bowlers would boycott all centers that don’t join USA Bowling. I know I would.

Member centers put up the funds for USA Bowling and therefore they get to run it — I’d give them a majority of the board positions — and the membership portion of USA Bowling supports only member centers.

USA Bowling could be structured to offer a robust awards program, topped by valuable awards for the Sport level of competition and lesser awards for house shot leagues. Both levels could co-exist without friction as USA Bowling would recognize them for what they are “worth.”

There is no reason to pit the sport bowler and level against the regular recreational bowler and level — both have their place and can co-exist peacefully.

(Once the new model is in place, "fixes" for what ails the sport could be implemented, but that is the next step and ideas for another story at another time.)

USA Bowling also could offer a thorough league and tournament database that would aim to fight sandbagging.

And USA Bowling could offer the Open Championships and Women’s Championships, as well as the Masters, Queens, Seniors Masters, Senior Queens, U.S. Opens, Team USA, Junior Team USA, etc.

Non-member centers and bowlers from non-member centers would be ineligible to compete in any of those events, although someone who bowls in both member and non-member centers would be eligible.

That’s a powerful stick to encourage centers to become USA Bowling members. The carrot is the great deals BPAA already gets in some areas, as well as the awards, certified tournaments, etc.

PBA could fit into USA Bowling if a deal could be struck with PBA owners, who are down tens of millions of dollars in efforts to turn PBA into something big after they acquired it at the start of the century.

USA Bowling would provide the funding for a robust PBA Tour that offers something young bowlers can aspire to as a logical career opportunity — a necessity for the industry to truly prosper again.

And the PBA Tour acts as a promotional vehicle for USA Bowling, with the key part being TV ads on PBA Tour TV shows.

PBA staff run the best tournaments in the world and they can and should stay on and continue running them.

USA Bowling can embrace current sponsors and seek more sponsors to boost the PBA, but the beauty of my idea is that it’s bowlers funding bowling — anything additional just makes a good situation better.

It probably would take $5 million to $10 million to fund a true PBA Tour of 20 or more tournaments at different sites on cable and/or network TV  with prize funds good enough to make professional bowling a feasible career for dozens of players.

I am pessimistic that there are enough proprietors out there who see the value of having a strong PBA Tour that young bowlers can aspire too, that draws fans and that showcases the industry and sport. Or at least enough that see the value when it costs them a decent chunk of change.

It requires them to sacrifice for the greater good of the game, for a vision of a better future for their industry and sport.

But I'd sure love to be proven wrong.

And I'd offer that if they put up the funds to make USA Bowling with the PBA a reality, they might find more sponsors willing to get involved, especially if it were possible to get out of competing against the NFL on TV.

There could even be a Women’s Tour if the leaders of USA Bowling deem it desired and feasible.

The logistical issues might be large, but if brilliant minds can create the kind of technology that makes our lives so much better in so many areas than years ago, they should be able to set this up.

The bigger hurdle is the human factor and it’s a huge one in my mind.

Every entity has to accept that the current model is broken, competitive bowling is dying, the industry is withering and radical change is necessary.

Proprietors must accept responsibility for taking the lead in fixing their industry and sport.

USBC must accept that it needs to become a component of a body led by proprietors and that the two entities must work in lock-step to support and protect each other as part of the same body.

PBA should accept that shy of an umbrella sponsor or fairy godmother appearing, it can only become an actual tour again with a different business model. I don’t know exactly how the current owners would work this out with the leaders of USA Bowling, but if both sides want to do what is best for the PBA and the industry they hopefully would find a way.

As I said last month on Above180.com, I find this model to be so correct that I must be missing something obvious. If it's just wariness of one entity for another, then it's something that can be overcome by all the entities sitting down and hammering things out.  

Desperate times call for desperate (or at least extreme) measures.

I welcome all serious comments and constructive criticism of my idea. I only have a broad concept here, not that much different than what others have offered. And I know the devil is in the details in things like this.

I also welcome anyone with the groups I mention hijacking my idea and running with it. I love the sport and want to see it strong again so the best young bowlers of today have the same or better opportunities than I had. 

Give me that and I don’t care who gets the credit.