PDA

View Full Version : Selig's latest - Astros to AL and NO divisions


Fenway
06-11-2011, 03:12 PM
insanity

http://m.espn.go.com/mlb/story?storyId=6651634&y=1apvc

Frater Perdurabo
06-11-2011, 03:26 PM
It's not a terrible idea. It ensures the top five W-L records in each league make the playoffs.

Fenway
06-11-2011, 03:32 PM
It's not a terrible idea. It ensures the top five W-L records in each league make the playoffs.

If they go to a balanced schedule I might be OK

but everyone has a different interleague slate ..

lizard6king6
06-11-2011, 03:41 PM
It's not a terrible idea. It ensures the top five W-L records in each league make the playoffs.
Thats why I like it.

Frater Perdurabo
06-11-2011, 04:17 PM
If they go to a balanced schedule I might be OK

but everyone has a different interleague slate ..

I would keep the divisions (Houston going to AL West), have the teams within each division play the same interleague opponents for the same number of games, and then base wild card standings only on games played within the league.

Fenway
06-11-2011, 04:21 PM
I would keep the divisions (Houston going to AL West), have the teams within each division play the same interleague opponents for the same number of games, and then base wild card standings only on games played within the league.

Only problem - White Sox play Cubs 6 times - Royals play Cards 6 times - but Tigers have no true NL rival

Frater Perdurabo
06-11-2011, 04:26 PM
Only problem - White Sox play Cubs 6 times - Royals play Cards 6 times - but Tigers have no true NL rival

Get rid of the "rival" interleague games. One three-game series every three years is enough.

Fenway
06-11-2011, 04:33 PM
Get rid of the "rival" interleague games. One three-game series every three years is enough.

The White Sox have only 4 games they KNOW will sell out

Opening Day and the Flubs...JR won't give those up

Frater Perdurabo
06-11-2011, 04:33 PM
Get rid of the "rival" interleague games. One three-game series every three years is enough.

In fact, are the Dodgers - Angels, Mets - Yankees, and Athletics - Giants, series really that big of a deal?

BOS-NYY clearly is a bigger deal to the Yankees, as is the Mets' rivalry with the Phillies and Braves. Dodgers - Giants is bigger for both teams than either's rivalry with their local AL neighbor.

I think the Cubs - Sox interleague games may be the "biggest" interleague series, but I'm not sure it's a bigger deal than Cubs - Cards, Cubs - Brewers, Sox - Twins or Sox - Tigers. Cubs - Cards also is bigger than Cards - Royals.

And most of the other manufactured "natural" rivalries are lame. Padres - Mariners? Please. HOU - TEX had to invent a silver boot to make it worth something. That rivalry would be MUCH better if both teams played in the same division in the same league.

Frater Perdurabo
06-11-2011, 04:35 PM
The White Sox have only 4 games they KNOW will sell out

Opening Day and the Flubs...JR won't give those up

I know Selig and JR are friends, but should their friendship and the interests of one owner hijack a better realignment?

TDog
06-11-2011, 04:39 PM
If you have no divisions, you have no need for playoffs.

It's bad enough you have the postseason watered down with a wild card.

TDog
06-11-2011, 04:50 PM
In fact, are the Dodgers - Angels, Mets - Yankees, and Athletics - Giants, series really that big of a deal? ...

Yes. Actually, I don't know about the Mets-Yankees. But the A's are going to sell out their series against the Giants, which will be huge for the A's. (The Giants sold out for the A's in May, but they have sold out every home game this year.)

The Cubs-White Sox thing is unique in its deep-rooted intensity because all the other motroplex interleague rivalries are younger, having been set up by franchise shifts and expansion, but that doesn't mean they are not a big deal.

TomBradley72
06-11-2011, 06:21 PM
Yuck.

I like the division set up- I like having Division champions.

If any team moves to the AL- it should be Washington from a historical perspective. Or move TB to the NL (foster a rivalry with Marlins and Braves) and move Milwaukee and Washington to the AL.

Frater Perdurabo
06-11-2011, 07:46 PM
Now that we've tasted champagne, beating the Cubs tastes like Old Style.

DSpivack
06-11-2011, 08:06 PM
Yuck.

I like the division set up- I like having Division champions.

If any team moves to the AL- it should be Washington from a historical perspective. Or move TB to the NL (foster a rivalry with Marlins and Braves) and move Milwaukee and Washington to the AL.

Orioles-Nats could be a decent rivalry, then.

WSox597
06-11-2011, 09:37 PM
Now that we've tasted champagne, beating the Cubs tastes like Old Style.

Excellent. I'll have to borrow that one.

My family is loaded with Cub fans.

Lip Man 1
06-11-2011, 09:59 PM
The thinking makes sense to me, a hell of a lot more then having a division with four teams in it while other divisions have more.

Get back to playing more league games and screw interleague. The shine has worn off...as others have said that Marlins-Royals and Padres-Indians rivalry really makes things sizzle doesn't it?

Lip

ComiskeyBrewer
06-11-2011, 10:21 PM
Yuck.

I like the division set up- I like having Division champions.

If any team moves to the AL- it should be Washington from a historical perspective. Or move TB to the NL (foster a rivalry with Marlins and Braves) and move Milwaukee and Washington to the AL.

No thanks. The Brewers are finally starting to develop rivalries for the first time since the AL East, and after having had the team play in both leagues, most Brewer fans prefer the NL style of play.

Brian26
06-11-2011, 10:46 PM
If they really want to abolish the divisions, they absolutely have to go back to a balanced schedule.

Move the Astros to the American League. Each league has 15 teams.

Play each league opponent eight times. One series on the road, one series at home. The four game series will reduce travel. 8 x 14 = 112

Play each non-league opponent in a single three game series. 3 x 15 = 45. This series will alternate year-to-year home and road.

112 + 45 = 157 game schedule, which is a nice compromise between the old 154 gamer with only the World Series following it, and the modern day 162 gamer with three rounds of playoffs.

russ99
06-11-2011, 10:48 PM
Bud should recuse himself from any alignment talk, since the Brewers leaving the AL being the cause of this problem, and the Brewers going back to the AL would solve it, especially if there are no divisions.

I'm incensed about this Astros rumor. As I've said before, this would be a horrible move for this club.

They'd lose their 50 year rivalries with St. Louis, Cincinnati and the Cubs and only gain a false one with the Rangers and also force one of the preeminent speed-defense-pitching teams to drop their 45+ year philosophy and go to the DH.

This also would force the Astros to become the big league club with the most travel miles, and lose ratings (and thus TV money) drastically by pushing the majority of their road games to a 9PM slot, thus alienating the next generation of fans who can't watch games so late. And I'm sure the A's, Mariners and Angels would be a great draw.

For Jim Crane to accept this, or even worse have the league look the other way to the massive debt he's using to purchase the club in return for realignment concessions, he'd immediately be hated more than former owners Drayton McLane and John McMullen put together, and have zero chance with this fanbase.

If MLB wants balanced leagues, they should look at the Brewers, and if not them, a less established club, and don't force any team into a West division.

Edit: Good deal, Jim Crane wants nothing to do with this.
Linky (http://houston.culturemap.com/newsdetail/06-11-11-forget-the-houston-astros-moving-to-the-american-league-jim-crane-ownership-group-not-interested/)

soxfan2504
06-11-2011, 11:49 PM
now that we've tasted champagne, beating the cubs tastes like old style.

+1

Hitmen77
06-11-2011, 11:51 PM
insanity

http://m.espn.go.com/mlb/story?storyId=6651634&y=1apvc

If this were to happen, this would mean at least one interleague game every day (except for off days), no?


I'm incensed about this Astros rumor. As I've said before, this would be a horrible move for this club.

They'd lose their 50 year rivalries with St. Louis, Cincinnati and the Cubs and only gain a false one with the Rangers and also force one of the preeminent speed-defense-pitching teams to drop their 45+ year philosophy and go to the DH.

This also would force the Astros to become the big league club with the most travel miles, and lose ratings (and thus TV money) drastically by pushing the majority of their road games to a 9PM slot, thus alienating the next generation of fans who can't watch games so late. And I'm sure the A's, Mariners and Angels would be a great draw.

Yes, aside from getting Texas as a division rival, the rest of their division would be on the West Coast, 2 times zones over, and well over 1,000 miles away.


If MLB wants balanced leagues, they should look at the Brewers, and if not them, a less established club, and don't force any team into a West division.

Edit: Good deal, Jim Crane wants nothing to do with this.
Linky (http://houston.culturemap.com/newsdetail/06-11-11-forget-the-houston-astros-moving-to-the-american-league-jim-crane-ownership-group-not-interested/)

They'll never bring Milwaukee back to the AL. They won't want to give up 9 huge crowds vs. the Cubs every year and they won't want to move to a league where the wild card is usually locked up by an AL East powerhouse.

That being said, I agree that I wish they never moved the Brewers to the NL in the first place. Geographically, an AL Central with Chicago, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Detroit, and Cleveland would have been great.

ComiskeyBrewer
06-12-2011, 12:42 AM
Am i the only guy who thinks moving the Diamondbacks(or Rockies) to the AL west would be a great move? Dbacks have been in existence for less than 15 years, they have no real rivalries yet.

They'll never bring Milwaukee back to the AL. They won't want to give up 9 huge crowds vs. the Cubs every year and they won't want to move to a league where the wild card is usually locked up by an AL East powerhouse.

Not to mention the sellout/near sellouts that the Cardinals produce. They travel to Milwaukee very well.

Zakath
06-12-2011, 07:00 AM
Only problem - White Sox play Cubs 6 times - Royals play Cards 6 times - but Tigers have no true NL rival

They could, if baseball would realize that the rivalry between Pittsburgh and Cleveland is as big if not bigger than Cleveland-Cincinnati, thus making the rivalries Pirates-Indians and Tigers-Reds.

dickallen15
06-12-2011, 07:24 AM
The thinking makes sense to me, a hell of a lot more then having a division with four teams in it while other divisions have more.

Get back to playing more league games and screw interleague. The shine has worn off...as others have said that Marlins-Royals and Padres-Indians rivalry really makes things sizzle doesn't it?

Lip
As opposed to a Marlins/Pirates or Indians/Mariners match up? The shine hasn't worn off interleague. Those games still draw more on average.

amsteel
06-12-2011, 11:03 AM
The White Sox have only 4 games they KNOW will sell out


Those days may be over:
http://www.ticketmaster.com/event/0400463FC85A40F1?majorcatid=10004&artistid=805917&minorcatid=10

Premium lowers available for all 3 Cubs games. The fact they are 135$ each probably has something to do with it.

Also ScoreBig has Cubs-Sox at USCF for UNDER face, so someone is trying to get rid of alot of tickets.

Zisk77
06-12-2011, 11:10 AM
Am i the only guy who thinks moving the Diamondbacks(or Rockies) to the AL west would be a great move? Dbacks have been in existence for less than 15 years, they have no real rivalries yet.



Not to mention the sellout/near sellouts that the Cardinals produce. They travel to Milwaukee very well.

Coors field just screams DH as well.

Of course if they really want to make money, blow up the leagues (never going to happen) and have these divisions:

West
A's
Angels
Dodgers
Padres
Giants

Mountain
Mariners
Rockies
D'Backs
Rangers
Astros

Central
White Sox
Cubs
Cards
Royals
Brewers

G. Lakes (or whatever)
Twins
Tigers
Blue Jays
Indians
Reds

East coast (dadada division)
Yankees
Red Sox
Mets
Phillies
Pirates (lots of luck competing)

South
Braves
Marlins
Rays
Orioles
Nationals

This would create huge rivalries (Sox-cards, Sawks Phillies, etc) and save money on travel. of course everyone would have to abolish the dh or go with the dh.

Probably go east/west for leagues West, Mountain, & Central Vs. East,G. Lakes, & South in Ws.

Ok I'm done solving that problem, now on to Israel and the mideast.:redneck

TDog
06-12-2011, 11:12 AM
They could, if baseball would realize that the rivalry between Pittsburgh and Cleveland is as big if not bigger than Cleveland-Cincinnati, thus making the rivalries Pirates-Indians and Tigers-Reds.

Often in professional sports, rivalries are more about the fans than the players, and more now than ever. The New York Giants and Brooklyn Dodgers had a true nasty rivalry and carried it to California in the late 1950s. Interleague rivalries are more about the fans, though. Aside from the Dodgers and Yankees, there aren't many natural interleague rivalries that grew out of both competition and geography.

Baseball chose to cultivate the mid-Ohio Reds-Indians rivalry instead of the natural Cleveland-Pittsburgh rivalry. Brewers fans had nasty rivalries and geographically natural with both the Twins and White Sox when they were in the American League. My boss in Wisconsin told me of a White Sox game he went to in Milwaukee where beer sales had to be cut off in the second inning because things were getting so ugly in the stands. Now the White Sox rivalry is pretty much forgotten. The White Sox probably have natural interleague rivalries with both the Brewers and the Cubs, but they have ignored the Brewers. Detroit really has no natural interleague rival. Nor do the Mariners or Rockies.

An interleague game between the Mariners and Marlins may not be intriguing, but neither is an intra-league game between the Rays and Mariners or the Rays and A's. It's not going to be the Yankees and Red Sox every week, and most people wouldn't want it to be.

I don't have a problem with interleague play, per se. I do have a problem with teams making the postseason without winning a division title. Baseball is played six months of the year. It's about the pennant race. Multiple divisions create multiple races. The wild card cheapens that , but at least there is only one in each league. Expanding the postseason does not give worthy teams a chance to play for the title. It increases the likelihood of a non-deserving team getting hot at the right time and winning the title. Balance the schedule and only take the top four or eight teams in each league, and you have done more to assure only the best teams make the postseason, but you have eliminated the pennant races while giving non-deserving teams a chance to get hot and win a fluke title.

If you only want the elite teams to play for the title, a balanced schedule tells you who the elite teams are without the necessity of playoffs, unless there is a tie for first at the end of the regular season.

Tragg
06-12-2011, 11:23 AM
Get rid of the "rival" interleague games. One three-game series every three years is enough.

Amen

I think they'd use divisions.
Also, just moving the Astros into the AL west doesn't seem fair to them to me. I think they'd have to shake things up more.

Fenway
06-12-2011, 11:25 AM
Often in professional sports, rivalries are more about the fans than the players, and more now than ever. The New York Giants and Brooklyn Dodgers had a true nasty rivalry and carried it to California in the late 1950s. Interleague rivalries are more about the fans, though. Aside from the Dodgers and Yankees, there aren't many natural interleague rivalries that grew out of both competition and geography.



Yes it was huge in Brooklyn but it didn't carry over so much to the Polo Grounds.

The Giants had the weakest radio station (WMCA) and TV deal with channel 5. Truth is the stadium was in a bad area. The Giants were all set to move to Minneapolis when O'Malley sold Stoneham on San Francisco. If the Giants hadn't moved Pittsburgh may have been the team to bolt as in the 50's they were awful.

Sox-Cubs is the deepest as it goes back a 100 years.... NOTHING else comes close.

hawkjt
06-12-2011, 12:13 PM
I am fine with just shoving the Astros into the AL West...I know,russ will be pissed,but it makes sense. Pay them to do it.

3 five team divisions in each league.
Play one interleague rival every year - one series.
Then rotate the other interleague series for each team,to end up playing a total of 9-12 interleague games/yr,as necessary with 15 team leagues.

2 wildcards for each league. They play each other in 3 game series on Mon-wed immediately following the end of the season. Best record in each league sit til thursday to play wildcard winners. The other series can start on tues or wed.as normal. 10 teams out of 30 making the playoffs is about right for baseball.

Don't screw this up,Bud!

g0g0
06-12-2011, 01:19 PM
I like the idea and am okay with the structure, but a lot of the rivalries would diminish in importance. Astros going definitely makes sense. Now would be the time to also contract if they are seriously thinking about it. Get it done when all of the other realignments are taking place and it won't be as much of a shock.

voodoochile
06-12-2011, 03:08 PM
That would guarantee all-season long interleague games.

Fenway
06-12-2011, 05:16 PM
That would guarantee all-season long interleague games.

unless you end the leagues ( which Selig has plotted for 15 years )

http://espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office/post/_/id/363/mlb-needs-geographic-realignment

hawkjt
06-12-2011, 05:19 PM
That would guarantee all-season long interleague games.


I am fine with that. No reason we have to have that glut of interleague games all in 2 weeks.

sox1970
06-12-2011, 06:19 PM
I love the idea of no divisions/top 5 making the playoffs.

It's a lot better to seed the teams the right way than to penalize a wildcard team that is clearly better than one or two divison winners in the same league.

Plus the symmetry of the top 5 of 15 in each league makes more sense than keeping it 14AL/16NL. Interleague all year is fine, and to me it's more palatable than clustered mostly in June. I pointed that out in this thread:
http://whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2756031&postcount=26

miker
06-12-2011, 09:30 PM
So with the first round bye for the "League" winner and the traditionally bad October weather, they should get the World Series in by Thanksgiving, right?

PKalltheway
06-12-2011, 09:34 PM
This also would force the Astros to become the big league club with the most travel miles, and lose ratings (and thus TV money) drastically by pushing the majority of their road games to a 9PM slot, thus alienating the next generation of fans who can't watch games so late. And I'm sure the A's, Mariners and Angels would be a great draw.


I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with you on this point. Texas has been in the AL West for years, and they routinely have to make that kind of travel all by themselves, and to my knowledge, I've never heard them complain too much about it. I'm sure the Rangers would love to have a division rival in their time zone.

Plus, even though Houston will lose series against the Cardinals and the Cubs, they would likely get some of that money back with the Rangers in the same division, along with having 6-10 combined home dates with the Red Sox and Yankees. Plus, the Astros don't exactly pack Minute Maid Park when they play the Reds, Pirates or Brewers anyway, so your point about playing the Angels, A's and Mariners is a moot one IMHO.

IMO, I believe Milwaukee is here to stay as a National League team. Houston, Colorado and Arizona would be perfect candidates to move to the AL. You could move the Nationals, but you would need an even bigger shakeup with realignment, since you would probably move Toronto to the AL Central and Kansas City to the AL West.

sox1970
06-12-2011, 09:40 PM
So with the first round bye for the "League" winner and the traditionally bad October weather, they should get the World Series in by Thanksgiving, right?

There's one thing I can guarantee with realignment...the World Series will not end in November. They aren't going to do that again.

They're either going to go to 156 or schedule 6 day/night doubleheaders. Either way, they have to shorten the regular season by a week to accomodate for another level of playoffs.

To me, having the top-3 teams get a 5 or 6 day bye isn't that big of a deal. They get to heal up and set their rotations any way they want, all while the 4 and 5 seeds are burning their bullpens in what I would assume be a best-of-3 play in series.

Zakath
06-12-2011, 10:26 PM
I think I'd prefer adding 2 new teams to the AL and going to 4 4-team divisions in each league.

TDog
06-12-2011, 10:49 PM
I think I'd prefer adding 2 new teams to the AL and going to 4 4-team divisions in each league.

That wouldn't be a bad idea if there weren't already cities that can't support major league baseball.

Fenway
06-12-2011, 10:59 PM
That wouldn't be a bad idea if there weren't already cities that can't support major league baseball.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/attendance

Milwaukee may support their team better per capita than anyone....

ComiskeyBrewer
06-13-2011, 01:07 AM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/attendance

Milwaukee may support their team better per capita than anyone....

Since 2007:

2.8m
3.06m
3.03m
2.76m

And they will probably break 3 million again this year. Not bad for a city of just under 600,000. The FO for the Brewers does a TON to get the surrounding areas(not just the city itself) involved with the team. I live about 54 miles SW of Milwaukee, and i find myself going to atleast 15 or so games/year since about 2004. The number of fans who come down from the Fox River Valley/Madison is astounding.

DonnieDarko
06-13-2011, 04:20 AM
The more that I read about this proposed realignment, the more I like it. When can we get it started?!

PeteWard
06-13-2011, 05:35 AM
No more wild cards. :mad: Eight teams is already a lot.

PeteWard
06-13-2011, 05:37 AM
There's one thing I can guarantee with realignment...the World Series will not end in November. They aren't going to do that again.

They're either going to go to 156 or schedule 6 day/night doubleheaders. Either way, they have to shorten the regular season by a week to accomodate for another level of playoffs.

To me, having the top-3 teams get a 5 or 6 day bye isn't that big of a deal. They get to heal up and set their rotations any way they want, all while the 4 and 5 seeds are burning their bullpens in what I would assume be a best-of-3 play in series.

I miss the old Sunday DHs to cap a four game series. They used to sell out the old park very often for those games.

MARTINMVP
06-13-2011, 07:59 AM
In fact, are the Dodgers - Angels, Mets - Yankees, and Athletics - Giants, series really that big of a deal?

BOS-NYY clearly is a bigger deal to the Yankees, as is the Mets' rivalry with the Phillies and Braves. Dodgers - Giants is bigger for both teams than either's rivalry with their local AL neighbor.

I think the Cubs - Sox interleague games may be the "biggest" interleague series, but I'm not sure it's a bigger deal than Cubs - Cards, Cubs - Brewers, Sox - Twins or Sox - Tigers. Cubs - Cards also is bigger than Cards - Royals.

And most of the other manufactured "natural" rivalries are lame. Padres - Mariners? Please. HOU - TEX had to invent a silver boot to make it worth something. That rivalry would be MUCH better if both teams played in the same division in the same league.

The Sox vs. Cubs 6 times a year is overkill. I'd rather see it go down to 3.

I'd rather see the Sox play other NL Central division teams more often, like the Cardinals or Brewers. I'd also love to see the Sox player the Phillies or Reds.

Hitmen77
06-13-2011, 08:12 AM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/attendance

Milwaukee may support their team better per capita than anyone....

Since 2007:

2.8m
3.06m
3.03m
2.76m

And they will probably break 3 million again this year. Not bad for a city of just under 600,000. The FO for the Brewers does a TON to get the surrounding areas(not just the city itself) involved with the team. I live about 54 miles SW of Milwaukee, and i find myself going to atleast 15 or so games/year since about 2004. The number of fans who come down from the Fox River Valley/Madison is astounding.

What caused this turn around in Brewers support? Back in the 1990s they didn't draw well at all. I know Milwaukee has had some decent seasons of late, but it's not like they've been a perennial playoff team.

Was it Miller Park that caused this surge in Brewers popularity? Or perhaps having a star like Prince Fielder to generate interest?

Don't tell me it's because they're in the NL because I really find it hard to believe that fans would suddenly start flocking to games just because the team is in the NL instead of the AL.

PKalltheway
06-13-2011, 09:17 AM
What caused this turn around in Brewers support? Back in the 1990s they didn't draw well at all. I know Milwaukee has had some decent seasons of late, but it's not like they've been a perennial playoff team.

Was it Miller Park that caused this surge in Brewers popularity? Or perhaps having a star like Prince Fielder to generate interest?

Don't tell me it's because they're in the NL because I really find it hard to believe that fans would suddenly start flocking to games just because the team is in the NL instead of the AL.
I'm not entirely sure either, but I feel like the CC Sabathia trade in 2008 sent a really good message to the fans that the front office is doing the best they can to field a winner. Plus, having Ryan Braun and Prince Fielder doesn't hurt, either.

palehozenychicty
06-13-2011, 09:45 AM
Yes. Actually, I don't know about the Mets-Yankees. But the A's are going to sell out their series against the Giants, which will be huge for the A's. (The Giants sold out for the A's in May, but they have sold out every home game this year.)

The Cubs-White Sox thing is unique in its deep-rooted intensity because all the other motroplex interleague rivalries are younger, having been set up by franchise shifts and expansion, but that doesn't mean they are not a big deal.

Mets-Yankees was cemented when they played for the title in 2000. It's still covered intensely in the local press. Those games still generate high markups, despite the Mets' mediocrity over the past couple of years.

Cubs-Sox is unique because of time, as you mention.

kaufsox
06-13-2011, 10:01 AM
get rid of the "rival" interleague games. One three-game series every three years is enough.

yes!

kaufsox
06-13-2011, 10:06 AM
I'm torn on this idea, and really I doubt it will happen seeing how it currently rests at less than 50-50. Anyway, speaking of hypotheticals, I like the idea of a single table for each league, but with balanced divisions (why the hell can't they figure this out!) having to win something(with the exception of 1 wild card) to get into the playoffs makes baseball unique and I'd hat to lose that as well. We'll see what eventually washes out.

Irishsox1
06-13-2011, 10:12 AM
I still say the team that's getting screwed is the Rangers in the West. That means all of those west coast games are two hours behind.

The people that are putting this story out are forgetting one thing which is the DH. The players union will not get rid of the DH as they feel it creates another job especially for older players who can still hit.

Moses_Scurry
06-13-2011, 10:35 AM
Contraction is the answer. Contract the A's and cubs, move the Diamondbacks to the American League, no divisions, balanced schedule, no interleague, top 4 teams make the playoffs.

C-Dawg
06-13-2011, 12:06 PM
What caused this turn around in Brewers support? Back in the 1990s they didn't draw well at all. I know Milwaukee has had some decent seasons of late, but it's not like they've been a perennial playoff team.



Its because of all those sold-out weekday games against the Cubs!

downstairs
06-13-2011, 01:24 PM
I absolutely hate it. You seriously will be eliminating some rivalries... or at least making them less meaningful.

Sure, Boston hates the NY Yankees... but if you do this, they're not fighting against the Yankees any more than the Rangers, Mariners, White Sox, etc.

Plus, when rival teams are both doing well, and both are in the top 5... all they're playing for is playoff slotting... which isn't that interesting.

sox1970
06-13-2011, 01:48 PM
I absolutely hate it. You seriously will be eliminating some rivalries... or at least making them less meaningful.

Sure, Boston hates the NY Yankees... but if you do this, they're not fighting against the Yankees any more than the Rangers, Mariners, White Sox, etc.

Plus, when rival teams are both doing well, and both are in the top 5... all they're playing for is playoff slotting... which isn't that interesting.

What you're not taking into consideration is that nobody would want to be the 4th or 5th seed. Nobody is going to want to be stuck playing a best-of-3 series to move on. Therefore, the race for the 3rd seed is going to be very important, and if you think about it, that team's win total won't be that far off from the 6th place team that would be out. The spread from a top-3 bye and out of the playoffs completely won't be that far off...maybe 6 games on average. So the jockeying for position in September will bring more teams into the race--good for attendance, good for ratings.

If they eliminate divisions, they're really making it important to finish in the top-3, which basically would be division winners. And as far as rivals, by my count there are three in the majors--Yankees/Red Sox, Cubs/Cardinals, and Giants/Dodgers. These teams would still be facing each other 11 games and competing for playoff spots and within the playoffs themselves some years. They don't need 18 games in the regular season to maintain their rivalry.

The reason why I'd like to see no divisions/top 5 is that it would seed the best teams in the right order...it's fair. And I don't need to see 18 games vs the Indians, Royals, Twins, and Tigers anymore. A close-to-balanced schedule is a lot more appealing to me as a fan.

siugrad25
06-13-2011, 01:57 PM
At first I was hesitant on the idea of getting rid of the divisions, but honestly in most years, we're looking at least two of the divisions being crap anyway. This configuration allows the Orioles and Blue Jays among others, to have a chance at a playoff spot without sporting 38 games against the Red Sox and Yankees. However, there has to be a way to keep the natural rivalries (Cubs/Cards, Yanks/Red Sox, Sox/Twins, etc) while providing opportunities for more meaningful games throughout the year. Maybe by getting rid of some of the less star power division match-ups other rivalries with form. Just my opinion.

MARTINMVP
06-13-2011, 01:58 PM
And as far as rivals, by my count there are three in the majors--Yankees/Red Sox, Cubs/Cardinals, and Giants/Dodgers. These teams would still be facing each other 11 games and competing for playoff spots and within the playoffs themselves some years. They don't need 18 games in the regular season to maintain their rivalry.


Exactly. Sometimes, less is more.

TDog
06-13-2011, 02:10 PM
Contraction is the answer. Contract the A's and cubs, move the Diamondbacks to the American League, no divisions, balanced schedule, no interleague, top 4 teams make the playoffs.

I thought baseball needed contraction before the last expansion. Moving Oakland anywhere isn't gong to help. (Moving or contracting the Raiders or making them a permanent road team and allowing Oakland to renovate the dump the A's call home into a nice baseball-only park would be the best hope for the A's, but that is off-topic.)

I don't see interleague going away. I don't see the the designated hitter going away or National League owners accepting it, if only for financial reasons. I don't see baseball being stupid enough to do away with the divisional races. If you have interleague play, you can't have balanced schedules.

I honestly don't know where people get the idea that playing for six months and putting the top four teams into a playoff format was a good idea. There are people who post here who don't believe yet the White Sox are still in the divisional race even though their record would put them 3.5 games out of first a month before the All-Star break in two of the league's three divisions. So what if there are years when the Yankees and Red Sox don't play for the championship. I would have no problem with putting them in the same division and having only one team make it to the postseason.

If your argument is that balancing the schedule (which you can't do with interleague play, so this is not entirely directed at the poster I'm responding to) and taking the teams with the top four or whatever records will assure the best team makes it to the World Series, why bother with a playoff system? If you wanted to assure that only the best was playing in the World Series, you don't need to play off the top whatever teams as determined by a balanced schedule. Playoff ties, but the season has determined what you don't need to determine with a playoffs among the best.

Every baseball season is a struggle, for the winners as well as the losers. The 2005 White Sox had a season full of ups and downs, and they were in first place from opening day for the next six months before going 11-1 in the postseason. The struggle, in the case of the White Sox not limited to 2005, is what makes a championship mean something. But I go to Oakland and see their 1972 championship banner, and that takes me back to another great summer and ultimately makes me hate the A's even more if that's possible. Baseball is about the six months of pennant races that qualify teams for the postseason, not about qualifying for playoffs where the surviving teams play for three weeks.

I don't care who has the best record in the league. I don't care that a balanced schedule would assure that the Yankees or Red Sox record could be judged fairly against the White Sox record. I don't think it's an injustice if the Yankees and Red Sox don't play each other in the postseason. There is a huge segment of baseball fans that would have no problem with the Yankees and Red Sox not even getting to the postseason.

People argue that baseball needs a salary cap (like hockey, i guess) to improve competition, to limit the dominant teams, although the owners are looking at it as a way to pay players less money. A better idea to improve competition would be to divide up baseball into regional divisions with unbalanced schedules, have them play for six months to determine winners and go head-to-head in October. Baseball has had nine different World Series champions in the 10 seasons since 2001. If I know going into the season that my team doesn't have the best talent, I know they still have the opportunity to get to the top through hard work and perseverance.

I have no idea why people want to screw that up.