RealGM

Not really a new idea but...

During the Braves broadcast they spoke at length (the whole 7th inning without giving play-by-play basically) talking about a recent article calling for radical realignment in MLB.

http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2015-09-15/mlb-realignment-astros-rangers-pennant-race-mets-yankees-cubs-white-sox-dodgers-angels-giants-as

They were heavily in favour of the idea. Basically get rid of American/National leagues and just have East/West. 6 total divisions, 5 teams per.

Cons: DH/Pitcher, travel
Pros: everything else

What would our potential division look like? Toronto/Det/PItt/Cleve/Cinci (or montreal)? Tor/Bos/NYY/NYM/Det?

I'm not bothered personally. I like that baseball is different than the other sports.

I don't see a huge need for it to be completely revamped.

Anything that gets us away from the Yankees and Red Sox is a plus, not necessarily for the fans of storied franchises, but for our W-L columns.

I'd go with 5 divisions of 6 teams. Obviously some teams would get screwed marginally on travel, especially the south but even 6 divisions doesn't alleviate that. You play four 3 game series against the teams in your division for a total of 60 games. You play two 2 game series against everyone else for a total of 96. You play divisions all at once to limit travel. Makes for a 156 game season. Did my best to create regional and keep traditional rivalries while factoring in travel. Obviously compromises had to be made. Was thinking maybe Atlanta and Colorado should be swapped?

Playoffs would include 12 teams and have the the 4 division winners with the best record getting a first round bye. The division winner with worst record would play the last of the 7 wildcard teams. First round would be a 3 game series all played in the team with better records park, visitor would receive the gate from game one. Head to head record and then run differential would be the tie breakers. Re-seed like in football after the first round with all remaining series being 7 game series.

Pacific

Seattle
SD
LAD
LAA
Oakland
SF


South

Arizona
Texas
Houston
Atlanta
TB
Miami


Central

Toronto
Detroit
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Pittsburgh
Minnesota


North East

NYY
NYM
Boston
Baltimore
Washington
Philly


Midwest

Chicago Cubs
CWS
St. Louis
KC
Milwaukee
Colorado

why do this? don't see a need for it... the only thing i think baseball should think of changing is the amount of playoff teams that make it... baseball has a lot more variables than other sports and any team can win on any given night... for example orioles have a **** record and wont make the playoffs right now... but im sure if they got in theyd have a good chance at winning a series. therefore if you added more teams to the playoff bracket you could see a lot of cinderella like upsets which makes it more exciting... look at how pumped people were for the royals last year... also makes the last few games of the season more exciting as more teams are jockeying for playoff spots. other than that, i dont see the purpose in rearranging the league.

Boogie! wrote:why do this? don't see a need for it... the only thing i think baseball should think of changing is the amount of playoff teams that make it... baseball has a lot more variables than other sports and any team can win on any given night... for example orioles have a **** record and wont make the playoffs right now... but im sure if they got in theyd have a good chance at winning a series. therefore if you added more teams to the playoff bracket you could see a lot of cinderella like upsets which makes it more exciting... look at how pumped people were for the royals last year... also makes the last few games of the season more exciting as more teams are jockeying for playoff spots. other than that, i dont see the purpose in rearranging the league.

I'm just saying if they decided to go more regional and get rid of the leagues. I have no major issues with the way things are now with the exception of lack of playoff teams. Would like a 154 game season as well.

ONe thing I want to see is less importance on the division.

If you win the division you are a playoff team, but you might have to participate in the 1 game playoff.


This year in the NL, if the playoffs were to start today:

Cardnials vs Cubs/Mets
Pirates vs Dodgers

HangTime wrote:ONe thing I want to see is less importance on the division.

If you win the division you are a playoff team, but you might have to participate in the 1 game playoff.


This year in the NL, if the playoffs were to start today:

Cardnials vs Cubs/Mets
Pirates vs Dodgers

That's how I feel too. I'd say the division should clinch you a playoff spot but if 3 teams in another division have a better record than you then you have to play the wild card game.

I say this because I think it's silly the Pirates and Cubs are going to have to play a 1 game elimination game even though they could end up being the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the NL. Follow that up with the fact they'd then have to face the NL best Cardinals in the first round while the Mets and Dodgers face each other and the whole thing seems a bit unfair.

Grasping at straws, I say.

Owners are seeing piddling attendance and look to build geographic rivalry to push ticket sales. Look at the Toronto games played in New York. The attendance was pathetic. Look at the attendance at any Toronto home game, has it ever been that pathetic?

Mets against Yankees might boost ticket sales this year, but what about the years when the Mets suck? If you can't get Yankee fans to watch the Yankees against their strongest rival Blue Jays, why would people show up if the Mets are not in contention?

Baseball is interesting because it is different. MLB watered down that difference when they brought in inter-league play. I say dump the inter-league play to enhance what makes baseball different from any other sport.

HangTime wrote:ONe thing I want to see is less importance on the division.

If you win the division you are a playoff team, but you might have to participate in the 1 game playoff.


This year in the NL, if the playoffs were to start today:

Cardnials vs Cubs/Mets
Pirates vs Dodgers

No, that's not right. It's Mets V Dodgers and Cards v CHC / PIT

"it’s fun, because you know that the proximity of the teams to each other on the map leads to a special kind of hostility that cannot be manufactured."

Really? So because the plane ride was 30 minutes shorter it's more hostile? This is the definition of manufactured.

When they first came out with inter-league play the idea of seeing things like NY vs NY, Cubs vs White Sox, As vs Giants, Jays vs Expos etc seemed like a lot of fun. It lost its novelty after a few years so I would be against any kind of drastic changes for the time being.

I would rather they just shorten the regular season a bit, and make the wild card a 3 game series. Kind of silly to play a 162 season and then have it come down to one game.

RalphWiggum wrote:I
Central

Toronto
Detroit
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Pittsburgh
Minnesota

Maybe my geography is off, but isn't Chicago smack in the middle of that? Much more so than Minne and Pittsburgh

leave things as they are

kayliecee wrote:

HangTime wrote:ONe thing I want to see is less importance on the division.

If you win the division you are a playoff team, but you might have to participate in the 1 game playoff.


This year in the NL, if the playoffs were to start today:

Cardnials vs Cubs/Mets
Pirates vs Dodgers

No, that's not right. It's Mets V Dodgers and Cards v CHC / PIT

I was just saying that if the "Wildcard game" was for the bottom 2 teams, in terms of record (Division winner used for tie breaker). Which would be Cubs vs Mets

I'd rather just have a more balanced scheduled.
I'd like every team visit every other team in a year:
-2 games at home and 2 away for each opponent in the other league = 60 games
-3 games at home and 3 away for each opponent in the same league but in another division = 60 games
-5 games at home and 5 away for each divisional rival = 40 games (for reference, we played 41 games against the AL east before the AS Game)
-2 games as filler

HangTime wrote:

kayliecee wrote:

HangTime wrote:ONe thing I want to see is less importance on the division.

If you win the division you are a playoff team, but you might have to participate in the 1 game playoff.


This year in the NL, if the playoffs were to start today:

Cardnials vs Cubs/Mets
Pirates vs Dodgers

No, that's not right. It's Mets V Dodgers and Cards v CHC / PIT

I was just saying that if the "Wildcard game" was for the bottom 2 teams, in terms of record (Division winner used for tie breaker). Which would be Cubs vs Mets

Ah, I gotcha.

Parataxis wrote:

RalphWiggum wrote:I
Central

Toronto
Detroit
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Pittsburgh
Minnesota

Maybe my geography is off, but isn't Chicago smack in the middle of that? Much more so than Minne and Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh is marginally closer than Chicago is to Toronto. Also wanted both Chicago's in the Midwest. Minnesota geographically fits better in that midwest division but then I would've had to remove one of the Chicago teams which sorta defeats the purpose of the build rivalries thing.

I would definitely have no problem ammending my idea that winning your division assures you of a playoff spot but not necessarily a first round bye if a wildcard team has a better record. Same record goes to division winners.

Indiana Jones wrote:Anything that gets us away from the Yankees and Red Sox is a plus, not necessarily for the fans of storied franchises, but for our W-L columns.

Leaving a division with the Skankees/Red Sux would just give Rogers an excuse to slash payroll.

Current alignment is fine. Make the schedule slightly less unbalanced and away you go.