PDA

View Full Version : Interleague..


INSox56
05-18-2007, 08:45 AM
Who the hell did the Indians have to...bribe...to get the interleague schedule they have??? Reds twice, Fla, Atl, Phi, Wash......!!?? GMAB, you might as well have just said here, go ahead and have 12 games or so. Everyone else in our division has decently balanced schedules but wow...Cleveland has it easy man. Ugh...jesus I hate interleague. Anyone else remember a time when we had a really easy interleague schedule? I know we did awesome last year, but STL eventually won the WS, Houston wasn't that bad yet, the cubs usually play us tough as with any rivalry....

sox1970
05-18-2007, 08:48 AM
Interleague sucks, but I don't think it's going away anytime soon.

ondafarm
05-18-2007, 08:54 AM
I wish they'd either:

a) cut interleague back to once every three years or so, to keep it something special

b) go whole hog and have everybody play everybody in the other league for one three game series.

c) do both a) and b). Whole hog, once every three years.

Fenway
05-18-2007, 08:58 AM
When Montreal moved to Washington MLB then ended Baltimore-Philadelphia as natural rivals and assigned the Phillies to play the Red Sox 6 times. Fans loved it and in fact the 2 largest crowds in the last year of The Vet were Boston games. So what does MLB do? They hook Boston back with Atlanta 6 times.

itsnotrequired
05-18-2007, 09:05 AM
Who the hell did the Indians have to...bribe...to get the interleague schedule they have??? Reds twice, Fla, Atl, Phi, Wash......!!?? GMAB, you might as well have just said here, go ahead and have 12 games or so. Everyone else in our division has decently balanced schedules but wow...Cleveland has it easy man. Ugh...jesus I hate interleague. Anyone else remember a time when we had a really easy interleague schedule? I know we did awesome last year, but STL eventually won the WS, Houston wasn't that bad yet, the cubs usually play us tough as with any rivalry....

Well, they get the Reds twice because it is the other Ohio team. Not much to say there as it is the "local" rivalry. They are playing the NL East this year so they get the Marlins and Washington. The Sox play the Marlins as well but rather than face the crappy Nationals, the Sox face the crappy Pirates. Atlanta is better than Houston. If anything, the SOS of the Indians and Sox are about the same. No need to bribe here.

SBSoxFan
05-18-2007, 09:10 AM
Well, they get the Reds twice because it is the other Ohio team. Not much to say there as it is the "local" rivalry. They are playing the NL East this year so they get the Marlins and Washington. The Sox play the Marlins as well but rather than face the crappy Nationals, the Sox face the crappy Pirates. Atlanta is better than Houston. If anything, the SOS of the Indians and Sox are about the same. No need to bribe here.

Yes, I think you are spot on with there. :thumbsup: The only issue is that "local" has very different meanings in Ohio and Illinois.

itsnotrequired
05-18-2007, 09:47 AM
Yes, I think you are spot on with there. :thumbsup: The only issue is that "local" has very different meanings in Ohio and Illinois.

Same deal with all the "local" rivalries. Is it "fair" that the Cardinals get to play the Royals twice a season while the Mets have to play the Yankees?

WhiteSoxJunkie
05-18-2007, 12:34 PM
Why is there an interleague series this weekend, then it goes back to AL vs AL, NL vs NL for a few weeks, then interleague picks up again?

gosiu
05-18-2007, 12:38 PM
Why is there an interleague series this weekend, then it goes back to AL vs AL, NL vs NL for a few weeks, then interleague picks up again?
I'm assuming they want to highlight one half of the rivilary series.

INSox56
05-18-2007, 12:57 PM
Well, they get the Reds twice because it is the other Ohio team. Not much to say there as it is the "local" rivalry. They are playing the NL East this year so they get the Marlins and Washington. The Sox play the Marlins as well but rather than face the crappy Nationals, the Sox face the crappy Pirates. Atlanta is better than Houston. If anything, the SOS of the Indians and Sox are about the same. No need to bribe here.Yeah, but because of the BS rivalry crap, we play the cubs who're going to play us much harder than the reds will the indians. And I'd rather face the Nats than Pit any day. Meh, whatever, I just think the Indians have one hell of an easy interleague where everyone else is moderately difficult. Hell, the Twins have to play MIL twice...that's no good (for them) So I guess it comes down to the "rivalry" games where you play that team twice, is harder for some teams than others. Lame either way.

JB98
05-18-2007, 08:41 PM
Our rivals are all beating the **** out of sorry NL competition tonight. At last check:

Detroit 14, St. Louis 2
Cleveland 9, Cincinnati 4
Minnesota 5, Milwaukee 1

sox1970
05-18-2007, 08:46 PM
Our rivals are all beating the **** out of sorry NL competition tonight. At last check:

Detroit 14, St. Louis 2
Cleveland 9, Cincinnati 4
Minnesota 5, Milwaukee 1

I'm hoping for 6 losses each for the AL Central teams other than the Sox during interleague play. That's the best we can hope for. That's why today's game stings a little bit.

JB98
05-18-2007, 09:29 PM
I'm hoping for 6 losses each for the AL Central teams other than the Sox during interleague play. That's the best we can hope for. That's why today's game stings a little bit.

I'm envious of the Tigers. I've forgotten what it feels like to hang 14 runs on somebody and just whip their ass.

LongLiveFisk
05-18-2007, 10:00 PM
Our rivals are all beating the **** out of sorry NL competition tonight. At last check:

Detroit 14, St. Louis 2
Cleveland 9, Cincinnati 4
Minnesota 5, Milwaukee 1

Which makes today's loss suck that much more. 14 runs for Detroit, huh? I remember the days when we'd get that in 1 or 2 games instead of the 8 it takes now. :(:

DumpJerry
05-18-2007, 10:06 PM
Same deal with all the "local" rivalries. Is it "fair" that the Cardinals get to play the Royals twice a season while the Mets have to play the Yankees?
Is there a difference?:rolleyes:

Brian26
05-18-2007, 10:15 PM
They hook Boston back with Atlanta 6 times.

Boston Braves vs. Boston Red Sox. A lot of history there, Fenway. Do your homework. :D:

LongLiveFisk
05-18-2007, 10:16 PM
Same deal with all the "local" rivalries. Is it "fair" that the Cardinals get to play the Royals twice a season while the Mets have to play the Yankees?

I think most of us realize that interleague play isn't perfect, but as far as "local" rivalries, what do you do? I mean, it's not like it's the Cardinals' fault the Royals haven't been competitive in recent years.

Fenway
05-18-2007, 10:46 PM
Boston Braves vs. Boston Red Sox. A lot of history there, Fenway. Do your homework. :D:

I know the history better than most. Just last week we had a Boston Braves thread on WSI. But in 2007 Philly is a better fit than Atlanta.

Brian26
05-18-2007, 11:03 PM
Just last week we had a Boston Braves thread on WSI.

Never heard of that site. Is it any good?:D:

Fenway
05-18-2007, 11:32 PM
Never heard of that site. Is it any good?:D:

It has potential :lol:

skottyj242
05-18-2007, 11:37 PM
It has potential :lol:

It's a great site.

HotelWhiteSox
05-19-2007, 12:35 AM
Looks like some NL teams got off to a better start this year, still more losses than the AL today though, some Day 1 notables:

- Zito remembers why he went to the NL, gets lit up by up his old team
- Detroit remembers the joy of playing STL in interleague (they got jacked up)
- Yankees lose again
- SportsCenter credited Erstad as one of the league's best interleague hitters, hitting about 70 points higher in interleague

IndianWhiteSox
05-19-2007, 07:15 AM
Is there a difference?:rolleyes:

That's what I wanted to know?
:tongue:

:gulp:

FarWestChicago
05-19-2007, 07:36 AM
Interleague sucks, but I don't think it's going away anytime soon.Interleague needs to go. It's absolutely horrible. For most of the league it creates nonsense games. It appeals to the Flubsessed and a couple other groups interested in "rivalries". It's tired, played out and a waste of time.

sox1970
05-19-2007, 08:04 AM
Interleague needs to go. It's absolutely horrible. For most of the league it creates nonsense games. It appeals to the Flubsessed and a couple other groups interested in "rivalries". It's tired, played out and a waste of time.

I agree with you. If I had it my way, they would eliminate divisions and interleague play, and go back to a balanced schedule. Then send the top four teams in each league to the playoffs. But as long as Bud and Fox are in bed with each other, it won't go anywhere.

I love how they say that attendance goes up when they play interleague games. Well duh, they're played in June--the nicest weather of the year when school is out. Of course attendance is higher--because they're mostly played in June!

itsnotrequired
05-19-2007, 08:22 AM
I think most of us realize that interleague play isn't perfect, but as far as "local" rivalries, what do you do? I mean, it's not like it's the Cardinals' fault the Royals haven't been competitive in recent years.

http://westside.wz.cz/imgz/artists/2pac/tupac.jpg

"That's just the way it is..."

Fenway
05-19-2007, 08:33 AM
Selig loves interleague so it isn't going anywhere.

I would like to see them do is play the visiting team league rules so AL fans could get a taste of seeing the pitcher bat and NL fans could see life with a DH.

UserNameBlank
05-19-2007, 09:10 AM
Same deal with all the "local" rivalries. Is it "fair" that the Cardinals get to play the Royals twice a season while the Mets have to play the Yankees?
Didn't the Royals OWN the National League last year? I remember they beat the crap out of some of those teams, and the AL Central as a whole absolutely demolished the NL "competition."

BTW, I actually think the Royals would be pretty serious contenders over there in the NL. They have a NL-style pitching staff in the American League. De La Rosa and Perez have become better pitchers with the Royals. Take that team to the NL and they are 2006 Bronson Arroyos. Greinke could be pretty good over there too. And imagine Mark Teahan feasting on that prime rib that is NL pitching. He'd be a stud over there too, if he isn't pretty darn good already.

Frater Perdurabo
05-19-2007, 09:49 AM
Give me option B, ondafarm.

Selig says interleague play boosts attendance. But it's also because of when it's scheduled. More people come to the park when school's out and the weather's nice.

I'd go more radical. Contract Florida and TB to get 28 clubs. Eliminate the DH, the divisions and the leagues. Placate the MLBPA by expanding rosters from 25 to 27 (despite contraction, this adds six total MLB jobs).

Have every team play two three-game series against every other team (27*6=162). To placate Florida, each team plays one series in Miami and one in St. Pete. (Outdoor cold weather teams make their Florida trips in April.) Schedule no games on Mondays; leave Mondays for travel and make-ups.

Seed the teams with the eight best records in the playoffs.

JB98
05-19-2007, 12:33 PM
Selig loves interleague so it isn't going anywhere.

I would like to see them do is play the visiting team league rules so AL fans could get a taste of seeing the pitcher bat and NL fans could see life with a DH.

I would hate that. I like American League baseball. I like the DH. I'd much rather see Jim Thome swing the bat than Jose Contreras. Interleague needs to go. Selig thinks the fans love it. Well, maybe the casual fans love it. The people I know who really love baseball all hate it. It creates absurd matchups and unfair advantages in scheduling for certain teams. It's unnecessary.

Fenway
05-19-2007, 12:43 PM
While people in Boston are excited about the Giants coming in, I know the Colorado tickets are the easiest to get this year.

I watched the Giants-Oakland game last night and it was one ugly then happy crowd as the A's took batting practice off Zito. But for all the good matchups interleage brings you also get Pittsburgh vs Tampa

itsnotrequired
05-19-2007, 12:44 PM
I would hate that. I like American League baseball. I like the DH. I'd much rather see Jim Thome swing the bat than Jose Contreras. Interleague needs to go. Selig thinks the fans love it. Well, maybe the casual fans love it. The people I know who really love baseball all hate it. It creates absurd matchups and unfair advantages in scheduling for certain teams. It's unnecessary.

Key statement. Diehard fans are going to come out no matter what. It is the casual fan that baseball caters to since it is untapped revenue.

TDog
05-19-2007, 01:15 PM
Is there a difference?:rolleyes:

Royals come into Chicago and outscore the White Sox, but lose two of three. Yankees come into Chicago and outscore the White Sox but lose two out of three. You make the call.

Before the 1973 season, baseball owners considered two proposals. They voted on whether to have regular season interleague play and whether to adopt the DH. The NL rejected both. NL votes required a super majority at the time. I think it might have been 7-5 in the NL for the DH, or DPH as people were calling it at the time. The AL couldn't do interleague play alone, but they agreed to a three-year experiment with the DH.

I would love to go back to the way baseball used to be in 1972, with Dick Allen swinging a 42-ounce bat and Terry Forster hitting over .500 as both a pitcher and pinch-hitter. I love winning exciting 1-0 and 2-1 games. But I know I'm in the minority.

Fenway
05-19-2007, 01:41 PM
Welcome to the American League Atlanta

7-0 Boston in the 5th Dice-K cruising along

sox1970
05-19-2007, 01:48 PM
I would love to go back to the way baseball used to be in 1972, with Dick Allen swinging a 42-ounce bat and Terry Forster hitting over .500 as both a pitcher and pinch-hitter. I love winning exciting 1-0 and 2-1 games. But I know I'm in the minority.

I've waffled on the DH. I have no memory of a time without a DH, so I'm very used to the current setup. I say just keep it like it is. It's not like the player's association would ever give it up, so they might as well keep the NL pitchers hitting, and the DH in the AL.

They just need to get rid of this interleague bull****. I don't like how the wildcard team is determined by who you play in June--and it's not even against the teams you're competing for the playoff spot. Makes no sense. And for the fans that like interleague because it's fun...**** fun. This is about fairness and competition. If you want fun, go fly a kite.

MarySwiss
05-19-2007, 02:18 PM
I've waffled on the DH. I have no memory of a time without a DH, so I'm very used to the current setup. I say just keep it like it is. It's not like the player's association would ever give it up, so they might as well keep the NL pitchers hitting, and the DH in the AL.


Well, I do have memory of a time without a DH, and there was nothing I hated more than to have a couple runners on base, two out, the pitcher due up and it's too early in the game to pinch hit for him. Oh, sure; every now and then they'd surprise you with a hit, but most of the time, it was very deflating.

itsnotrequired
05-19-2007, 02:25 PM
Welcome to the American League Atlanta

7-0 Boston in the 5th Dice-K cruising along

Good grief, 12-0 in the 6th!

:o:

Fenway
05-19-2007, 02:29 PM
Last game of the 1967 season and Boston was trailing the Twins 2-0 with Lonborg due to lead of the bottom of the 6th. Dick Williams let him bat.... :smile:

RED SOX 6TH: On a bunt Lonborg singled; Adair singled to center
[Lonborg to second]; Jones singled to left [Lonborg to third,
Adair to second]; Yastrzemski singled to center [Lonborg scored,
Adair scored, Jones to third]; Harrelson reached on a fielder's
choice [Jones scored, Yastrzemski to second]; TARTABULL RAN FOR
HARRELSON; WORTHINGTON REPLACED CHANCE (PITCHING); Worthington
threw a wild pitch [Yastrzemski to third, Tartabull to second];
Worthington threw a wild pitch [Yastrzemski scored, Tartabull to
third]; Scott struck out; Petrocelli walked; Smith reached on an
error by Killebrew [Tartabull scored (RBI), Petrocelli to
second, Smith to first]; SIEBERN BATTED FOR GIBSON; Siebern
grounded out (second to first) [Petrocelli to third, Smith to
second]; Lonborg made an out to second; 5 R, 4 H, 1 E, 2 LOB.
Twins 2, Red Sox 5.

http://retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1967/B10010BOS1967.htm

TDog
05-19-2007, 06:36 PM
Well, I do have memory of a time without a DH, and there was nothing I hated more than to have a couple runners on base, two out, the pitcher due up and it's too early in the game to pinch hit for him. Oh, sure; every now and then they'd surprise you with a hit, but most of the time, it was very deflating.

But it was special when Wilbur Wood -- an awful hitter, by the way -- got an eighth-inning, two-out hit to win 1-0.

I don't mind the DH, but when they were voting on changes before the 1973 season, I was in favor of interleague and against the "designated pinch-hitter" because the DH really does change the game. Most of the changes people are proposing here would make things worse.

Having to finish as the best second-place team to make the playoffs may be unfair, but having to finish first, second, third or fourth to make the playoffs would destroy any semblance of a penant race. I don't care how the NBA does it. There are myriad reasons why I don't watch or care about the NBA.

Lip Man 1
05-19-2007, 07:02 PM
Sports Illustrated had a small thing on this idea this week. Basically they are saying that the 'imbalance' in interleague scheduling is having an impact on pennant races.

The sense I got was that they think something needed to be done to correct this althought I don't see how they could.

Lip

HotelWhiteSox
05-19-2007, 09:04 PM
Welcome to the American League Atlanta

7-0 Boston in the 5th Dice-K cruising along

Atlanta returns the favor

JB98
05-19-2007, 09:16 PM
The Tigers and Twins have won both their first two interleague games. Same old, same old......

Detroit 8, St. Louis 7 Rolen pops out with bags juiced in ninth
Minnesota 5, Milwaukee 2

:whiner: :whiner:

Fenway
05-19-2007, 09:50 PM
Atlanta gets even 14-0 We were overdue for a stinker

ondafarm
05-19-2007, 10:25 PM
Sports Illustrated had a small thing on this idea this week. Basically they are saying that the 'imbalance' in interleague scheduling is having an impact on pennant races.

The sense I got was that they think something needed to be done to correct this althought I don't see how they could.

Lip

Everybody plays everybody in the other league one series and have interleague only one of every three years. Keeps it special and evens the competition out.

itsnotrequired
05-19-2007, 11:42 PM
Atlanta gets even 14-0 We were overdue for a stinker

Are members of the Red Sox boards cutting their heads off like many on WSI?

Fenway
05-20-2007, 07:52 AM
Are members of the Red Sox boards cutting their heads off like many on WSI?

Not yet BUT if NYY sweeps this week Chicken Little will return. Time to listen to Yankee Talk on WEEI :lol:

tick53
05-20-2007, 09:17 AM
Interleague sucks, but I don't think it's going away anytime soon.

As far as I'm concerned, they can whack interleague play after this season. I've been wanting that for the last couple years.

LongLiveFisk
05-20-2007, 01:00 PM
Are members of the Red Sox boards cutting their heads off like many on WSI?

I don't think the Red Sox losing to the Braves is anything like the White Sox losing to the Cubs, although you never want to see your team get annihilated by anyone, and 14-0 is definitely an annihilation.

HotelWhiteSox
05-20-2007, 01:37 PM
I don't think the Red Sox losing to the Braves is anything like the White Sox losing to the Cubs, although you never want to see your team get annihilated by anyone, and 14-0 is definitely an annihilation.

It also helps to be around a .700 winning %

Foulke You
05-20-2007, 05:42 PM
Does anyone know what the overall record AL vs NL is so far this year? It seems like the AL won the majority but I haven't seen the official record so far.

Fenway
05-20-2007, 06:50 PM
Boston beats Atlanta with a AAA pitcher to hit 30 wins. Now they go to da Bronx for 3.

PeteWard
05-20-2007, 10:33 PM
If you junk interleague you get to see more of the likes of Boston and LA and other non-division teams of whom we see so little. I think it's time to get rid of it and for god's sake lkeep the DH. For every good hitting pitcher there are 20 who are automatic outs.

PeteWard
05-20-2007, 11:13 PM
Does anyone know what the overall record AL vs NL is so far this year? It seems like the AL won the majority but I haven't seen the official record so far.

24-18 AL leads

Foulke You
05-21-2007, 01:56 PM
24-18 AL leads
Thanks.

Tragg
05-21-2007, 02:43 PM
I like interleague play. But just to it like the NFL - play one division every year and rotate it. There's no reason the Sox and Cubs should play 6 times a year.

sox1970
05-21-2007, 02:51 PM
I like interleague play. But just to it like the NFL - play one division every year and rotate it. There's no reason the Sox and Cubs should play 6 times a year.

It's bad overall, but if it must continue, I would prefer a 4 game series with the Cubs. Thursday/Saturday at the Cell, Friday/Sunday at Wrigley, and then alternate year to year. But that's only if it has to continue. I hate interleague play with a passion.

EastCoastSoxFan
05-22-2007, 09:24 AM
As far as I'm concerned, they can whack interleague play after this season. I've been wanting that for the last couple years.:rolleyes:
This same silly debate goes on every season, so I'll just say it one more time -- if you were following an American League team while living in a National League city (or vice versa) you would probably think differently.

IL games are not intended primarily for hometown fans.
That attendance spike that ALWAYS happens during IL series consists primarily of transplanted fans like me who only get to see our teams in person once in a while and a smattering of hometown fans adventurous enough to make the trip.

If regular season IL play stops, of course I won't stop being a Sox fan (or a baseball fan in general).
But I'm going to enjoy the hell out of the Sox/Phillies series here in June (and hopefully meet a few WSI'ers)...

Iwritecode
05-22-2007, 09:47 AM
Who the hell did the Indians have to...bribe...to get the interleague schedule they have??? Reds twice, Fla, Atl, Phi, Wash......!!?? GMAB, you might as well have just said here, go ahead and have 12 games or so. Everyone else in our division has decently balanced schedules but wow...Cleveland has it easy man. Ugh...jesus I hate interleague. Anyone else remember a time when we had a really easy interleague schedule? I know we did awesome last year, but STL eventually won the WS, Houston wasn't that bad yet, the cubs usually play us tough as with any rivalry....

Check out the Sox schedule. As of right now, the Sox don't have a single team on the schedule through the All-Star break that's above .500. Only Oakland and Philly are currently at .500. :o:

PKalltheway
05-22-2007, 09:52 AM
:rolleyes:
This same silly debate goes on every season, so I'll just say it one more time -- if you were following an American League team while living in a National League city (or vice versa) you would probably think differently.

IL games are not intended primarily for hometown fans.
That attendance spike that ALWAYS happens during IL series consists primarily of transplanted fans like me who only get to see our teams in person once in a while and a smattering of hometown fans adventurous enough to make the trip.

If regular season IL play stops, of course I won't stop being a Sox fan (or a baseball fan in general).
But I'm going to enjoy the hell out of the Sox/Phillies series here in June (and hopefully meet a few WSI'ers)...
I agree completely. I made sure of it that I saw all three games of the Sox series here in Cincinnati because it was their first time here in 6 years, and it may be another 6 before they come back.

I enjoy interleague play, and I hope it stays. Besides, every team hasn't been to every park yet. (Example: The Sox haven't been to San Francisco)

sox1970
05-22-2007, 09:53 AM
Check out the Sox schedule. As of right now, the Sox don't have a single team on the schedule through the All-Star break that's above .500. Only Oakland and Philly are currently at .500. :o:

Wow, that's amazing. Like I said last week, no reason why the Sox shouldn't have the best record in baseball between now and the AS Break. 52 wins at the break is my prediction.

If you extend that past the AS Break, the Sox next 50 games are against teams that are currently .500 or below.

TDog
05-22-2007, 12:01 PM
Wow, that's amazing. Like I said last week, no reason why the Sox shouldn't have the best record in baseball between now and the AS Break. 52 wins at the break is my prediction.

If you extend that past the AS Break, the Sox next 50 games are against teams that are currently .500 or below.

As of this morning, 16 of 30 MLB teams are below .500. Three teams have .500 records, so it's possible that tomorrow morning 19 teams could be below .500.

Only 5 American League teams are currently above .500. The White Sox are among them. The league offers them 13 opponents, and only 4 of them are above .500.

If the White Sox win tonight, they will be going for the sweep Wednesday against a below-.500 team starting a good young pitcher who held the Sox to run in his start in Oakland. Gaudin has pitched well against other teams, too. Of course, when the series started, the A's were above .500. If they are below .500 tomorrow, I wouldn't consider Wednesday's game to be just another game against a losing team.

There are no easy games. Not even for the Indians, who lost 2 of 3 in Oakland, which doesn't even field an above-.500 team. The Twins have a losing record against Tampa Bay in their 7-game series this year. Of course, the Twins are just another losing team.

ondafarm
05-22-2007, 12:17 PM
. . . The Twins have a losing record against Tampa Bay in their 7-game series this year. Of course, the Twins are just another losing team.


Not to dismiss your primary point, which I happen to agree with, but just this supporting evidence. The Twins typically have a big advantage over teams which do not play most of their games in domes. Tampa Bay and Toronto just happen to and the Twins typically don't overwhelm them.

INSox56
05-22-2007, 12:31 PM
Check out the Sox schedule. As of right now, the Sox don't have a single team on the schedule through the All-Star break that's above .500. Only Oakland and Philly are currently at .500. :o:Well I was just talking about interleague, really. But if you want to compare our schedules to others....DET's schedule the majority of this season has been a joke.