PDA

View Full Version : 2007 Interleague


woodsdavid
05-04-2006, 12:59 PM
yes, i know it's only may, but i'm sorting thru frequent flyer info now and trying to allocate for games next year.

so my question is, other than continuing the rotation of:
06: NLC
05: NLW
04: NLE
etc., is there any consistent, confirmable sequence for playing interleague games? i'm trying to see if the sox will play the mets in ny, phils in philly, nats in dc etc. next year.

or is it even certain that the 07 games will be NLE games?

i know, teams have lots to take into consideration for scheduling, so maybe i'm way ahead of this here.

thx.

ShoelessJoeS
05-04-2006, 01:19 PM
I'm just hoping that the Phils come to Chicago next year, for obvious reasons...

woodsdavid
05-04-2006, 01:31 PM
phils were here in town in 04, so i'm hoping sox are in philly in 07. went to the '04 game buehrle pitched that ended 17-16 or something crazy like that. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=240608104
thome was killing the ball.

jenn2080
05-04-2006, 01:34 PM
if the phillies were in town in 04 then the sox will play the phillies out there. same goes for any interleague team they play. they switch off every 3 yrs. so according to the way it should be the phillies wont be back until 2010.

oeo
05-04-2006, 01:42 PM
phils were here in town in 04, so i'm hoping sox are in philly in 07. went to the '04 game buehrle pitched that ended 17-16 or something crazy like that. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=240608104
thome was killing the ball.

I was there as well, that game was nuts. Right when you thought the Sox were on top for good, Thome and the Phils (mostly Thome) came back and put themselves right back in it.

champagne030
05-04-2006, 01:43 PM
they switch off every 3 yrs.

Are you sure? They played the East in '02, West in '03, East in '04 and West in '05. It does appear that teams switch locals each time they play. Also, remember that some team from the other division is skipped (unless we play the Central) because of the home and home with the flubs. If we played the East next season we would be at Phil, Atl and NY (Phil or Atl would probably be skipped since we missed the Mets in '04). Florida and Washington would be here.

ondafarm
05-04-2006, 01:49 PM
While the rotation of division against division is predictable, as in the ALCD will play the NLED next year both the matchups and the locations are not predictable. Those depend on the end of year standings for the previous year.

As in, the ALCD champs will host the NLED champs next year, and play at the NLED #2 teams home.

In five on five division matchups I believe it goes something like:

ALCD plays from the NLED

#1 Champs #1 Champs, #2, #3 & #4
#2 #1, #2, #3 & #5
#3 #1, #2, #4 & #5
#4 #1, #3, #4 & #5
#5 #2, #3, #4 & #5

Which if the standings as of today are how they finish would have the Sox hosting:

Mets & Atlanta

and visiting

Phillies and Nationals, but missing Florida.

Wheras, the Royals would

host: Phillies and Nats

and visit: Braves and Marlins

Then again, with Borchard, the Marlins could put together a run and foul this all up.

jenn2080
05-04-2006, 01:52 PM
Are you sure? They played the East in '02, West in '03, East in '04 and West in '05. It does appear that teams switch locals each time they play. Also, remember that some team from the other division is skipped (unless we play the Central) because of the home and home with the flubs. If we played the East next season we would be at Phil, Atl and NY (Phil or Atl would probably be skipped since we missed the Mets in '04). Florida and Washington would be here.


well i mean that isnt 100% accurate, but pretty close. Take for instance. Yankees played the Cubs in 2002 at Wrigley last year the Cubs went out there. So I mean it isnt dead on but it is about is semi close.

EastCoastSoxFan
05-04-2006, 02:35 PM
I'm just hoping that the Phils come to Chicago next year, for obvious reasons...
I'm hoping that the Sox come to Philadelphia next year, for an even more obvious reason...
:D:

ShoelessJoeS
05-04-2006, 02:38 PM
I'm hoping that the Sox come to Philadelphia next year, for an even more obvious reason...
:D:Lol, you deserve it more being deprived in Philly and all...

EastCoastSoxFan
05-04-2006, 02:42 PM
Lol, you deserve it more being deprived in Philly and all...
True, but fortunately I am within reasonable driving distance of several stadiums (and I usually make at least one Chicago visit per summer to catch a game or two at the Cell)...

WS in 05
05-04-2006, 02:46 PM
is it for sure the east next year I thought it would be central again someone once told me that?

chisoxfanatic
05-04-2006, 02:53 PM
Are you sure? They played the East in '02, West in '03, East in '04 and West in '05. It does appear that teams switch locals each time they play. Also, remember that some team from the other division is skipped (unless we play the Central) because of the home and home with the flubs.

That was to compensate for our playing NL Central for the first few years of interleague play.

gowhitesox
05-04-2006, 02:58 PM
I would like to see the Sox play the Phillies next season, I would prefer in Chicago. Because of Rowand and to see Jim Thome thump the phillies with one of his home runs.

TheKittle
05-04-2006, 04:06 PM
In 2003 the White Sox were at LA and Arizona.

SF and Colorado came to Chicago.

In 2005 the White Sox were at Colorado and SD

AZ and LA came to Chicago.


So in 08 the White Sox will not play either LA, AZ, SD or Colorado and the Giants would be added? So maybe at LA and SF!!!!!!

palehozenychicty
05-04-2006, 04:11 PM
So in 08 the White Sox will not play either LA, AZ, SD or Colorado and the Giants would be added? So maybe at LA and SF!!!!!!

i'd be down to visit candlestick, er...pac bell, er..AT&T Park. last time i was in frisco they were on the road:(: .

32nd&Wallace
05-04-2006, 09:05 PM
Sox have not yet visited New York NL and San Fransisco. The Rockies I think are the only NL team the Sox have not played at home.

itsnotrequired
05-04-2006, 09:08 PM
well i mean that isnt 100% accurate, but pretty close. Take for instance. Yankees played the Cubs in 2002 at Wrigley last year the Cubs went out there. So I mean it isnt dead on but it is about is semi close.

Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.

:redneck

Kogs35
05-04-2006, 10:03 PM
Sox have not yet visited New York NL and San Fransisco. The Rockies I think are the only NL team the Sox have not played at home.

and the marlins

dcb56
05-04-2006, 10:21 PM
While the rotation of division against division is predictable, as in the ALCD will play the NLED next year both the matchups and the locations are not predictable. Those depend on the end of year standings for the previous year.

As in, the ALCD champs will host the NLED champs next year, and play at the NLED #2 teams home.

In five on five division matchups I believe it goes something like:

ALCD plays from the NLED

#1 Champs #1 Champs, #2, #3 & #4
#2 #1, #2, #3 & #5
#3 #1, #2, #4 & #5
#4 #1, #3, #4 & #5
#5 #2, #3, #4 & #5

Which if the standings as of today are how they finish would have the Sox hosting:

Mets & Atlanta

and visiting

Phillies and Nationals, but missing Florida.

Wheras, the Royals would

host: Phillies and Nats

and visit: Braves and Marlins

Then again, with Borchard, the Marlins could put together a run and foul this all up.

That can't possibly be correct becuase last year the Sox, who finished 2nd in 04, played the Dodgers (NLW Champs), Padres (3rd), Rockies (4th), and Arizona (5th).

Correct me if I'm wrong but there is no established, predictable method for selecting interleague opponents, which is just another reason why interleague stinks and needs to go away.

NoNeckEra
05-04-2006, 10:42 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but there is no established, predictable method for selecting interleague opponents, which is just another reason why interleague stinks and needs to go away.
Whoa, whoa there my man. Don't be knockin' interleague play. It's one of the few things MLB has done right recently. For all of the Royals vs Marlins matchups, there are plenty of "once in a lifetime" matchups that you would never see except for in the W.S.

ChiSoxGirl
05-04-2006, 11:05 PM
i'd be down to visit candlestick, er...pac bell, er..AT&T Park. last time i was in frisco they were on the road:(: .

Join the club! I was in NorCal two weeks ago, and of course the Giants were out of town, so I had to settle for McAffee Coliseum, which was fine by me. The closest I got to PacBell was driving down the Embarcadero and taking pictures of the outside of the ballpark while at a stoplight. Next time I go out to NorCal, I'm planning my trip around the Giants' homestands! :tongue:

ilsox7
05-04-2006, 11:08 PM
Whoa, whoa there my man. Don't be knockin' interleague play. It's one of the few things MLB has done right recently. For all of the Royals vs Marlins matchups, there are plenty of "once in a lifetime" matchups that you would never see except for in the W.S.

Uh, no. Interleague is stupid. The Cubs-Sox, Mets-Yankees, etc match-ups lost their luster a while ago.

whitesoxwilkes
05-04-2006, 11:13 PM
Join the club! I was in NorCal two weeks ago, and of course the Giants were out of town, so I had to settle for McAffee Coliseum, which was fine by me. The closest I got to PacBell was driving down the Embarcadero and taking pictures of the outside of the ballpark while at a stoplight. Next time I go out to NorCal, I'm planning my trip around the Giants' homestands! :tongue:

We took the PacBell/SBC/AT&T tour last summer while the Giants were on the road. Best $5 I'd spent in a long time!

ChiSoxGirl
05-04-2006, 11:15 PM
We took the PacBell/SBC/AT&T tour last summer while the Giants were on the road. Best $5 I'd spent in a long time!

I would've done that, but with having never been to NorCal before and only being up there for two days total, there just wasn't enough time with all of the other sightseeing I had to do. Next time I go back, though, PacBell will be getting a visit from me!

FedEx227
05-04-2006, 11:25 PM
I was there as well, that game was nuts. Right when you thought the Sox were on top for good, Thome and the Phils (mostly Thome) came back and put themselves right back in it.

That was a weird/kind of awesome game. Highest scoring game I had ever been to. Thome was just insane that game, added in with the fact that EVERYBODY in the stands knew that when Mike Jackson came in the lead would. It was pretty funny, but I do remember that game well, mainly my neck from having to look up at all the balls flying out that day.

PKalltheway
05-05-2006, 12:04 AM
I'd say it would probably go back to the AL Central facing the NL East next year and then going in a three-year rotation. AL Central vs. NL East, AL Central vs. NL West, and AL Central vs. NL Central. If we were to face the NL East next year, we would most certainly be facing the Mets in New York, and the Marlins would likely come to Chicago. Then again, you never know. This year, Kansas City is coming here to Cincinnati for the first time in 8 years and this will be the first time the Reds have faced them in this decade (the Reds last faced Kansas City in KC in 1999). :o: Not that it will be an exciting series to watch but still, 8 years is a loooonnng time....

WhiteSoxFan84
05-05-2006, 01:14 AM
I could've swore I remember 2-3 years ago during a Cubs telecast, Butt Selig said, "Our goal is to have every team playing one another in a few years". I was hoping he meant that it would be like the NBA or NFL where everyone played everyone else any given year.

I think every team should play...
- divisional teams 12 games a year (48 games if we're discussing White Sox)
- other league teams 7 games a year (63 games)
- all NL teams except the Cubs 3 games a year (45 games)
- the cubs 6 games a year (6 games)

We'd play each divisional team 6 times at home and 6 times on the road.
We'd have a 3 game series and a 4 game series against every other AL team. One year we'd play the 3-gamer at home/4 -gamer on the road, next year we play the 3-gamer on the road/4-gamer at home.
We'd play each of the 15 NL teams (not including Cubs) 3 times. We'd get 7 3-game series at home/8 on the road and then switch it around the next year.
The 2 Cubs series would stay as is; 3 at home and 3 at the Urinal.


It could get a little repetitive but I think it would work.

Scottiehaswheels
05-05-2006, 01:33 AM
I think every team should play...
- divisional teams 12 games a year (48 games if we're discussing White Sox)
- other league teams 7 games a year (63 games)
- all NL teams except the Cubs 3 games a year (45 games)
- the cubs 6 games a year (6 games)


Other than the Cubs series being 6 games, I love it... I'd go through the 30 ballparks in 4-5 years instead of the projected 10-12 years at this rate

ilsox7
05-05-2006, 03:19 AM
I could've swore I remember 2-3 years ago during a Cubs telecast, Butt Selig said, "Our goal is to have every team playing one another in a few years". I was hoping he meant that it would be like the NBA or NFL where everyone played everyone else any given year.

I think every team should play...
- divisional teams 12 games a year (48 games if we're discussing White Sox)
- other league teams 7 games a year (63 games)
- all NL teams except the Cubs 3 games a year (45 games)
- the cubs 6 games a year (6 games)

We'd play each divisional team 6 times at home and 6 times on the road.
We'd have a 3 game series and a 4 game series against every other AL team. One year we'd play the 3-gamer at home/4 -gamer on the road, next year we play the 3-gamer on the road/4-gamer at home.
We'd play each of the 15 NL teams (not including Cubs) 3 times. We'd get 7 3-game series at home/8 on the road and then switch it around the next year.
The 2 Cubs series would stay as is; 3 at home and 3 at the Urinal.


It could get a little repetitive but I think it would work.

Why not just scrap the American League and National League and all of the divisions while you're at it? This is baseball, not football or basketball.

EastCoastSoxFan
05-05-2006, 10:35 AM
Uh, no. Interleague is stupid. The Cubs-Sox, Mets-Yankees, etc match-ups lost their luster a while ago.
I will agree that the "geographic rivalries" are a bit artificial at times -- i.e., Cleveland is much closer to and has a much longer and nastier history of sports rivalries with Pittsburgh than Cincinnati -- but interleague play in general is not stupid for transplanted fans, especially those of us who live in cities that only have a team from the other league.
If the Sox play '07 road interleague games in Philly and either DC (Nats) or NY (Mets), that's 4-6 Sox games that I would never have otherwise been able to see...

Railsplitter
05-05-2006, 10:48 AM
I'd much rather have interleague co with natural geographic teams.

The Marlins going from Miami to Seattle or the Red Sox going from Boston to San Diego makes no sense.

champagne030
05-05-2006, 11:09 AM
I could've swore I remember 2-3 years ago during a Cubs telecast, Butt Selig said, "Our goal is to have every team playing one another in a few years". I was hoping he meant that it would be like the NBA or NFL where everyone played everyone else any given year.

I think every team should play...
- divisional teams 12 games a year (48 games if we're discussing White Sox)
- other league teams 7 games a year (63 games)
- all NL teams except the Cubs 3 games a year (45 games)
- the cubs 6 games a year (6 games)

We'd play each divisional team 6 times at home and 6 times on the road.
We'd have a 3 game series and a 4 game series against every other AL team. One year we'd play the 3-gamer at home/4 -gamer on the road, next year we play the 3-gamer on the road/4-gamer at home.
We'd play each of the 15 NL teams (not including Cubs) 3 times. We'd get 7 3-game series at home/8 on the road and then switch it around the next year.
The 2 Cubs series would stay as is; 3 at home and 3 at the Urinal.


It could get a little repetitive but I think it would work.

:puking:

Maybe if they add a DH to the NL. Personally, I'd scrap the whole interleague farce, but it seems that most like it. Imagine sitting Konerko or Thome 25 times a year because we're playing in a **** League stadium. An AL team losing the DH hurts much more than an NL team throwing a bench player at DH.

ondafarm
05-05-2006, 11:21 AM
I could've swore I remember 2-3 years ago during a Cubs telecast, Butt Selig said, "Our goal is to have every team playing one another in a few years". I was hoping he meant that it would be like the NBA or NFL where everyone played everyone else any given year.

I think every team should play...
- divisional teams 12 games a year (48 games if we're discussing White Sox)
- other league teams 7 games a year (63 games)
- all NL teams except the Cubs 3 games a year (45 games)
- the cubs 6 games a year (6 games)

We'd play each divisional team 6 times at home and 6 times on the road.
We'd have a 3 game series and a 4 game series against every other AL team. One year we'd play the 3-gamer at home/4 -gamer on the road, next year we play the 3-gamer on the road/4-gamer at home.
We'd play each of the 15 NL teams (not including Cubs) 3 times. We'd get 7 3-game series at home/8 on the road and then switch it around the next year.
The 2 Cubs series would stay as is; 3 at home and 3 at the Urinal.


It could get a little repetitive but I think it would work.

I actually think something like this would be great. I'd like to see every team play every other team, every year. What would you do with 4 team divisions and the 6 team division?

woodsdavid
05-05-2006, 12:32 PM
I will agree that the "geographic rivalries" are a bit artificial at times -- i.e., Cleveland is much closer to and has a much longer and nastier history of sports rivalries with Pittsburgh than Cincinnati -- but interleague play in general is not stupid for transplanted fans, especially those of us who live in cities that only have a team from the other league.
If the Sox play '07 road interleague games in Philly and either DC (Nats) or NY (Mets), that's 4-6 Sox games that I would never have otherwise been able to see...

completely agree. other than having to go to the world series to see the sox play NL teams -- which will be happening quite regularly -- how else can i see the sox play st.louis, milwaukee, cinci, etc? everyone loves a good road trip, and why not see the sox vs reds at great american ballpark (a weird little stadium, btw) than some random game against the marlins.

i just started to travel for business out west, so i'm looking forward to seeing games in SD, SF, denver, etc. -- apparently in '08.

maybe i'm a rube and not as sophisticated as the ny fans, but i still think the cubs sox series is great.

EastCoastSoxFan
05-05-2006, 12:59 PM
I'd much rather have interleague co with natural geographic teams.

The Marlins going from Miami to Seattle or the Red Sox going from Boston to San Diego makes no sense.
I think you're missing part of the point of interleague play.
Interleague play is like MLB TV -- it's primarily for out-of-market fans.
Look at the Sox-Rockies series last season. There were so many Sox fans there that even just watching on TV I could hear cheering whenever we made a big play.
And even a cursory glance at this board will reveal a significant percentage of loyal and knowledgeable fans currently residing outside Chicagoland.
Don't you think that SoxintheBurgh is pretty much going to be in hog heaven the last week of June, and even more so if/when we sweep the Pirates right in his hometown...?

PKalltheway
05-05-2006, 03:34 PM
I think you're missing part of the point of interleague play.
Interleague play is like MLB TV -- it's primarily for out-of-market fans.
Look at the Sox-Rockies series last season. There were so many Sox fans there that even just watching on TV I could hear cheering whenever we made a big play.
And even a cursory glance at this board will reveal a significant percentage of loyal and knowledgeable fans currently residing outside Chicagoland.
Don't you think that SoxintheBurgh is pretty much going to be in hog heaven the last week of June, and even more so if/when we sweep the Pirates right in his hometown...?
I agree. As a Sox fan living here in Cincinnati, June 16th-18th is going to be awesome!:cool: Even though I have family in Chicago, I don't get to go there too often, let alone see a Sox game there. Interleague Play is the best opportunity for me to see the Sox without having to travel great distances.
The way interleague is set up, it may be another six years before the Sox come back to Cincinnati (barring the chance that the two teams meet in the World Series). Of course, interleague play is not going to make everybody happy, and there is no way they can set it up to make everybody happy. For us out of market fans though, it's golden. We love it and we hope it stays! Not all of us have the money to go to Chicago every year. Thankfully in my case, I have relatives up there and I'm about to turn 18 soon, so hopefully I can make it up there a few times in the next few years.:smile: