PDA

View Full Version : Condensed season?


nasox
07-12-2006, 04:00 PM
While reading the AP story of the TV deal with Fox and TBS, I came upon this blurb about a condensed season:

That means baseball must adjust its season schedule in the next collective bargaining agreement with the players' union. The current deal expires after this season.Baseball would probably prefer to begin the Fall Classic a few days earlier than it does now, as opposed to several days later. So if owners and players agree, the regular season could be condensed to accommodate the new TV deal.
"It will be a better fit for us, better fit for them," Selig said. "We'll have to work the schedule out, but I can assure you that it will work out very well."

Here is the whole thing (http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=107748)


I'm not sure what to make of this. I don't thing the owners would ever agree. Or the players, as less games means less revenue for the owners and less chances for players to get bonuses (500 AB, 20 win seasons, etc.). Is this just bad reporting?

KMKsuburbannoise
07-12-2006, 04:10 PM
boo i say boo

Fenway
07-12-2006, 04:24 PM
The return of the Sunday doubleheader????

SouthSide_HitMen
07-12-2006, 04:26 PM
:farmer

"It's always about the money. And when Bud says it isn't about the money, it's about the money."

There are few off days during the year as it is. 26 weeks is 182 days. 162 games plus the three day All Star Game break gives you 17 off days during the season. There is not much wiggle room there.

You would have to end the season in mid week (Wednesday or Thursday) and start the playoffs the first Saturday in October.

First Round (7 days Saturday - Friday)
Second Round (9 days Saturday - Sunday)
World Series (9 days Tuesday - Wednesday)

You could have a situation of having one off day between the League Championship and the World Series. Add the ridiculous decision by Bud Selig to allow Fox to dictate the game time (see Yankees vs. Angels - Games 4 & 5 circa 2005) and this further pisses on the actual competition.

But then again to Bud Selig it isn't about the competition, it is (well you know what it is all about).

TDog
07-12-2006, 04:28 PM
While reading the AP story of the TV deal with Fox and TBS, I came upon this blurb about a condensed season:



Here is the whole thing (http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=107748)


I'm not sure what to make of this. I don't thing the owners would ever agree. Or the players, as less games means less revenue for the owners and less chances for players to get bonuses (500 AB, 20 win seasons, etc.). Is this just bad reporting?

When I read this last night, I thought "condensed season" referred to the calendar and not the number of games played. Teams used to play a lot of doubleheaders. It isn't the players who brought an end to that, but the owners. In many places now, when they have to play doubleheaders, they charge two separate admissions. As much as players don't like doubleheaders (the union had provisions after the 1972 strike such as no day doubleheaders after a night game, no day games after twi-night doubleheaders etc.) they like day-night doubleheaders even less. Those used to be limited to Boston because of the low capacity, but there was one in New York this season.

More single-admission doubleheaders means diminishing the season's total gate, but so does playing fewer games.

MadetoOrta
07-12-2006, 04:32 PM
The return of the Sunday doubleheader????

Or the Day-Night Doubleheader. Two games, two crowds, same day/night.

nasox
07-12-2006, 04:32 PM
When I read this last night, I thought "condensed season" referred to the calendar and not the number of games played. Teams used to play a lot of doubleheaders. It isn't the players who brought an end to that, but the owners. In many places now, when they have to play doubleheaders, they charge two separate admissions. As much as players don't like doubleheaders (the union had provisions after the 1972 strike such as no day doubleheaders after a night game, no day games after twi-night doubleheaders etc.) they like day-night doubleheaders even less. Those used to be limited to Boston because of the low capacity, but there was one in New York this season.

More single-admission doubleheaders means diminishing the season's total gate, but so does playing fewer games.

From an admission standpoint, playing single-admission double headers is just like playing less games.

Lip Man 1
07-12-2006, 04:43 PM
Cut back the season to 154 games and everyone will be happy. Plus you won't have the chance for a 'snow-out' in the World Series.

Lip

russ99
07-12-2006, 04:44 PM
From an admission standpoint, playing single-admission double headers is just like playing less games.

From a fan's standpoint, that's big fun, especially when I was a kid at Old Comiskey.

:D:

I really miss those. Maybe charge double admission to adults, and the 2nd game for kids under 17 are free. I know - logistical nightmare.

spiffie
07-12-2006, 04:50 PM
Cut back the season to 154 games and everyone will be happy. Plus you won't have the chance for a 'snow-out' in the World Series.

Lip
:reinsy

Apparently I am not a part of "everybody" in Lip's definition.

Frater Perdurabo
07-12-2006, 05:48 PM
Right now there are a lot of off days in April, since April often has lots of rain in the Northeast, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic and Midwest.

Thoughtful scheduling would allow more games to take place in April - with fewer rainouts - by scheduling the earliest games in warm weather cities (OAK, SF, LAA, LAD, SD, TEX, ATL, FLA) and in domes (TOR, MIN, TB, HOU, ARI, MIL, SEA). It's not the end of the world if the other teams embark on nine-game road trips to begin the year.

Also, with the three-game interleague series confined to late May and June right now, there are an unnecessarily large number of off-days in late May and June. By spreading interleague play throughout the season, the extra off days in late May and June could be reallocated throughout the season. (This would have the side benefit of allowing realignment into six divisions of five teams each.)

Ol' No. 2
07-12-2006, 05:56 PM
Cut back the season to 154 games and everyone will be happy. Plus you won't have the chance for a 'snow-out' in the World Series.

LipGreat idea. The owners and players, who have final say in the matter, would make less money, but I doubt that would influence them.

PaulDrake
07-12-2006, 06:28 PM
The return of the Sunday doubleheader???? That would be great. The Sunday doubleheader was a big part of my youth. I've been saying for years that baseball should be over and done with before my birthday which is October 20.

CallMeNuts
07-12-2006, 06:40 PM
On one hand, I saw references to a "condensed season". To get the World Series to start on the Tuesday before it does now, they would have to end the regular season 4 days earlier. Therefore, there would only be 25 weekends in the season. But according to the articles I've seen, they have committed 26 Saturday games to Fox and 26 Sunday games to TBS. I don't see how they could continue to have 26 weekends with a "condensed season". They'd have to open the season earlier in order to continue to have 26 weekends.

Kogs35
07-12-2006, 07:09 PM
remeber a few years ago the season starting the last week of march?

PKalltheway
07-13-2006, 01:40 AM
remeber a few years ago the season starting the last week of march?
Yeah I sure do. That wasn't such a bad idea. What's wrong with that? So what if it's cold, the season would at least end in September. Just scrap the damn WBC and that would end the conflict of the beginning of the season merging with the WBC.