SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Theoretical MLB expansion and realignment
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 20, 2017 4:42:48 GMT -5
www.baseballamerica.com/columnists/expansion-trigger-realignment-longer-postseason/#UCLKsmyhm4HQflw0.97MLB just revealed it's future plans yesterday (MOD. NOTE: THIS IS NOT AN ACTUAL PLAN, BUT RATHER A THEORETICAL PROPOSAL BY THE ARTICLE'S WRITER - CH) when a reporter by the name of Tracy Ringolsby released a story in baseball america. Story featured a number of huge topics- Realignment Expansion Schedule I'll give a summary to all the important topics that is both a part of this story that was mentioned and the part of the story that wasn't mentioned- -MLB would be getting rid of both leagues for the first time since both there inceptions over 100 years ago. Yeap, no NL or AL anymore. This is huge in terms of history and in terms of my next bulletin- -Since there's only one league, there can only be one rule for the DH. Meaning the DH rule is probably coming for all teams coming in the near future with this realignment. -I mentioned in the CBA negotiations thread a year ago to James Dunne that I heard expansion is coming from Rob Manfred after they found ballparks for Tampa Bay and Oakland. Well now MLB has revealed where they want these two expansion teams located, Portland Oregon and Montreal. There would need to be a team expanded to the west as mentioned in this article. Portland has a 150 million dollar grant to build a new ballpark at any point. There's also a ownership group waiting in Portland to own a franchise. -Since there's no more NL or AL, there will be 4 divisions in MLB. The north, the east, the midwest, and the west. Our beloved Red Sox would be in the north which would also be featuring the following teams- North: Boston, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota, Montreal, New York Mets, New York Yankees (MFY), and Toronto. - The Red Sox in this case would lose out on two natural rivals with this realignment, Baltimore and Tampa Bay. This scheduling would reduce travel time between cities and save money for this next topic- -Reduction of schedule. The season would reduce to 156 games in a season from the 162 format it has now. There will be one scheduled off day a week during the whole course of a season and this day will be consistent throughout the year (if the off days fall on Monday's, then every team will get off days on Monday's no matter what during the season). This is similar to what Japan does over in their professional leagues. -Now onto the playoff format. MLB wants one division winner with each of the four divisions. MLB wants 8 wild card teams for teams that fall short of the division crown. -For those of you who want to see the one game wild card game eliminated, well today isn't your lucky day. Not only does MLB not want to get rid of it, they want to expand it. With this format, there would be 4 wild card play in games. Each of those 4 winning teams would go on to face the 4 division winners into the Divison Series. Then the winners of those series face off in the championship series and then the world series. This is all still being talked about, but this is the direction that MLB wants to go. I personally like the DH rule coming into affect for all teams and enforcing one rule throughout the game. It's good for players safety and it makes for a more competitive game. This is also good for the players because it creates more jobs with the DH rule in affect. What's also great for players safety is the guaranteed one off day a week every week on a certain day. It'll give starting pitchers more rest which could lead to less Tommy John surgeries in the future. It stinks a little that the league wants to get rid of both leagues because of the history, but I'm all for modernizing baseball today in a format more recognizable compared to other sports like basketball and football. It also stinks that we won't get to root against Baltimore and Tampa Bay as much, but I can see myself hating Cleveland and the Mets really quickly. In fact, I wasn't even born in 1986, and it makes me mad just thinking about losing to the Mets that year. I also hate the fact that it's almost twice as hard to win the division if this were to come into affect. You would have to build an absolute force of a team to win back to back division titles in this format. I guess MLB would win though with them wanting to create yet even more parity throughout the game. This format would certainly do just that, create a ton of parity. I love the expansion part, I have never been a part of a expansion off-season before. I started watching baseball in the middle of 1998 and Tampa Bay was already in the league by then. That part will be especially fun from my perspective. I wonder how MLB would allow the expansion teams to acquire players and maybe even prospects from other organizations in this day and age. Sorry for the long post, but it was worth the long write up. All of this is interesting and cool stuff. I don't think we are close to all of this happening. I think it might be at least 5-10 years away, but it's interesting to see what MLB will look like in 10 years in terms of this format.
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 20, 2017 5:00:10 GMT -5
Back to a 154 game regular season makes more sense. 7*22=154.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 20, 2017 6:17:45 GMT -5
This is probably going to be a minority opinion, but I am 100% on board with this entire plan.
The biggest drawback would be the loss of the AL and NL which of course has so much history attached. But I think the biggest mistake MLB made in the last 25 years was to diminish the challenge of winning the division with fewer teams in each. As a kid I loved the pennant races that evolved over the course of the summer with the 7-8 team divisions, and getting that back would return a very important part of the game's appeal. And the two leagues were born out of pure business decisions 100+ years ago, it was not part of some brilliant planning or anything.
Some incredible natural rivalries would develop all over the country - Dodgers v Angels, Rays v Marlins, Nationals v Orioles, Royals v Cardinals, etc. Even the Sox would pick up another big rival in the Mets.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 20, 2017 6:22:10 GMT -5
24 games against each divisional team can't be right - 7 teams to play X 24 = 168 games played without playing anyone else in the league.
|
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 20, 2017 6:46:37 GMT -5
This is probably going to be a minority opinion, but I am 100% on board with this entire plan. The biggest drawback would be the loss of the AL and NL which of course has so much history attached. But I think the biggest mistake MLB made in the last 25 years was to diminish the challenge of winning the division with fewer teams in each. As a kid I loved the pennant races that evolved over the course of the summer with the 7-8 team divisions, and getting that back would return a very important part of the game's appeal. And the two leagues were born out of pure business decisions 100+ years ago, it was not part of some brilliant planning or anything. Some incredible natural rivalries would develop all over the country - Dodgers v Angels, Rays v Marlins, Nationals v Orioles, Royals v Cardinals, etc. Even the Sox would pick up another big rival in the Mets. Agree here, especially in light of eliminating having to watch pitchers hit. We'd also pick up Montreal as a rival and going to a 154 game format would allow for the extra round of playoffs. I wonder though if teams will go to 6 man rotations. |
|
|
|
Post by SALNotes on Oct 20, 2017 7:24:03 GMT -5
I like it too, I'd be surprised if the owners are fully on board though, they'd lose some gate and the NL owners will have to pony up for DH's
It's kind of radical, I've thought for a while that 2, 16 team leagues made a lot of sense. Get away from this endless interleague
|
|
|
|
Post by greekgodofpancakes on Oct 20, 2017 7:33:01 GMT -5
24 total games against the 8teams in each of the other divisions (3 games vs. each other team)
12 games (6 home / 6 away) against division opponents.
|
|
|
|
Post by artfuldodger on Oct 20, 2017 7:46:36 GMT -5
I like the plan except for the loss of the leagues. I wonder what will become of the all star game?
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,654
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 20, 2017 7:49:57 GMT -5
It would be a 156 game season.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 20, 2017 8:05:45 GMT -5
24 total games against the 8teams in each of the other divisions (3 games vs. each other team) 12 games (6 home / 6 away) against division opponents. FINAL EDIT: I'm an idiot, re-read the article. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 20, 2017 8:10:03 GMT -5
Someday, we'll have a WS winner that was under .500.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 20, 2017 8:12:55 GMT -5
Expansion is so obvious. The 15-team leagues and constant interleague goings-on is dreadful. I'm actually surprised the expansion part of this plan hasn't happened faster. There are a ton of potential markets: Montreal, Charlotte, Indianapolis (check out their Triple-A attendance over the years), Portland - not to mention the idea of getting the Mets and Yankees to agree to a team(s) in Brooklyn and/or North NJ.
Some sort of realignment will almost necessarily follow, but I don't buy the radical plan. The American League vs. National League set up has been a pretty huge success, historically, right? Sure, it developed out of convention rather than a master plan, but does that matter if the convention works?
Anywhere, here's my thought, based on the rumored Montreal and Portland destinations:
AL East (North?)
Boston
New York
Toronto
Montreal
AL Central
Detroit
Minnesota
Cleveland
Chicago
AL West
LAAOA
Seattle
Oakland
Portland
AL South
Houston
Texas
Arizona
Kansas City
-------
NL East
Washington
Philadelphia
New York
Baltimore
NL South
Cincinnati
Miami
Tampa Bay
Atlanta
NL Central
Chicago
St. Louis
Milwaukee
Pittsburgh
NL West
Colorado
San Diego
San Francisco
Los Angeles
The biggest drawback is probably going to be sticking either Pittsburgh and Cincinnati in the NL South rather than Central. I've been to both cities, and Cincinnati is culturally the south while Pittsburgh definitely is not. Chicago/St.Louis/Pittsbugh were also in the old NL East together while Cincinnati was in the West with Atlanta, so there's some history there as well.
I'd send all eight division winners to the playoffs and ditch the wild card. That probably won't happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 20, 2017 8:35:14 GMT -5
When I read the OP, I was under the impression that this was what MLB's plans were, but I don't think that's the case as stated in the article.
It's just a proposal by who knows who. It doesn't name the source, though it names Mansfred as the source for the expansion plans. I wish journalism were still taught in college.
Building consensus and proposal from an unnamed source does not mean that these are MBL's plans. And it's way too specific. It sounds to me like it's the writer's proposal.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 20, 2017 8:48:08 GMT -5
The wild card won't be ditched for sure...especially with a shorter season. Money talks. I guess expansion is inevitable but fans of poorer teams may not get to see a championship in their life times. Hey I grew up with 8 teams in each league...hope did spring eternal then.
I am in favor of shortening the season by giving more rest, helping to prevent injury and encouraging recoveries. The quality of play might be enhanced too.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 20, 2017 9:17:47 GMT -5
The wild card won't be ditched for sure...especially with a shorter season. Money talks. I guess expansion is inevitable but fans of poorer teams may not get to see a championship in their life times. Hey I grew up with 8 teams in each league...hope did spring eternal then. There hasn't been a repeat champion in 17 years and counting. New York teams won every title from 1949 to 1956, and one from 2001 to present. A team has more hope of building a winner now than it ever has. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 20, 2017 10:14:45 GMT -5
When I read the OP, I was under the impression that this was what MLB's plans were, but I don't think that's the case as stated in the article. It's just a proposal by who knows who. It doesn't name the source, though it names Mansfred as the source for the expansion plans. I wish journalism were still taught in college. Building consensus and proposal from an unnamed source does not mean that these are MBL's plans. And it's way too specific. It sounds to me like it's the writer's proposal. Yeah definitely nothing set in stone or final yet, but I got the impression that this plan is definitely a part of their plans because of all the minor details in it. MLB has had no problem leaking out stories like this just for the anticipation and build up of everything. You could be 100 percent right on this one though. |
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 20, 2017 10:16:25 GMT -5
24 total games against the 8teams in each of the other divisions (3 games vs. each other team) 12 games (6 home / 6 away) against division opponents. Yeah thanks for the correction. I totally missed that point lol. I thought my numbers could be a little off. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 20, 2017 10:58:28 GMT -5
OK, enormous, enormous correction here - this is NOT AN ACTUAL PLAN PUT FORTH BY MLB.
Read the article. This is Ringolsby (who's not just some schmoe, as seems to be the suggestion in the top post - he's a former president of the BBWAA and kind of a luminary among baseball writers) proposing an idea based on "One proposal ... to geographically restructure into four divisions".
Manfred has come out and said there won't be expansion until the A's and Rays get new stadiums. This makes perfect sense, because they need places like Montreal as potential destinations if those clubs don't get new parks, or at least for the threat of moving.
EDIT: All that said.... definitely a fun thing to speculate about. But again, this isn't an actual thing yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by swingingbunt on Oct 20, 2017 11:46:42 GMT -5
I don't see this proposal going anywhere. Having four divisions with 8 teams each means half those teams are out of the race by July. Like it or not, it would probably look more like the NFL's eight divisions with 4 teams each.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,654
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 20, 2017 12:52:19 GMT -5
One thing I saw about the proposal which thanks for clarifying is Ringolsby's proposal, not MLB, is that in his scenario I don't see a way to determine which teams play each other in the World Series, unless I misread it.
I mean we know the AL champion plays the NL champion, but if you do away with the league distinctions, what do you go by? Is his the Winner of the East/North vs South/West? Or whatever?
I think you still need to keep the league distinctions.
You wind up with 8 divisions of 4 teams each or 4 divisions of 8 teams. I'm old school, would prefer no wild card, and go with the division winners, but that's not going to fly these days, so I would suspect they would go with 8 division winners and no wild card or go with 4 divisions of 8 teams and have 4 division winners and the best 4 teams that didn't win the division in each league?
Either way, once they get to 32 teams, it is pretty obvious something will need to change.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 20, 2017 19:54:41 GMT -5
The wild card won't be ditched for sure...especially with a shorter season. Money talks. I guess expansion is inevitable but fans of poorer teams may not get to see a championship in their life times. Hey I grew up with 8 teams in each league...hope did spring eternal then. There hasn't been a repeat champion in 17 years and counting. New York teams won every title from 1949 to 1956, and one from 2001 to present. A team has more hope of building a winner now than it ever has. MLB has worked hard to create greater competitive balance. It will never be perfect. The more teams added, the less likelihood of seeing a home town champion. It there were absolute parity, a championship every 32 years would be about right. With inequities, lower rung teams may not achieve that. No one can predict what MLB will do in the future to alter things so my less enthusiastic view is based on today. If Sox fans could expect a win every 30 years or so...Oooff. |
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871 
|
Post by danr on Oct 20, 2017 22:32:33 GMT -5
Ringolsby and I were contemporaries in United Press International a long time ago. I think he probably is on to something. Manfred was in Seattle last week and was asked about the chances of Portland getting a franchise. He said something to the effect, that it was likely in the next expansion. Portland is one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Right now it is about the size of Baltimore. The economy in Oregon is booming with thousands of unfilled jobs available. There is a huge housing shortage and we now are among the highest priced housing market. There are something like 30 or more highrise apartment buildings under construction in the city. We're also overdue for a massive earthquake that will destroy both Seattle and Portland...
The present mayor of Portland, who is a bit of a jerk, responded to the Manfred report by saying he would welcome a major league baseball team but the city would not provide any financial assistance. The major league soccer and basketball teams here are very successful. They would have to build a domed stadium since it doesn't stop raining here until July and it resumes in mid October. We're supposed to get maybe 4 inches in the next two days.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheers on Oct 21, 2017 2:33:35 GMT -5
While Portland seems like a good expansion target on paper, the reality is that it isn't likely to be much of a baseball town. The AAA team (that was evicted to make way for MLS -yawn) really didn't do much. MLS works downtown because youngish Portlanders fancy themselves as quasi-euro. MLB is unlikely to strike that chord.
Also, the Mariners would HAVE to fight it kicking and screaming. That really nice park they play in only gets 2/3 full if the Sox or MFY are in town. A Portland team would shrink their TV market, if nothing else.
Seems like MLB might be smarter to go in the other direction. There really are a couple of franchises that are barely viable.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Oct 21, 2017 13:53:47 GMT -5
There's a big difference between a triple A team in a ballpark with no parking and a major league team in a modern stadium. Portland is a rapidly changing city, much different from just a few years ago. There has been a huge influx of people from California and elsewhere. There is a big appetite for entertainment. I suspect a big league team would do just fine. I don't sense much of a fan base for Seattle. Baseball is a big sport here and U of Oregon and Oregon State produce major league players. Traffic congestion is a big problem and locating a new stadium with good highway and transit access would be a significant factor in the team's success.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Oct 21, 2017 19:06:49 GMT -5
The new alignment could be completely different and MLB might still even keep both leagues in some way but I do think a lot of this will come to fruition.
-I think the DH rule is coming for both leagues
-I think MLB is really pushing for Portland and Montreal in expansion. Oakland has already found a new site for a ballpark and Tampa is trying to look for a new site in Tampa at the moment. Tampa is the team that could move to Montreal, but MLB is going to do everything in their power to try and keep it in Tampa first.
-I do think that MLB will push for more wildcard teams and games. Ratings are way up for those games and it raises interest. That's what really matters to them.
|
|
|
