PDA

View Full Version : Tampa Bay to the AL Central? Royals to the West????


Fenway
07-05-2006, 06:14 PM
On the Red Sox pregame tonight Marc Tompkin of the St Pete Times was saying that the new ownership of the Rays ( or whatever they will be called soon ) are pleading with Bud Light to get out of the AL East and according to Tompkin Bud is not against the idea for 2008.

The Rays would move to the AL Central and the Royals would be asked to move to the West and the AL East would become the 4 team division. The major selling point for this is that teams in the Central would then get more dates with the Eastern clubs, Texas would have a time zone partner in the west and the Rays might have a chance to compete.

Tompkin says the ownership has done studies and is now convinced they can not survive in the AL East as they will never come close to the resources of New York or Boston.

Well I can see how it works for the Rays but why would the Royals do it?

santo=dorf
07-05-2006, 06:20 PM
I hope not. I hate that ****ty stadium

Tragg
07-05-2006, 06:24 PM
On the Red Sox pregame tonight Marc Tompkin of the St Pete Times was saying that the new ownership of the Rays ( or whatever they will be called soon ) are pleading with Bud Light to get out of the AL East and according to Tompkin Bud is not against the idea for 2008.

The Rays would move to the AL Central and the Royals would be asked to move to the West and the AL East would become the 4 team division. The major selling point for this is that teams in the Central would then get more dates with the Eastern clubs, Texas would have a time zone partner in the west and the Rays might have a chance to compete.

Tompkin says the ownership has done studies and is now convinced they can not survive in the AL East as they will never come close to the resources of New York or Boston.

Well I can see how it works for the Rays but why would the Royals do it? Interesting, but why didn't they do their due diligence BEFORE buying the team?
As for the Royals, maybe they would, but I don't see a benefit for them.
Maybe they could be bribed.
I dont' see any benefit to the AL Central teams either.
I don't see how this translates into more dates against the AL East...it would be offset by more teams to play in the AL west. Same as it is now. I think we only play the As in 2 series, e.g.
And to be honest, dates with NY and to some extent Boston are great, but Balt and Toronto are ho hum.

Daver
07-05-2006, 06:26 PM
Interesting, but why didn't they do their due diligence BEFORE buying the team?
As for the Royals, maybe they would, but I don't see a benefit for them.
Maybe they could be bribed.

David Glass will go where the money is, he doesn't care about competing, just give him his yearly revenue sharing check.

Fenway
07-05-2006, 06:28 PM
I hope not. I hate that ****ty stadium

If the Rays can get any kind of pitching behind Scott Kazmir they will become a very dangerous club the next few years. They certainly have a decent lineup.

My in laws live in Pinellas and I am convinced it is a lousy baseball market. Montreal for one was far better until Bud killed it, but MLB is stuck there for another 22 years with the ironclad lease the Rays signed with the city.

gbergman
07-05-2006, 06:35 PM
I like the idea. But I think it would be better to make that move, and then put Houston in the AL East making that very competitive, and evening out the leagues

Fenway
07-05-2006, 06:38 PM
I like the idea. But I think it would be better to make that move, and then put Houston in the AL East making that very competitive, and evening out the leagues

Won't happen simply because then you would have to have an interleague game every night. They will blow up the National and American Leagues first before they do that

CanBuehrleWait
07-05-2006, 06:53 PM
I like the idea. But I think it would be better to make that move, and then put Houston in the AL East making that very competitive, and evening out the leagues
I wondered for years why they didn't even out the leagues. My uncle set me straight though. The problem is with two 15 team leagues(AL,NL) who would the 15th AL and the 15th NL team play daily? If it was like the NBA or Hockey where it didn't matter(East playing West teams anytime of year) that would be fine but there would have to be year round interleague play for that to work:o:.

Now, what they could do is move Tampa Bay to the NL East and move either the Pirates or the Phillies to the AL East. That way the 16-14 balance is maintained and Pennsylvania gets an AL/NL team balance (Messes up Florida's AL/NL balance but.. eh so what). Thing is if I am either of those P teams that would make little to no sense to me.

edit: Fenway beat me to the punch on the first part

Tragg
07-05-2006, 06:59 PM
Won't happen simply because then you would have to have an interleague game every night.
That's fine with me. I'd rather than than jamming it into 3 weeks a season.

gbergman
07-05-2006, 07:42 PM
that makes sense never thought about that. I say dich the DH once thome leaves

Brian26
07-05-2006, 08:08 PM
The major selling point for this is that teams in the Central would then get more dates with the Eastern clubs

Why? I'm not seeing this. The number of teams in the Central stays the same. The extra games against an AL East team (formerly DRays) would now go to the AL West (KC). What am I missing here?

getonbckthr
07-05-2006, 08:09 PM
Tompkin says the ownership has done studies and is now convinced they can not survive in the AL East as they will never come close to the resources of New York or Boston.

Well I can see how it works for the Rays but why would the Royals do it?

Cause entering a division with the defending champions, The current team with the best record in baseball, A team with possibly the best young 1-2 punch for a rotation and Mauer and Morneau finally playing to their potential, and finally a team who has all their young impressive core signed long term is so much easier than playing in the East. Message to Tampa the East is currently and for the future will be weaker than the Central!

GregoryEtc
07-05-2006, 08:19 PM
Another scenario I've heard before is moving KC to the NL West, bringing Arizona to the AL West and moving TB to the AL Central.

Red Barchetta
07-05-2006, 08:28 PM
I really think the Marlins are going to relocate to the Carolinas with the next few years. Move them into the AL East and move the Rays into the NL east. I would rather they maintain some kind of geographic division.

Tragg
07-05-2006, 08:29 PM
Another scenario I've heard before is moving KC to the NL West, bringing Arizona to the AL West and moving TB to the AL Central.
That wouldn't make any sense. That would put 2 lone wolves in 2 western divisions. Right now, the one team that has a legit gripe in the divisions, imo, is the Rangers.

Palehose13
07-05-2006, 08:29 PM
I love the idea because my dad has a condo outside of St. Pete and it would give me more windows to go and get a game in instead of only 3 days a year. However, I don't see it happening.

Sox-o-matic
07-05-2006, 08:43 PM
Won't happen simply because then you would have to have an interleague game every night. They will blow up the National and American Leagues first before they do that

I'd rather they blow up the NL and either institute the DH as a position or go with an 8-man lineup. The NL is inferior and always will be so long as pitchers bat. And while they're at it, they should blow up Tampa Bay and Florida and go with 4 7-team divisions.

getonbckthr
07-05-2006, 09:00 PM
I'd rather they blow up the NL and either institute the DH as a position or go with an 8-man lineup. The NL is inferior and always will be so long as pitchers bat. And while they're at it, they should blow up Tampa Bay and Florida and go with 4 7-team divisions.
So blow up a team who has 2 championships in a 13 year window and is building a team who is good enough to compete for a pennant this season and possible another title run in the next 3 years?

RKMeibalane
07-05-2006, 09:05 PM
I still think baseball needs to go back to the two-division format, but still having four playoff teams from each league- two division winners and two wildcard teams.

AL East:
Baltimore Orioles
Boston Red Sox
Cleveland Indians
Detroit Tigers
New York Yankees
Tampa Bay Devil Rays
Toronto Blue Jays

AL West:
Chicago White Sox
Kansas City Royals
Los Angeles Angels
Minnesota Twins
Oakland Athletics
Seattle Mariners
Texas Rangers

NL East:
Atlanta Braves
Cincinnati Reds
Florida Marlins
Milwaukee Brewers
New York Mets
Philadelphia Phillies
Pittsburgh Pirates
Washington Nationals

NL West:
Arizona Diamondbacks
Chicago Cubs
Colorado Rockies
Houston Astros
Los Angeles Dodgers
San Diego Padres
San Francisco Giants
St. Louis Cardinals

DSpivack
07-05-2006, 09:48 PM
I really think the Marlins are going to relocate to the Carolinas with the next few years. Move them into the AL East and move the Rays into the NL east. I would rather they maintain some kind of geographic division.

If the Marlins do move to the Carolinas, then I'd think they'd stay in the NL East, as they'd be even closer to the Braves.

Ol' No. 2
07-05-2006, 09:59 PM
I'd rather they blow up the NL and either institute the DH as a position or go with an 8-man lineup. The NL is inferior and always will be so long as pitchers bat.This is complete nonsense. These things go in cycles. Some time back the NL was the much stronger league.

the gooch
07-05-2006, 10:09 PM
Why? I'm not seeing this. The number of teams in the Central stays the same. The extra games against an AL East team (formerly DRays) would now go to the AL West (KC). What am I missing here?
When he said eastern teams he meant ESPN teams. Fewer division games for the yankees and red sox means they will invade west.

Clembasbal
07-05-2006, 11:49 PM
and the Rays might have a chance to compete.


how is this true? Don't the Tigers and the Sox have the best records in baseball, and aren't the Yankees old and falling apart as we speak?

SOXfnNlansing
07-06-2006, 12:15 AM
If the Rays can get any kind of pitching behind Scott Kazmir they will become a very dangerous club the next few years.

:cubune

DumpJerry
07-06-2006, 12:26 AM
My buddy argues that one of the Florida teams should move to New York. HE argues that they supported three teams in the past (Yanks, Giants, Dodgers), so it is possible. He also points out it would dilute George's influence in MLB. Of course, that might make this a moot point.

Blueprint1
07-06-2006, 02:04 AM
How about no playing the national league. No divisions everyone plays the same schedule and the top four teams make the playoffs.

TDog
07-06-2006, 02:19 AM
When the divisions aligned in 1969, the Sox wanted to be in the East with the Yankees etc. Instead hey ended up in the West behind two expansion teams, one of which finished ahead of the the first year and both of which finished ahead of them the next. When the Washington Senators moved to Texas and became the Rangers, the White Sox lobbied hard to move into the AL East but lost out to Milwaukee. At the time, the West was tougher than the East. In 1972, the Sox had the league's second-best record, and the third best MLB record, but didn't make the postseason. Not being in the East may have cost the Sox a World Series appaerance.

The current aliments -- Diamondbacks and Brewers in the NL and Royals in the AL for example -- resulted from political compromise. A Florida baseball team isn't going to move to the Central simply because it wants to move to the Central.

TheKittle
07-06-2006, 03:53 AM
I still think baseball needs to go back to the two-division format, but still having four playoff teams from each league- two division winners and two wildcard teams.

AL East:
Baltimore Orioles
Boston Red Sox
Cleveland Indians
Detroit Tigers
New York Yankees
Tampa Bay Devil Rays
Toronto Blue Jays

AL West:
Chicago White Sox
Kansas City Royals
Los Angeles Angels
Minnesota Twins
Oakland Athletics
Seattle Mariners
Texas Rangers

NL East:
Atlanta Braves
Cincinnati Reds
Florida Marlins
Milwaukee Brewers
New York Mets
Philadelphia Phillies
Pittsburgh Pirates
Washington Nationals

NL West:
Arizona Diamondbacks
Chicago Cubs
Colorado Rockies
Houston Astros
Los Angeles Dodgers
San Diego Padres
San Francisco Giants
St. Louis Cardinals

The cubs do not want to be in the West. Remember when Fay Vincent wanted to realign the divisions and move the Cardinals and Cubs into the NL West and the Braves and Reds to the NL East? The cubs said hell no.

If the Marlins move to a Central or Western time zone city, the Brewers and Marlins could be in the West and the Cubs and Cardinals could be in the East.

But this two division idea is a good one.

chaerulez
07-06-2006, 04:08 AM
The cubs do not want to be in the West. Remember when Fay Vincent wanted to realign the divisions and move the Cardinals and Cubs into the NL West and the Braves and Reds to the NL East? The cubs said hell no.

If the Marlins move to a Central or Western time zone city, the Brewers and Marlins could be in the West and the Cubs and Cardinals could be in the East.

But this two division idea is a good one.

Yes the Cubs were so worried they would lose money due to not playing teams like the Mets as often. Whatever. But I do feel bad for the Devil Rays, they would be wild card leaders if they played in the NL. Or even lead the division if they were in the NL Central.

RKMeibalane
07-06-2006, 09:10 AM
Yes the Cubs were so worried they would lose money due to not playing teams like the Mets as often. Whatever. But I do feel bad for the Devil Rays, they would be wild card leaders if they played in the NL. Or even lead the division if they were in the NL Central.

Given how stupid Cubs fans are, I really don't see the point of their argument. Their attendance figures shouldn't change much regardless of who they're playing. The irony is that they were so worried about having fewer games against a team like the Mets, yet that's exactly what they have now, as the two are in different divisions.

dickallen15
07-06-2006, 09:21 AM
I don't know why TB would want to move out of the East. With the Yankees and Red Sox, if you could even throw an average team on the field, those games are sellouts. I don't see where moving to the Central would be good for them. I don't think they particularly draw that well vs. any Central teams, and at least this year, there are 2 teams in the Central that are better than anything in the East.

RKMeibalane
07-06-2006, 09:23 AM
I don't know why TB would want to move out of the East. With the Yankees and Red Sox, if you could even throw an average team on the field, those games are sellouts. I don't see where moving to the Central would be good for them. I don't think they particularly draw that well vs. any Central teams, and at least this year, there are 2 teams in the Central that are better than anything in the East.

I think their ownership believes that they have a better chance of building a winning team in the Central, which would increase their revenue over time.

Frater Perdurabo
07-06-2006, 11:37 AM
This is complete nonsense. These things go in cycles. Some time back the NL was the much stronger league.

This is the perfect reason to split up the MLB according to competitiveness. Put the 14 best teams teams in the "Man's League," and the 16 weaker teams in the "Child's League." Go the NASCAR (NEXTEL Cup/Busch Series) route and sell naming rights to each league. For argument's sake let's name them after hypothetical sponsors and start in 2007 with the top two finishers from each division (for purposes of illustration, this is based on who is where at the half-way mark) plus two "wild cards" (again, just to illustrate) populating the "Man's League":

Chevrolet League: Tigers, White Sox, Red Sox, Yankees, Athletics, Rangers, Rockies, Padres, Cardinals, Reds, Mets, Phillies, Blue Jays, Twins

The remaining teams go to the Microsoft League: Nats, Braves, Marlins, Pirates, Cubs, Astros, Brewers, Diamondbacks, Giants, Dodgers, Devil Rays, Orioles, Royals, Indians, Angels, Mariners

The regular season will mean something again; the top two finishers in the Microsoft League each year get to move up to the Chevrolet League for the next season (or the Microsoft League could have a postseason tournament to determine the top two finishers), and the bottom two finishers in the Chevrolet League must move down to the Microsoft League for the next season. If you want to add more excitement, have another tournament among these four teams in which the top two finishers play in the Chevy League for the next season.

Chevrolet League teams play each other 12 times each (12x13=156 games). At the end of the regular season, the the top two finishers play in a seven-game World Series during the second full week of October. Microsoft League teams play each other 10 times each (10x15=150 games). Make the All-Star game among Chevy League players only but play the game only in Microsoft League cities!

Chicken Dinner
07-06-2006, 12:08 PM
But the "Childs League" has won 5 out of the last 11 World Series. :o:

SBSoxFan
07-06-2006, 12:18 PM
I'd hate for the Sox to have to play Tampa Bay any more than they already do.

Scottiehaswheels
07-06-2006, 12:27 PM
As diluted as the talent is that is already out there my suggestion of just adding 2 new teams prolly wouldn't go over so well but add a team in Indy and one on the West coast to mirror the NL in # of teams... then go to 4 team divisions such as in football and the top team in each division plays in the postseason eliminating the wildcard... could have like a N/S/E/W divisions

North AL

Chicago, Detroit, Minny, Indy

South AL

KC, TX, TB, Cleveland

West AL

OAK, LA, Seattle, other west coast team

East AL

Redcubs, Yanks, Jays, O's


North NL

Scrubs, brewers, Cards, Pitt

South NL

Cincy, Houston, Atlanta, AZ

East NL

Mets, Phillies, Marlins(which may move north), Nats

West NL

Rockies, Dodgers, Padres, Giants

Basically keeps most of the current rivalries intact, cuts the interleague crap down to say one Cubs series a year and only say 15 games vs. the other league(including the "rival" series of 3 games)... 30 games vs. the teams in your division and 6 against the others in the league.... still come up with 162 games a year... or some variant of the 30/6 thing Such as 17 each vs. the 3 teams in your division and 8 vs. the other 12 teams etc...

kraut83
07-06-2006, 12:53 PM
This is the perfect reason to split up the MLB according to competitiveness. Put the 14 best teams teams in the "Man's League," and the 16 weaker teams in the "Child's League." Go the NASCAR (NEXTEL Cup/Busch Series) route and sell naming rights to each league. For argument's sake let's name them after hypothetical sponsors and start in 2007 with the top two finishers from each division (for purposes of illustration, this is based on who is where at the half-way mark) plus two "wild cards" (again, just to illustrate) populating the "Man's League":

Chevrolet League: Tigers, White Sox, Red Sox, Yankees, Athletics, Rangers, Rockies, Padres, Cardinals, Reds, Mets, Phillies, Blue Jays, Twins

The remaining teams go to the Microsoft League: Nats, Braves, Marlins, Pirates, Cubs, Astros, Brewers, Diamondbacks, Giants, Dodgers, Devil Rays, Orioles, Royals, Indians, Angels, Mariners

The regular season will mean something again; the top two finishers in the Microsoft League each year get to move up to the Chevrolet League for the next season (or the Microsoft League could have a postseason tournament to determine the top two finishers), and the bottom two finishers in the Chevrolet League must move down to the Microsoft League for the next season. If you want to add more excitement, have another tournament among these four teams in which the top two finishers play in the Chevy League for the next season.

Chevrolet League teams play each other 12 times each (12x13=156 games). At the end of the regular season, the the top two finishers play in a seven-game World Series during the second full week of October. Microsoft League teams play each other 10 times each (10x15=150 games). Make the All-Star game among Chevy League players only but play the game only in Microsoft League cities!

That's just crazy enough to work! I really like the idea, and think it would help boost interest in cities with perpetually crappy teams (KC, PIT, TB).

tigersfan25
07-06-2006, 02:01 PM
This is the perfect reason to split up the MLB according to competitiveness. Put the 14 best teams teams in the "Man's League," and the 16 weaker teams in the "Child's League." Go the NASCAR (NEXTEL Cup/Busch Series) route and sell naming rights to each league. For argument's sake let's name them after hypothetical sponsors and start in 2007 with the top two finishers from each division (for purposes of illustration, this is based on who is where at the half-way mark) plus two "wild cards" (again, just to illustrate) populating the "Man's League":

Chevrolet League: Tigers, White Sox, Red Sox, Yankees, Athletics, Rangers, Rockies, Padres, Cardinals, Reds, Mets, Phillies, Blue Jays, Twins

The remaining teams go to the Microsoft League: Nats, Braves, Marlins, Pirates, Cubs, Astros, Brewers, Diamondbacks, Giants, Dodgers, Devil Rays, Orioles, Royals, Indians, Angels, Mariners

The regular season will mean something again; the top two finishers in the Microsoft League each year get to move up to the Chevrolet League for the next season (or the Microsoft League could have a postseason tournament to determine the top two finishers), and the bottom two finishers in the Chevrolet League must move down to the Microsoft League for the next season. If you want to add more excitement, have another tournament among these four teams in which the top two finishers play in the Chevy League for the next season.

Chevrolet League teams play each other 12 times each (12x13=156 games). At the end of the regular season, the the top two finishers play in a seven-game World Series during the second full week of October. Microsoft League teams play each other 10 times each (10x15=150 games). Make the All-Star game among Chevy League players only but play the game only in Microsoft League cities!
Not only is this idea mildly humorous, it actually makes quite a bit of sense. It's like a hybrid of NASCAR and European Soccer Leagues.

Fenway
07-06-2006, 02:09 PM
I'd hate for the Sox to have to play Tampa Bay any more than they already do.

I know the Boston Sox are sick of the Rays after losing 3 straight to them. Last night Tampa drew 15,000 of which probably 10,000 were Boston fans.

My own guess what is going on. The new ownership wants a name change, a new division to start clean. Remember they got screwed in the first place. They were supposed to be a National League team after their first 2 years and Arizona was supposed to move to the AL but the Diamondbacks cried they wanted to be in with the Padres and Dodgers.

Madvora
07-06-2006, 02:12 PM
From what I hear, a lot of New Yorkers live in Florida. So it wouldn't be a good idea to take away more Yankee visits for a team that is desperate to draw good attendance.

TheKittle
07-06-2006, 02:25 PM
Given how stupid Cubs fans are, I really don't see the point of their argument. Their attendance figures shouldn't change much regardless of who they're playing. The irony is that they were so worried about having fewer games against a team like the Mets, yet that's exactly what they have now, as the two are in different divisions.

It's not about attendance at the Chewing Gum Field. It's the late west coast start times, that they think would hurt TV ratings for WGN.

SoxFan64
07-06-2006, 03:07 PM
Why? I'm not seeing this. The number of teams in the Central stays the same. The extra games against an AL East team (formerly DRays) would now go to the AL West (KC). What am I missing here?
For the same reason that we play an extra series with AL West teams now. It has to do with the numbers. Currently all AL teams play a home and home series with every team outside of their own division. Since the AL West currently has one less team they have to make up the 18 games that currently would be played if they had a fifith team in the AL West.

To make up those 18 games (since all division opponents play each other 9 times at home and 9 times on the road), all AL teams play an additional series at home against a AL West team and an additional series on the road against a AL West team.

This year, we go out to Anaheim of LA of Orange County and play the Angels twice (once in April and another in September). We also play Seattle twice at home and once on the road. The second home series against Seattle will also be in September.

So ... if there was one less team in the AL East and one more team in the AL West and the AL remains at 14 teams and the NL remains at 16 teams then all AL teams not in the AL East will play one additional home series against one AL East team and they will play one additional away series against a different AL East team.

This additional series comes in September when every one else is playing a concentrated schedule against division opponents.

I hope that helps explain why we would be playing additional games against AL East teams. Heck, all AL West and AL Central would be playing more games against the remaining AL East teams -- the Jays, the Stankees, the RedCubs and the O's.

AZChiSoxFan
07-06-2006, 03:27 PM
I know the Boston Sox are sick of the Rays after losing 3 straight to them. Last night Tampa drew 15,000 of which probably 10,000 were Boston fans.

My own guess what is going on. The new ownership wants a name change, a new division to start clean. Remember they got screwed in the first place. They were supposed to be a National League team after their first 2 years and Arizona was supposed to move to the AL but the Diamondbacks cried they wanted to be in with the Padres and Dodgers.

How did they get screwed? Did they have an inherent right to be in the National League?? Plain and simple, the D-backs had a better owner than Tampa did so AZ got to be where they wanted to be and the Rays didn't.

The agreement was that after two years, the D-backs COULD be moved to the AL. It was never set in stone that they WOULD be moved.

Fenway
07-06-2006, 03:47 PM
How did they get screwed? Did they have an inherent right to be in the National League?? Plain and simple, the D-backs had a better owner than Tampa did so AZ got to be where they wanted to be and the Rays didn't.

The agreement was that after two years, the D-backs COULD be moved to the AL. It was never set in stone that they WOULD be moved.

Tampa *thought* they would be in with Atlanta and Miami but as the story goes their owner was such an *** they were kept in the AL. The new ownership there has an uphill battle to undo the damage done by Namoli. Tampa has seen laughing stock franchises turn around before in the Bucs and the Lightning so anything is possible.

MERPER
07-06-2006, 03:52 PM
I don't think this makes any sense, either... if they are ever going to realign and move a team, I would think they'd want to take 1 of the 6 out of the NL Central and put them in the NL West and then move one of the NL West teams into the AL West....

Logically, this would mean moving the Houston Astros out of the NL Central... then let the pieces fall in place as they may... maybe the Colorado Rockies would move to the AL West...

Ol' No. 2
07-06-2006, 03:59 PM
I don't think this makes any sense, either... if they are ever going to realign and move a team, I would think they'd want to take 1 of the 6 out of the NL Central and put them in the NL West and then move one of the NL West teams into the AL West....

Logically, this would mean moving the Houston Astros out of the NL Central... then let the pieces fall in place as they may... maybe the Colorado Rockies would move to the AL West...You can't have odd numbers of teams in a league without scheduling interleague games all season long.

I don't see KC moving to the West because of timezone differences. They're not going to want half their road games to be on TV at 9pm local time. Also, they get a significant attendance bump from Chicagoans travelling to see the Sox in KC, but they're not going to get many travelling from the West Coast.

dcb56
07-06-2006, 08:02 PM
You can't have odd numbers of teams in a league without scheduling interleague games all season long.

I don't see KC moving to the West because of timezone differences. They're not going to want half their road games to be on TV at 9pm local time. Also, they get a significant attendance bump from Chicagoans travelling to see the Sox in KC, but they're not going to get many travelling from the West Coast.

I agree, I don't see any chance that KC would willfully let itself get trapped in the same situation Texas is in right now.

If TB did move to the Central, I imagine a more likely realignment scenario would have Detroit or Cleveland moving back to the AL East rather than KC moving to the West.

ondafarm
07-06-2006, 08:30 PM
Unfortunately, the breakdown on teams in time zones is 6 in the Pacific, 2 in the Mountain, 8 in the Central and 14 in the Eastern. Somebody has to go two time zones away.

White City
07-07-2006, 08:16 AM
Unfortunately, the breakdown on teams in time zones is 6 in the Pacific, 2 in the Mountain, 8 in the Central and 14 in the Eastern. Somebody has to go two time zones away.

Or add two more teams in the Central/Eastern regions and go with four four-team divisions in each league, a la NFL. This sets baseball up for another expansion of the playoffs down the line.

I don't like the dilution of talent or the idea of more playoff teams, but from a business perspective, this approach makes the most sense. Money will lead whatever decision MLB makes.

Irishsox1
07-07-2006, 10:44 AM
How about Tampa moves to Vegas or Portland, Texas moves to the Central and either Detroit or Cleveland move to the east? At least it get's every team in the same division in the same time zone.

EAST
BOSTON
YANKEES
BALTIMORE
DETROIT
TORONTO

CENTRAL
SOX
MINNESOTA
KC
CLEVELAND
TEXAS

WEST
OAKLAND
ANGELS
SEATTLE
DEVIL RAYS

TDog
07-07-2006, 01:02 PM
Unfortunately, the breakdown on teams in time zones is 6 in the Pacific, 2 in the Mountain, 8 in the Central and 14 in the Eastern. Somebody has to go two time zones away.

It is deceptive to note that two teams are in the Mountain Time Zone. Arizona doesn't observe daylight saving time. During the baseball season it is on Mountain Standard Time, while the Padres, Dodgers, Angels etc. are on Pacific Daylight Time.

The Diamondbacks are on Pacific time. They just don't call it that.

Ol' No. 2
07-07-2006, 01:25 PM
Unfortunately, the breakdown on teams in time zones is 6 in the Pacific, 2 in the Mountain, 8 in the Central and 14 in the Eastern. Somebody has to go two time zones away.And right now that team is Texas. I'd assume they would wait until the Marlins situation is resolved before they make any kind of move. If they move to the West coast or Mountain region, I'm sure Texas would want to move to the Central and either Cleveland or Detroit could move to the East.

White Sox Randy
07-07-2006, 02:05 PM
On the Red Sox pregame tonight Marc Tompkin of the St Pete Times was saying that the new ownership of the Rays ( or whatever they will be called soon ) are pleading with Bud Light to get out of the AL East and according to Tompkin Bud is not against the idea for 2008.

The Rays would move to the AL Central and the Royals would be asked to move to the West and the AL East would become the 4 team division. The major selling point for this is that teams in the Central would then get more dates with the Eastern clubs, Texas would have a time zone partner in the west and the Rays might have a chance to compete.

Tompkin says the ownership has done studies and is now convinced they can not survive in the AL East as they will never come close to the resources of New York or Boston.

Well I can see how it works for the Rays but why would the Royals do it?


Sure. This is easy to do and makes perfect sense. But, a salary cap wouldn't solve anything.

Tragg
07-07-2006, 07:07 PM
This year, we go out to Anaheim of LA of Orange County and play the Angels twice (once in April and another in September). We also play Seattle twice at home and once on the road. The second home series against Seattle will also be in September.

So ... if there was one less team in the AL East and one more team in the AL West and the AL remains at 14 teams and the NL remains at 16 teams then all AL teams not in the AL East will play one additional home series against one AL East team and they will play one additional away series against a different AL East team.

This additional series comes in September when every one else is playing a concentrated schedule against division opponents.

I hope that helps explain why we would be playing additional games against AL East teams. Heck, all AL West and AL Central would be playing more games against the remaining AL East teams -- the Jays, the Stankees, the RedCubs and the O's.
Let's see if I get this straight:
Right now, we play 2 series against 2 west teams and 3 series against 2 west teams, for a total of 10 series against the West.
This year we also play 2 series against 5 Eastern teams for a total of 10 series against the East.
In total, 10 series against the east, 10 against the west.
So for us slowpokes, once again, how would shifting a team to the west result in more total series against eastern teams? (I see how it would result in an extra series with certain eastern teams, but not total number of series).

And secondarily, except for the gate from playing the Yankees, does playing more eastern series matter?

Railsplitter
07-08-2006, 06:57 PM
Contract 'em.

Brian26
07-08-2006, 07:02 PM
Or add two more teams in the Central/Eastern regions

:o:

The diluted pitching staffs of MLB being even thinner? Scary thought.

Frater Perdurabo
07-08-2006, 07:22 PM
:o:

The diluted pitching staffs of MLB being even thinner? Scary thought.

Raise the pitching mounds.

Grzegorz
07-08-2006, 09:46 PM
Contract 'em.

Absolutely the correct thing to do...

South Side Irish
07-09-2006, 01:08 AM
Brewers back to AL (Central).
Rays to NL (East).

The Brewers are back and have natural rivals in the Sox, Twins, and Tigers.
The Rays have in-state rivals with the Marlins (assuming they stay. Carolina isn't even too far). They also have close geographic rivals to the Braves, and still draw NY market. Philly and DC aren't small markets, either.

Pros:
AL/NL balance of 14 and 16 teams.
No teams are forced to play outside their timezones.
Brewers are back in AL.
Rays have more natural and closer rivals.

Cons:
Two 6 team divisions (new NL East and new AL Central)
Two 4 team divisions (new AL East, AL West)
Potential FLA/TAM relocations screw everything up!

See how simple change can be?

South Side Irish
07-09-2006, 01:12 AM
This is the perfect reason to split up the MLB according to competitiveness. Put the 14 best teams teams in the "Man's League," and the 16 weaker teams in the "Child's League." Go the NASCAR (NEXTEL Cup/Busch Series) route and sell naming rights to each league. For argument's sake let's name them after hypothetical sponsors and start in 2007 with the top two finishers from each division (for purposes of illustration, this is based on who is where at the half-way mark) plus two "wild cards" (again, just to illustrate) populating the "Man's League":

Chevrolet League: Tigers, White Sox, Red Sox, Yankees, Athletics, Rangers, Rockies, Padres, Cardinals, Reds, Mets, Phillies, Blue Jays, Twins

The remaining teams go to the Microsoft League: Nats, Braves, Marlins, Pirates, Cubs, Astros, Brewers, Diamondbacks, Giants, Dodgers, Devil Rays, Orioles, Royals, Indians, Angels, Mariners

The regular season will mean something again; the top two finishers in the Microsoft League each year get to move up to the Chevrolet League for the next season (or the Microsoft League could have a postseason tournament to determine the top two finishers), and the bottom two finishers in the Chevrolet League must move down to the Microsoft League for the next season. If you want to add more excitement, have another tournament among these four teams in which the top two finishers play in the Chevy League for the next season.

Chevrolet League teams play each other 12 times each (12x13=156 games). At the end of the regular season, the the top two finishers play in a seven-game World Series during the second full week of October. Microsoft League teams play each other 10 times each (10x15=150 games). Make the All-Star game among Chevy League players only but play the game only in Microsoft League cities!

While I love the creativity of such a thought...

Doesn't baseball already have 3 "Busch Leagues?" Isn't that what minor league systems do? Sure, you could argue that they are a place to develop talent for big league clubs, but would another tier of competitive baseball really excite fans in the "Microsoft League?" Fans in those markets know they're teams suck lately, but now they're in a "crap league," making it clearly obvious that they suck. It doesn't seem like a great sell to to those 14 teams, and major league baseball is now a 16 team entity, with very little change.

Frater Perdurabo
07-09-2006, 03:09 PM
While I love the creativity of such a thought...

Doesn't baseball already have 3 "Busch Leagues?" Isn't that what minor league systems do? Sure, you could argue that they are a place to develop talent for big league clubs, but would another tier of competitive baseball really excite fans in the "Microsoft League?" Fans in those markets know they're teams suck lately, but now they're in a "crap league," making it clearly obvious that they suck. It doesn't seem like a great sell to to those 14 teams, and major league baseball is now a 16 team entity, with very little change.

The possibility of winning the "Microsoft League" and moving up to the "Chevy League" maintains interest throughout the summer in more cities.

Right now, many small market teams like the Pirates and Royals already are de facto "developmental" teams for the big spenders; look at all the former Pirates and Royals who star for other teams now.

WMG
07-09-2006, 04:03 PM
there needs to be a cap!

not a strict one, but some sort of a ceiling AND a minimum.

If for the only reason that it will hinder the cubbies chance of ever winning, keep it status quo and they have to bump into a winner with that payroll eventually... right??? nah.... its the cubs!

Lip Man 1
07-09-2006, 07:54 PM
Minnesota and Oakland have shown you don't need a cap to be successful. Spending money definitely increases your chances of winning and making the post season, that's documented, but it's not a 100% guarantee.

Brains means almost as much as money in this game.

Baseball does not need a salary cap which is simply an excuse for the owners to make even more money.

Lip

nasox
07-09-2006, 09:47 PM
Brains means almost as much as money in this game.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/18/Steinbrenner_George.jpg
"What?!"

Lip Man 1
07-10-2006, 10:11 AM
Nasox:

My comment was not a knock against George. I respect a guy who has never lost his focus that winning is the only thing that matters in sports.

And before anyone says 'that's easy to say when you have as much income as the Yankees...' remember in the 80's and the first half of the 90's, the Yankees weren't drawing 'squat.' George was making noises about leaving for a new stadium in New Jersey and the team hadn't made the post season since 1978. That didn't stop him however from continuing to do everything he could to win...unlike some of the other owners, including those very close to home.

Lip

Ol' No. 2
07-10-2006, 12:24 PM
Minnesota and Oakland have shown you don't need a cap to be successful. Spending money definitely increases your chances of winning and making the post season, that's documented, but it's not a 100% guarantee.

Brains means almost as much as money in this game.

Baseball does not need a salary cap which is simply an excuse for the owners to make even more money.

LipI'm not sure Minnesota and Oakland are good examples. Neither has won anything except for a few division titles since the big-money era started in the post-strike years. The 2005 White Sox are a far better example. They won the whole enchilada with a payroll only a bit above the average.