PDA

View Full Version : Bud must be smoking the pipe again


Fenway
06-30-2005, 04:11 PM
Off day in Boston, so WEEI got the people in Pittsburgh that did this years schedule on the phone. Usual blah blah blah until the person interviewed let it drop that baseball also wanted to see a schedule for 2007 that would be based on reallignment ( and a drastic one ) Seems the west coast owners are on Bud's case about travel and there are some owners that would not mind the end of the present AL and NL since they actually no longer exist except for a schedule.

What the mockup for 2007 is ( and this is only for the owners to look at ) would be 4 divisions ( 2 of 8 teams, 2 of 7 ) with teams playing everybody in the division more often, and then like the NBA and NHL play everybody at least 3 games a season ) There would be a division winner and a second place finisher in each division.

The WEEI guys were speechless

The 4 divisions

WEST
Angels
Dodgers
Padres
A's
Giants
Diamondbacks
Rockies
Mariners

MIDWEST
Tigers
Cubs
White Sox
Brewers
Twins
Royals
Cardinals

SOUTH
Devil Rays
Marlins
Braves
Rangers
Astros
Reds
Indians
Pirates

EAST
Blue Jays
Red Sox
Yankees
Mets
Phillies
Nationals
Orioles

itsjustinf
06-30-2005, 04:17 PM
I really don't even know what to say about that. Why would they even consider this?

BridgePortNative
06-30-2005, 04:19 PM
:o: Thats all I could say..........:o: :?:

Looks like the "Midwest" seems to be the strongest, wait, there isn't an Al and NL, this is going to be strange

NSSoxFan
06-30-2005, 04:20 PM
I don't know what to say.

One thing is for sure, we would make it to the post-season every year!

:D:

doublem23
06-30-2005, 04:30 PM
:?:

:tool
I'm... such an idiot.

Hokiesox
06-30-2005, 04:32 PM
:?: :?: :?: :(: :(: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

That's about how my response went.

Fenway
06-30-2005, 04:34 PM
I think this is a rehash of what they were looking at 5-6 years ago.

If TV is a reason ( and I suspect it might be ) teams would have more games in their own time zone. One thing it would prevent is a repeat of a same market World Series and based on 1989 and 2000 ratings that might not be a bad idea.

The Indians lose the Tigers but get Pittsburgh and the Reds in return? A plus.

They have eliminated the AL and NL offices, the umpires are now MLB, the ball is MLB, this COULD be the start of perhaps in a decade or less a true World Series with teams from other countries.

I dunno

Flight #24
06-30-2005, 04:36 PM
Ummm.....someone actually believes that owners, among the most secretive of people, would check this scenario out with a 3d party, AND that that 3d party would "accidentally" spill this to a radio station, and THEN that instead of clamming up or backing off of the statement, they'd actually give details to said radio station over the air?

If indeed Bud & co were planning such a thing, one thing you know is that they'd be sure to let the schedule planners know to keep it quiet.
Smells like a hoax to me.

Cubbiesuck13
06-30-2005, 04:38 PM
Well this doesn't seem so far fetched considering the current state of the game. However, Bud is at fault for the current state of the game. With interleague play being so many games I don't see this as a bad thing. I don't like interleague play to start with or the wildcard so maybe this is a good thing for people like me because it is obvious that interleague play and the wildcard will not be going anywhere.

Fenway
06-30-2005, 04:55 PM
The owners have sent out trial ballons before to see what kind of reaction is out there.

There has been a lot written the past month that many of the owners are unhappy with the current 16-14 split in leagues and the travel nightmares the AL West teams face.

If they move one team back to the AL then you would have interleague every day.

I can sort of see the owners logic here. Under this setup EVERY team would get home dates with the Yankees, Boston, Dodgers every second year.

Everything they have done the past few years has shown a slow phasing out of the AL and NL as we know them.

Ummm.....someone actually believes that owners, among the most secretive of people, would check this scenario out with a 3d party, AND that that 3d party would "accidentally" spill this to a radio station, and THEN that instead of clamming up or backing off of the statement, they'd actually give details to said radio station over the air?

If indeed Bud & co were planning such a thing, one thing you know is that they'd be sure to let the schedule planners know to keep it quiet.
Smells like a hoax to me.

FielderJones
06-30-2005, 05:06 PM
Everything they have done the past few years has shown a slow phasing out of the AL and NL as we know them.

And how will they handle the DH?

ode to veeck
06-30-2005, 05:13 PM
there's nothing you'd smoke that could make your brain so spongy, more like an Owsley's acid overdose

Huisj
06-30-2005, 05:26 PM
A week ago or so, Hawk and DJ were sort of discussing this sort of idea because of an email that someone sent asking some question about the future of interleague play. Hawk said something like "before my time is up, we're going to see a realignment like none you've ever seen before, totally geographical, with no AL or NL." DJ didn't seem to like the idea at all, and I kind of thought maybe it was just Hawk blowing steam out of his rear, but maybe he knew something we didn't. This might be what he knew.

I don't like the idea at all. I'm in favor of doing away with interleague play actually. I can't really fathom not having an AL and an NL.

The teams on the west coast moved there because they saw it as a great opportunity to be out there. It's kind of ironic that now they whine about their location and say that that hurts them. Obviously it's not the same owners at all as when the teams originally went out there, but to me it just seems that that should be a consequence of having moved out there in the first place. They are benefits and consequences to it, so live with it or sell your stinking team to someone who can. Why do the owners all whine so stinking much about everything?

Fenway
06-30-2005, 05:44 PM
They could have solved the problem 50 years ago by making the Pacfic Coast League the 3rd major league. Since Veeck liked the idea the rest of the owners hated it.

whitesoxfan
06-30-2005, 05:51 PM
this is ridiculous. Is Selig really trying to ruin the game of baseball as quick as possible?

MIgrenade
06-30-2005, 05:53 PM
I think it would be a better idea to cut a few games off the schedule to allow for more travel days if these people are really complaining so much. I'd rather that than have no leagues. I think intercity games would lose their fun...or turn into all out brawls if the teams were in contention. I don't like any of it.

Cowhead418
06-30-2005, 05:55 PM
I don't like the idea. Not only would it be extremely strange to have no AL or NL, but I don't think I could stomach having 16 games against the Flubs every year. I don't want that garbage stinking up our field 8 games a year. The city would be destroyed in a matter of weeks.

buehrle4cy05
06-30-2005, 05:56 PM
Bud Selig....

















YOU IDIOT.

Chisox003
06-30-2005, 06:02 PM
But not to last to voice my opinion through this guy:
:chunks
What a terrible idea

CubsfansareDRUNK
06-30-2005, 06:02 PM
I don't like the idea. Not only would it be extremely strangeto have no AL or NL, but I don't think I could stomach having 16 games against the Flubs every year. I don't want that garbage stinking up our field 8 games a year. The city would be destroyed in a matter of weeks.

i agree. I hate playing the cubs every year and am sick of those monkey brains coming to our field. Im really glad when interleague play is over, but that idea is crazy. At least the twins would play the cubs. :tongue:

MisterB
06-30-2005, 06:08 PM
The teams on the west coast moved there because they saw it as a great opportunity to be out there. It's kind of ironic that now they whine about their location and say that that hurts them. Obviously it's not the same owners at all as when the teams originally went out there, but to me it just seems that that should be a consequence of having moved out there in the first place. They are benefits and consequences to it, so live with it or sell your stinking team to someone who can. Why do the owners all whine so stinking much about everything?

When teams started moving in the '50s it was all about tapping new markets. It's no coincidence that all the teams that moved were leaving 2 (or more) team markets to have one market all to themselves (Giants to SF, Dodgers to LA, Braves to Milwaukee, Browns to Baltimore, A's to KC). What has changed in the last 50 years is divisional play, which (depending on what the schedule balance is) limits which teams you play and how often, which can mean not seeing 'nationally popular' teams (like the Yankees, Red Sox, etc.) as much as other teams who can take advantage of the corresponding attendance & TV rating boosts.

Lip Man 1
06-30-2005, 06:08 PM
Remember baseball has been trying to realign since Fay Vincent wanted to move the Cards and Braves out of the West in the early 90's.

At one time Bud did want radical realignment.

Personally I don't have an issue with it, I mean the Brewers were moved into a different league, Tampa Bay started out in the A.L. WEST and interleague play has destroyed any seperation of the two leagues.

Lip

Hangar18
06-30-2005, 06:11 PM
this is ridiculous. Is Selig really trying to ruin the game of baseball as quick as possible?


YES. He truly is.

Cubbiesuck13
06-30-2005, 06:15 PM
It would be nice to see a penant race again but they have a plan to screw that too (1 division winner and a 2nd place finisher).

Wasn't the purpose of interleague play to allow fans to see players and teams they don't usually get to see? How is only playing three games against teams outside the division doing that?

MeanFish
06-30-2005, 06:17 PM
I'm going to take the side of MLB on this one and say that I think that this is a good idea for a number of reasons:

1.) It cuts down on travel costs

2.) It raises attendance for small-market clubs by creating more games against different teams that are in the same region.

3.) It does serve to balance out the schedule.

The one question remaining: what do they do with the DH? I can't see baseball doing anything other than get rid of it. There are very few players left who are *just* designated hitters. Unfortunately for us, Frank is one of them, but by the time this took effect he'd probably be looking towards the end of his career anyway.

Anyway, even if it was a bit strange for a little while, people would get used to it. There are a couple bad points about the division layout, such as the splitting up of Philly and Pittsburgh, but all in all it's a winning idea for everyone in the end.

A Special Note from MeanFish: Bud is still a douchebag, and the All-Lame Game is still totally messed up.

Cubbiesuck13
06-30-2005, 06:19 PM
And how will they handle the DH?

They keep the DH because the players association won't allow them to get rid of it if they wanted to. Also, when Edgar Martinez becomes the first DH to make it to the HOF everyone will get used to it and there will be no more argument.

Fenway
06-30-2005, 06:26 PM
They split up Philly and Pittsburgh when they went to 3 divisions anyways?

Pittsburgh has always had more of a rivalry with Cleveland anyways ( football )

The East would be brutal as with new ownership, Washington will be a big market team.

Everything I have read says there was nothing like the old Brooklyn/Giants rivalry in NY because it was so close. Mets/Yankees would be intense as so would Cubs?White Sox if it meant more than just pride.

Truth is the divisions make a lot of sense.

MisterB
06-30-2005, 06:55 PM
A Special Note from MeanFish: Bud is still a douchebag, and the All-Lame Game is still totally messed up.

Well, this realignment would end the All-Star game as we know it anyway. They'd either have to go West/Midwest vs. East/South or U.S. vs. the World or some such thing.

JB98
06-30-2005, 06:59 PM
They keep the DH because the players association won't allow them to get rid of it if they wanted to. Also, when Edgar Martinez becomes the first DH to make it to the HOF everyone will get used to it and there will be no more argument.

I hope you're right. I'm always worried the holier-than-thou purists are going to win that battle and eliminate the DH. I think the hitters should hit and the pitchers should pitch. I don't want to see Jose Contreras flailing away helplessly at the plate.

dickallen15
06-30-2005, 07:15 PM
They keep the DH because the players association won't allow them to get rid of it if they wanted to. Also, when Edgar Martinez becomes the first DH to make it to the HOF everyone will get used to it and there will be no more argument.

I think eventually the DH will be phased out and rosters will be expanded by a player or two.

Foulke You
06-30-2005, 07:17 PM
I see pluses and minuses to both. I'm kind've a purist and I love the American League tradition but sometimes the game just evolves. Baseball used to just take the team with the best record from both leagues for the Pennant. Then they expanded to 4 divisions, than 6 with 2 Wild Cards. Could this be the next major step in the game's evolution? The geographic rivalries would be insane. I could envision many scenarios where a team would still be able to generate excitement and attendance based on those bitter rivalries even if one team is out of the playoff race. Imagine for example, the Sox have a slim 1 game lead for a playoff berth and the Cubs are 15 games back and out of the race. With the realignment, we could go into the final series of the year playing the Cubs who would have a chance to play spoiler on our post season aspirations. Surely, there would be huge interest in the city of Chicago for a series like that even in late September and ditto for a similar Yanks/Mets showdown so I'm seeing some of Bud's logic here. However, it would take a lot of getting used to. Anytime you change things drastically, people will complain and there is the danger of alienating the purists. If they do this right though, it could generate quite a bit of interest in MLB. How insane would that "Midwest" division be with the Twins, Cubs, Sox, Cards, etc all fighting it out in the same division? :o:

MLB is essentially one entity now. The only think I'm foggy about is how the post season berths are decided. Two division winners and two Wild Cards per "Conference"? Also, like many others here, I fear that the DH would be eliminated. Hope I'm wrong.

Southsider101
06-30-2005, 07:24 PM
Bud must have a lot of money to buy drugs since his family sold the Brewers. I enjoy the rivalry with the Cubs and the occasional series with the Cards and Brewers, but this is awful! Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Cincinnati in the same division with Florida and Texas? I can hardly wait for those exciting Pittsburgh-Texas games each year!

MeanFish
06-30-2005, 07:28 PM
Bud must have a lot of money to buy drugs since his family sold the Brewers. I enjoy the rivalry with the Cubs and the occasional series with the Cards and Brewers, but this is awful! Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Cincinnati in the same division with Florida and Texas? I can hardly wait for those exciting Pittsburgh-Texas games each year!

Is that really so much worse than, say, Pittsburgh-Houston?

Cubbiesuck13
06-30-2005, 07:36 PM
Is that really so much worse than, say, Pittsburgh-Houston?

You can make a point like that for divisions now as well. Nothing is going to be perfect. Like I said, with the way Bud as made a mockery of baseball all ready I can only see this helping. Besides, no on has mentioned steroids yet so his job is done.

Tragg
06-30-2005, 09:51 PM
You gotta like that southern division with the reds, tribe and pirates. Houston to Miami to Cincy - that will cut down on the unfair travel, for sure.

The only team that has a legitimate gripe right now is Texas.

Brian26
06-30-2005, 10:03 PM
I completely, utterly hate the idea of destroying the American League and National League. The World Series, in its current form, dates back 100 years. Baseball is founded on tradition. You just can't realign the divisions to turn this into the NHL or NBA. I absolutely hate it.

Jerome
06-30-2005, 10:18 PM
I would actually like that. It reminds me of the NFL. I think it would be cool to have more mid-west rivialries. Plus the games with the cubs would mean more.

However, I still enjoy the tradition of the AL and NL, and this would mean the the WS loses some meaning.

Cubbiesuck13
06-30-2005, 10:18 PM
I completely, utterly hate the idea of destroying the American League and National League. The World Series, in its current form, dates back 100 years. Baseball is founded on tradition. You just can't realign the divisions to turn this into the NHL or NBA. I absolutely hate it.


Brian, Bud Selig has all ready done this. Pennant races were part of what made baseball great. Naturally Selig decided to change it. Having a WS where the teams haven't played each other was great so again Selig has to change it. The greatest game in the world is a joke because of Selig so we might as well just go along with it. Selig has made it where anything he does is an improvement over what it currently is.

Tragg
06-30-2005, 11:23 PM
I understand the cost factor in regionalization, but it seems to me that it can be way overdone. Do we really want to play the Cubs 18 times a year? The Yankees (with which we had a major rivalry for years) only 3 times?

It's gonna make baseball boring.

Stroker Ace
06-30-2005, 11:28 PM
:?: Just when I thought the Selig couldn't get any stupider, this just lowers the bar.

sox_fan_forever
07-01-2005, 01:25 AM
I totally hate this idea. It makes me feel sick just thinking about it. :angry:

Flight #24
07-01-2005, 10:26 AM
The more I think about it, the more I think if this happened, the reaction would be kind of like to the WC, only more so. I.e. a lot of initial moaning from purists, and a ton of early slams on Bud/MLB from critics, but an actual increase in the popularity for the common/casual fan, and much like the WC - long term it'll end up adding interest in the game.

Increasing regional rivalries = good thing (even though there will be some unnatural ones, much as there are now).
Reducing travel = good thing
Eliminating difference between leagues = good thing

For all the madness that goes on during the crosstown interleague games, can you imagine how crazy the town would be if the games meant more because the teams were contending for the same division? And you'd get the same in NY, LA, Ohio, Florida - all over the country.

That's bad in terms of even more drunken misbehaviour by Cub fans, but it's good because it increases the interest in baseball.

Ol' No. 2
07-01-2005, 10:28 AM
Brian, Bud Selig has all ready done this. Pennant races were part of what made baseball great. Naturally Selig decided to change it. Having a WS where the teams haven't played each other was great so again Selig has to change it. The greatest game in the world is a joke because of Selig so we might as well just go along with it. Selig has made it where anything he does is an improvement over what it currently is.I agree with Brian. This sucks. Adding a handful of interleague games is not remotely the same as destroying the two-league system.

Jerko
07-01-2005, 10:46 AM
Brutal idea. Worry about the league how it is now, Selig. Worry about teams like the Reds, Royals, Pirates, Rockies, et. al. trading off all their players and fielding AA teams the last 2 months of every season while playing games that still count in the standings and might mean something to other teams. Worry about your players who have lost 150 pounds in 6 months and are running around with skinny bodies and gigantic heads. Worry about making the schedule so each team in every division plays the same teams the same amount of times. I can't stand playing 4 teams 19 times each, now there's going to be 6 or 7 teams to do that with? Moron.

mdep524
07-01-2005, 11:04 AM
I completely, utterly hate the idea of destroying the American League and National League. The World Series, in its current form, dates back 100 years. Baseball is founded on tradition. You just can't realign the divisions to turn this into the NHL or NBA. I absolutely hate it. Totally agree with you, Brian. This is a horrific idea.

Eliminating difference between leagues = good thing Flight, I disagree here. The differences between the NL and the AL are part of what makes baseball so unique and special. They truly are two different leagues, which makes the World Series even more significant and just plain cooler.

Rocklive99
07-01-2005, 11:49 AM
I could actually see this happening, division realignment has happened before, but it would be extremely weird to have no leagues and have a NBA type format. I wouldn't mind it as much, except that World Series matchups are kind of ruined since the teams already met during the season, which already happens with interleague. I can also see former players or the old school baseball people assassinating Selig over this, and I'm not really exaggerating.

EDIT: Also interesting, I remember Rooney on a radio broadcast years ago talking about this exact format. I don't remember if he was proposing it or just what he foresaw as happening in the future

If it wasn't exactly the same, the format he was talking about was something like keeping the AL and NL for the purpose of standings only, getting rid of divisions, having every team play every other team 6 times (3 at home, 3 on the road), and then picking the top 4 in each league to make the playoffs, but that would make the schedule longer than it is now (contraction anyone? I think contracting 2 teams would make it exactly 162 in this situation). This would be awkward as well though

StepsInSC
07-01-2005, 11:55 AM
The more I think about it, the more I think if this happened, the reaction would be kind of like to the WC, only more so. I.e. a lot of initial moaning from purists, and a ton of early slams on Bud/MLB from critics, but an actual increase in the popularity for the common/casual fan, and much like the WC - long term it'll end up adding interest in the game.

Increasing regional rivalries = good thing (even though there will be some unnatural ones, much as there are now).
Reducing travel = good thing
Eliminating difference between leagues = good thing

For all the madness that goes on during the crosstown interleague games, can you imagine how crazy the town would be if the games meant more because the teams were contending for the same division? And you'd get the same in NY, LA, Ohio, Florida - all over the country.

That's bad in terms of even more drunken misbehaviour by Cub fans, but it's good because it increases the interest in baseball.

I agree.

As has been said in this post, I think most rabid baseball fans will hate the desired 'goal' of this realignment....i.e. creating a system centered on geographical location at the cost of tradition. That part has been beaten to death in this thread.

I do, however, like some parts of the 'means' that this system would use to achieve that goal. I balked at first seeing Pittsburgh in the South. But then I saw that 'Natti and Cleveland were in it too....and I'm sure many Pittsburghers would love to see the Bucs and Tribe play each other a lot, in addition to the Reds-Bucs, given the hatred b/w the three cities. The West division, for example, seems to be a perfect fit and would eliminate all of the headaches for those clubs in terms of travelling.

OTOH, dividing up the teams by pure geography is hard to do, especially in the Eastern half of this country. It's hard to divide all the clubs up logically...there are really only three teams in the "South" anyways (strictly from a geographical standpoint....because otherwise Florida sure as hell ain't the 'south'). As mentioned above, Pittsburgh & Cleveland hardly can be said to be in the South, while the Phillies are in the East? That's a potentially classic rivalry that is totally ignored by this system.

Trying to draw these lines is sticky, and personally I think they should stay away from it.

Lip Man 1
07-01-2005, 01:23 PM
Flight:

Cleveland could have an issue with being in the 'south,' given that the Sox, Twins and Tigers (two old guard rivals) will be in another division.

If so it should be easy to just slide them into the Midwest and have that one with eight teams.

Lip

Fenway
07-01-2005, 01:39 PM
There are some merits to the idea so I can see why it will be at least put on the table. The majority of classic rivals stay intact and some new ones are made.

IF they do something like this, they better not make the same mistake that the NFL did. There are MILLIONS of football fans out there today that don't know that football existed before Super Bowl I. The NFL Championships from 1920-65 have become footnotes.

White Sox Josh
07-01-2005, 01:42 PM
How many Wild Cards would there be and what would happen in the playoffs and who would make the playoffs? This idea sucks. The divisions are fine the way the are.

Lip Man 1
07-01-2005, 01:46 PM
I'm assuming the four divisional winners would face the four second place finishers in each division. That way you keep eight teams in the post season.

Perhaps the division winners and the second place finishers would be seeded.
In that case the division winner with the best record would play the second place finisher with the worst record in the opening round and so on down the line.

Lip

Flight #24
07-01-2005, 01:55 PM
Flight:

Cleveland could have an issue with being in the 'south,' given that the Sox, Twins and Tigers (two old guard rivals) will be in another division.

If so it should be easy to just slide them into the Midwest and have that one with eight teams.

Lip

I'd think that in any such drastic realignment, they'd do everything they could to keep the divisions equal. I would assume they'd play up the creation of the regional rivalries with the Reds & Pirates.

We'll see, there will certainly be some sort of concessions made to teams, but whether they take the form of altering the structure or possibly making some kind of financial inducements or doing something to create "non-divisional traditional rivals" (i.e. similar to the interleague rivals each team has now) or what is tough to say.

sthbndsox
07-01-2005, 04:23 PM
Does anyone really see this happening, and if it does, when do you think it will be put into effect?

cleanwsox
07-01-2005, 04:43 PM
I could see baseball turning into "Soccer in Europe" if this happened. Teams over there hate each other so much, each game is so heated. Of course, you have a bunch more games in baseball, but the hatred would be to an unprecedented level due to the geographic closeness of all the teams in the division. Could you imagine 18 some games versus the Cubs each year? Ugh, my stomache couldn't take it.

Madvora
07-01-2005, 04:47 PM
If they were going to do something like this and they wanted to still keep the regional rivalries and keep the split between American and National league, then why not have the West and Midwest be the "American League" and only play each other and have the South and East be the "National League" and they only play each other then have the winners play each other in the World Series.

This is like going back to the 4 divisions before the realignment, but having competion all in the same region.
I don't like the idea of every team playing every team because it does totally take away the aura of the World Series. Having all the teams in the same region playing each other would be kind of cool, but not everyone else too.

I guess just traveling West would kind of suck though (now thinking out loud)
Maybe you can split it up as North and South, but that could suck too.

Well, actually I got nowhere with these ideas.

Cubbiesuck13
07-01-2005, 05:11 PM
[QUOTE=Madvora]If they were going to do something like this and they wanted to still keep the regional rivalries and keep the split between American and National league, then why not have the West and Midwest be the "American League" and only play each other and have the South and East be the "National League" and they only play each other then have the winners play each other in the World Series.
QUOTE]

Switching leagues is a big deal because of the history that baseball has. The AL and NL did not form at the same time and it is relatively recent that the leagues have pretty much become the same. The NL was more popular and had better teams until the DH rule. Simply wiping out both leagues is better than taking NL teams and putting them in the AL and vice versa in my opinion.

Lip Man 1
07-01-2005, 09:19 PM
Folks:

Assuming there is even a shread of truth to all this (and I think there may be...) we are all forgetting something that could impact this discussion when it comes on the table.

Allow me to explain. The CBA expires next year, (by the way either side can request talks open early according to the deal, which opens the possibility of the owners locking out the players or the players striking but that's for a different discussion...) this realignment could be used as a bargaining chip probably by the owners, in the new discussions.

One possibility for example could be the MLBPA agreeing to this new 'realignment' in exchange for the DH becomming standard for all teams in MLB (which means more jobs for older players who generally make much higher salaries)

This is just one possibility, I'm sure others could come up with different ones. As I said before when Selig first became 'tempory' (LOL) commissioner he talked about realignment. The Brewers being moved was a compromise position but he wanted much broader changes. Also it is still possible for contraction to take place since according to the CBA when this deal ends, so does any legal options for the MLBPA concerning future contractions.

Lip

ChiSoxRowand
07-01-2005, 11:16 PM
Calm down people, calm down. This is an IDEA. I remember there was talk of realignment about 5-6 years ago. The proposed realignment would have had 4 divisions in 1 league and 3 in the other, and the Sox and Cubs would have been in the same division.

buehrle4cy05
07-01-2005, 11:20 PM
I could see baseball turning into "Soccer in Europe" if this happened. Teams over there hate each other so much, each game is so heated. Of course, you have a bunch more games in baseball, but the hatred would be to an unprecedented level due to the geographic closeness of all the teams in the division. Could you imagine 18 some games versus the Cubs each year? Ugh, my stomache couldn't take it.

Hopefully, that hatred wouldn't carry over into the semi-frequent soccer riots that happen in England.

CallMeNuts
07-02-2005, 03:59 PM
I don't see what is so fantastic about the current division alignment, other than the fact that we have gotten used to it.

I always thought that all the teams should have equal chances to become the World Series Champion. But now, we have one 4-team division, four 5-team divisions and one 6-team division. Everything else being equal, wouldn't you rather have one of the AL West teams?

In the All-Star game, the NL picks the best players from 16 teams and the AL picks the best players from 14 teams. Who has the edge?

And the teams don't play the same opponents the same number of times as the teams they are competing with to win the division championship. The Sox play the Cubs, and the Twins play the Brewers. How is this supposed to tell us who is the best team?

If I were the czar, we'd have 5 divisions of 6 teams each, all of which would be based on geography. You'd play each team in your division 18 times. You'd play the 24 teams outside your division 3 times. Total = 162.

Geographic rivalries have always been the best in baseball. I'd rather see the Sox playing the Brewers, Cardinals and Cubs regularly. Who cares about KC? The Twins rivalry is based merely on them winning our division for so many years.

The 5 division winners would get a bye in the first round of the play-offs, so they can set their rotations. The 6 best non-division winners (based on a "power-rating" ranking) would play off for 3 spots in a best of 3 series.

Round 2 would be best of 5. Round 3 would be best of 7. In a nod to traditionalists and TV, the World Series would return to the best of 9 format used as recently as 1921.

American & National League All-Star teams (based on what teams were in each league prior to radical realignment) would play the All-Star game. Milwaukee would be moved back to the AL for this purpose so as to give each league 15 teams to draw players from.

The DH would be used for all MLB games. Since it is has been used in College and Minor League ball for decade, as well as youth leagues and international ball, there is no sense in eliminating it now. But I like the college version of the DH rule better, as it would make it easier for a pitcher who could also hit to go both ways in the line-up.

Rocklive99
07-02-2005, 05:33 PM
After watching yesterday and remembering past years, maybe 3 games in Oakland every 2 years isn't such a bad idea...

Lip Man 1
07-03-2005, 02:04 PM
I forwarded the info on to Ken Rosenthal of The Sporting News.

He sent me an e-mail this morning stating that he asked Bud about this and was told it wasn't happening.

Of course that doesn't explain the comments from the Pittsburgh people in the first place does it? They certainly wouldn't have drawn up a 2007 schedule on their own. Someone asked them to do it....

Lip

Fenway
07-04-2005, 03:22 PM
The Stevenson's on Cape Cod also say they have "fiddled" with this concept.

These are the people who did the schedule for years and lost out to Pittsburgh this season. The 2006 winner hasn't been "officially" picked yet but Bud says he has seen the 2006 schedule and is concerned so many teams have Memorial Day off.

White Sox Josh
07-04-2005, 03:23 PM
The Stevenson's on Cape Cod also say they have "fiddled" with this concept.

These are the people who did the schedule for years and lost out to Pittsburgh this season. The 2006 winner hasn't been "officially" picked yet but Bud says he has seen the 2006 schedule and is concerned so many teams have Memorial Day off.Fenway tell your Red Sox friends on the Red Sox boards to vote for Scott Podsednik.

Kogs35
07-04-2005, 03:26 PM
The Stevenson's on Cape Cod also say they have "fiddled" with this concept.

These are the people who did the schedule for years and lost out to Pittsburgh this season. The 2006 winner hasn't been "officially" picked yet but Bud says he has seen the 2006 schedule and is concerned so many teams have Memorial Day off.

do u know any schedule tidbits anyway?

Brian26
07-04-2005, 04:57 PM
The 2006 winner hasn't been "officially" picked yet but Bud says he has seen the 2006 schedule and is concerned so many teams have Memorial Day off.

This is a valid concern. If I was making a schedule, I would schedule mandatory doubleheaders on Memorial Day. Everyone has the day off...kids are off from school...people should spend the day at the ballpark or at least listening/watching the game at home. Let's re-establish baseball in the hearts of America. If players need a day off, they can have Tuesday off. On Monday, you play baseball for the fans.

Fenway
07-06-2005, 07:24 PM
Talking to a writer from the Globe this afternoon and he believes they are looking hard at this concept and in fact may have decided to go with it and he offers a reason why.

The next 2 All Star Games will be in National League parks a complete break from tradition.

2006 Pittsburgh
2007 San Francisco

He said that 2007 should go to Tampa as "maybe" an All Star Game there would increase the season ticket base.

MLB moves in slow and mysterious ways but no one can deny they have been trying to make the AL and NL irrevelent for the past few years. The umpires are now MLB, the ball says MLB.

White Sox Josh
07-06-2005, 08:17 PM
Talking to a writer from the Globe this afternoon and he believes they are looking hard at this concept and in fact may have decided to go with it and he offers a reason why.

The next 2 All Star Games will be in National League parks a complete break from tradition.

2006 Pittsburgh
2007 San Francisco

He said that 2007 should go to Tampa as "maybe" an All Star Game there would increase the season ticket base.

MLB moves in slow and mysterious ways but no one can deny they have been trying to make the AL and NL irrevelent for the past few years. The umpires are now MLB, the ball says MLB.THey don't need the All Star Game in Tampa they need a new stadium. It's a DUMP!

Fenway
07-06-2005, 08:28 PM
THey don't need the All Star Game in Tampa they need a new stadium. It's a DUMP!

That not going to happen for another 20 years. The City of St Petersburg after getting burnt by the White Sox and Giants made sure the lease with the Rays was ironclad for 30 years.

But hey how many MLB parks have a furniture store in it

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/diamondbacks/articles/0627basereport0627.html

How tacky is the world of Devil Rays managing partner Vince Naimoli when, in the entrance that leads to the clubhouses at Tropicana Field, a local furniture store has set up a showroom with price tags dangling from the arms of chairs and dressers.

(By the way, the ottoman is going for $599 and an area rug for $199.)

http://www.sptimes.com/News/042701/Sports/Team_not_moving__offi.shtml


ST. PETERSBURG -- The Tampa Bay Devil Rays may be for sale, but they aren't going anywhere, St. Petersburg officials said confidently on Thursday.

Any new owner would have to honor the 26 years remaining on the Devil Rays' lease for Tropicana Field because the lease obligation must be sold with the team, City Attorney John Wolfe said.

The lease says the club shall "not permit relocation of the franchise from the dome."

"It's a 30-year-obligation," one the city could take the team to court for breaking, Wolfe said.

Despite the team's low attendance and a losing record, City Council members said they are adamantly opposed to letting the Rays, even with new owners, out of that lease. "They may view it as an asset, they may view it as a liability, but it's still there," council member Bill Foster said of the franchise's obligation to play all home games through 2026 at Tropicana Field