“Get to the level of stupid.”

I’ve heard this expression used twice in the last month in meetings that encouraged us to think riskier, to shed our preconceived notions and fear of failure, to attack problems with solutions that at first may seem, well, stupid.

Another popular trope in business is to “throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks.” You test different tactics to identify what works and what doesn’t.

Our CEO, Steve Stenersen, often urges that it is US Lacrosse’s duty to “stick a finger in the fan,” to propose disruptive and sometimes unpopular ideas to address the sport’s shortcomings. That innovative itch yielded the Lacrosse Athlete Development Model in 2016. It will be several more years before we know just how effective it has been in squaring the pyramid — fostering opportunities for all athletes, not just elite players, to grow within the sport’s structure.

Free play, small-sided practices and games, physical literacy, age-appropriate rules and field sizes — these concepts make so much sense now to those around the country who have adopted the model. It’s working, they say, creating not only better lacrosse players, but also helping to retain those with room to grow within their programs.

Likewise, the Premier Lacrosse League has proven unafraid to experiment. Some said the PLL reached the level of stupid this summer when it tinkered with hockey-style faceoffs and eliminating the draw entirely in the All-Star Game. But were you not entertained? And did it not at least make you go, “Hmm?” (Insert thinking face emoji.)

After the under-19 women’s world championship in August, World Lacrosse decided to forge forward with an experimental 6-on-6 format drafted by its Blue Skies working group.

This new discipline of the sport deploys a smaller field, shorter games, a 45-second shot clock, smaller rosters, no backup rule for shots and draws only at the beginning of each period (with the goalie putting the ball in play after goals). It’s radical, certainly, and not for the faint of heart. But let’s see how it looks when the Canadian and U.S. teams — men and women — go at it during the Team USA Fall Classic in October.

Lacrosse is in a state of revolution. Some stuff will stick. Some won’t. But what if years from now we look back at this era as the one that set the stage for the sport to be more broadly accessible, to be more viable as a professional option for the best players and to be contested in the Olympics?

That would be stupid good.

Matt DaSilva is the editor in chief of US Lacrosse Magazine. This column appears in the September/October edition.