SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,987
- Like
- 65,552
(Another post I made years ago and have kept in my WORD archives since which still seemed interesting.)
Radical Realignment
I was listening to ESPN radio and the charged up host was asking a series of callers “Inter-league Play: Love it or Hate it?!? Those were the options. I didn’t bother calling in because, as usual, my opinion is more complicated than talk radio is looking for.
As a Mets fan I’d have to say that I like inter-league play because of the series with the Yankees, which are always exciting and intense, (despite what the managers tell the reporters). But, even those series are like glorified mayor’s trophy games. They are not games against divisional rivals. There are too many games that aren’t against geographical rivals that come along with those games. The Yankees against the Pirates and the Mets against Seattle do a bit less for me than Mets- Yankees. There are, of course many other nearly meaningless intra-league but extra divisional games like the Mets vs. the Diamondbacks or the Yankees vs. the Royals.
What I really like is the idea of radical realignment. I’d actually like to see all sports organize themselves along geographical lines to take advantage of the natural rivalries that college sports has thrived on for years. There’s never been anything like the Dodgers-Giants rivalry in New York in the 50’s. The next best thing is a divisional rivalry between rival cities like New York-Boston and San Francisco-Los Angeles. There are many potential rivalries like that in baseball. As a matter of fact much of the schedule for many teams could be taken up by rivalry games.
Here is how I would do it. I’d create two new franchises to give us 32, which would allow for four 8 team divisions, just as the American and National leagues had 8 teams for 60 years. For the sake of argument, suppose the two new teams are New Orleans and Las Vegas. Here’s the line-up I’d create:
EAST: Blue Jays, Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, Pirates, Phillies, Orioles, Nationals
NORTH: Tigers, Indians, Reds, Cubs, White Sox, Brewers, Twins, Rockies
SOUTH: Cardinals, Royals, Astros, Rangers, (New Orleans), Braves, Devil Rays, Marlins
WEST: Mariners, Giants, Athletics, (Las Vegas), Dodgers, Angels, Padres, Diamondbacks
I’d have each team play its seven divisional rivals 14 times each: two 4 games series and two three games series. Each division would be paired up with a “sister” division in a rotating annual basis and each team in a division would play the eight teams in the “sister” division 8 times- two four game series. There would be 44 series a year- 30 four games series and 14 three game series, (obviously rain-outs, as always, could cause some shifting around). The emphasis on four game series allows teams to use their entire pitching rotations, (which with 32 teams should be four guys, not five) against each other most of the time and makes it more likely that fans would see a star pitcher in a series, pe
Radical Realignment
I was listening to ESPN radio and the charged up host was asking a series of callers “Inter-league Play: Love it or Hate it?!? Those were the options. I didn’t bother calling in because, as usual, my opinion is more complicated than talk radio is looking for.
As a Mets fan I’d have to say that I like inter-league play because of the series with the Yankees, which are always exciting and intense, (despite what the managers tell the reporters). But, even those series are like glorified mayor’s trophy games. They are not games against divisional rivals. There are too many games that aren’t against geographical rivals that come along with those games. The Yankees against the Pirates and the Mets against Seattle do a bit less for me than Mets- Yankees. There are, of course many other nearly meaningless intra-league but extra divisional games like the Mets vs. the Diamondbacks or the Yankees vs. the Royals.
What I really like is the idea of radical realignment. I’d actually like to see all sports organize themselves along geographical lines to take advantage of the natural rivalries that college sports has thrived on for years. There’s never been anything like the Dodgers-Giants rivalry in New York in the 50’s. The next best thing is a divisional rivalry between rival cities like New York-Boston and San Francisco-Los Angeles. There are many potential rivalries like that in baseball. As a matter of fact much of the schedule for many teams could be taken up by rivalry games.
Here is how I would do it. I’d create two new franchises to give us 32, which would allow for four 8 team divisions, just as the American and National leagues had 8 teams for 60 years. For the sake of argument, suppose the two new teams are New Orleans and Las Vegas. Here’s the line-up I’d create:
EAST: Blue Jays, Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, Pirates, Phillies, Orioles, Nationals
NORTH: Tigers, Indians, Reds, Cubs, White Sox, Brewers, Twins, Rockies
SOUTH: Cardinals, Royals, Astros, Rangers, (New Orleans), Braves, Devil Rays, Marlins
WEST: Mariners, Giants, Athletics, (Las Vegas), Dodgers, Angels, Padres, Diamondbacks
I’d have each team play its seven divisional rivals 14 times each: two 4 games series and two three games series. Each division would be paired up with a “sister” division in a rotating annual basis and each team in a division would play the eight teams in the “sister” division 8 times- two four game series. There would be 44 series a year- 30 four games series and 14 three game series, (obviously rain-outs, as always, could cause some shifting around). The emphasis on four game series allows teams to use their entire pitching rotations, (which with 32 teams should be four guys, not five) against each other most of the time and makes it more likely that fans would see a star pitcher in a series, pe
