OT: MLB commish - Las Vegas being considered for expansion team

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
8 teams eliminates story lines too. With 8 teams and a crap shoot playoffs you wouldn't have the current NL central/NL west races. The Cubs/Brewers/Dodgers/Rockies would be lining up their playoff rotations so instead of talking Cubs/Brewers Dodgers/Rockies we'd be talking about much lesser teams vs. each other over the bottom seeds and how it's unfair that these crappy teams could get hot and win it all.

Making the regular season meaningless in favor of the playoffs is a bad idea because baseball isn't a sport that sells itself nationally well other than the odd Cubs win world series after 108 years. Playoff ratings mostly keep going down. People only follow the local team. You'd lose a lot of regular season interest if you keep letting the 6th to 8th best record teams go to/win the world series. You can't play 162 games and have it mean very little. There would be no point in following the regular season under 8 teams make the playoffs. Baseball don't work like NBA/NFL. You can't decide the better team in a few games.

Agree with you on the DH. I also wish MLB would shorten the regular season to 154 games. Without PED's the players need more rest. 162 games grinds everyone down into mince meat.

Manfred lists every market as an expansion possibility because Tampa needs a ton of public $$$ for a stadium(over half of $890M bear minimum). If you asked him if Kabul, Baghdad or Mars was viable he'd say yes it is. I think he knows Vegas is crowded and with $750M in public money going to the Raiders it's almost impossible Vegas will fund a domed $900M ballpark. I have my doubts on both Montreal and Portland. Portland would be one of MLB's smallest markets and is short on fortune 1000 companies(only 7 as of 2015). According to Warren Cromartie the guy behind the Montreal baseball project the Expos would be a small market similar to the Twins and that was back when the dollars was at par. The Montreal project baseball report says the Expos would be a receiver of revenue sharing. See page 12.

http://montrealbaseballproject.com/wp-content/themes/mbp/assets/docs/Feasibility_Study.pdf

I have my doubts the MLB owners are willing to split the total revenue 2 more ways for a couple small markets that would receive revenue sharing. I think the whole expansion thing is to pressure Tampa and keep other markets interested. I do think that if they do expand though Montreal and Portland do have the best shot.
What you say is fair about the playoffs, but here's the thing. Having more teams in the playoffs is the best way to get rid of parity concerns. Fair or not, the MLB is seen as unfair. Would teams take the last 20 to prep for the playoffs? Yes but that to me isn't the end of the world. Maybe we can avoid some of those injuries as well.

Baseball was the national sport until the strike. Anything can happen. Right now lack of star power means it has slipped behind the NBA. I believe if you have a 7 game series each round you can provide more money. And not have the feeling of a wasted season. I agree with 154 games and I feel an expanded playoffs would alleviate concerns about revenue.

I feel Manfred wants Montreal but he feels that expansion needs to be two teams. I don't think he likes or want two teams in Florida. People talk about Charlotte but I dont see where the stadium is coming from over there. That's why I think of portland (and the league thinks of Vegas.)
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
8 teams eliminates story lines too. With 8 teams and a crap shoot playoffs you wouldn't have the current NL central/NL west races. The Cubs/Brewers/Dodgers/Rockies would be lining up their playoff rotations so instead of talking Cubs/Brewers Dodgers/Rockies we'd be talking about much lesser teams vs. each other over the bottom seeds and how it's unfair that these crappy teams could get hot and win it all.

First, the “bottom seeds” comment...

My idea situation would be Four division champs, 4 wild card games featuring 2 vs 3 in each division, winner gets the division champ.

We wouldn’t have Cubs/Brewers, Dodgers/Rockies pennant races? Depends on how they divide the NL (The old alignment had STL/CHC in the East because Wrigley didn’t have lights. They could be in the West now.) You could have CHC vs MIL for the NL West crown, and then MIL as first WC, with LAD vs COL vs STL for 2nd wild card (no different than now).

You’re also ignoring the fact that we’d HAVE a TB vs CLE battle for the AL East 2nd Wild Card when the five playoff spots in the AL are wrapped up now.

(Although everything WOULD be different, because those teams wouldn’t have those records when we’re changing the schedules, so the results would be different).

And I think the playoffs would become LESS of a crapshoot, because you’re making it far more likely that the best two teams in each league meet in the LCS. Because both LDS would have the underdog coming in without their top pitcher that won the wild card game.

This accomplishes WHAT THEY WANT to accomplish with the one-game wild card games (Reward for winning division), but makes that accomplishment mean something because it’s less likely an entire division just sucks.

The economic disparity that exists in MLB generally makes the Central Divisions of both leagues more likely to suck.

Average market size (USA/CAN ranks)
NLE: 6.4
ALW: 7.8
ALE: 12.4
NLW: 13.0
ALC: 19.8
NLC: 21.0


I have my doubts the MLB owners are willing to split the total revenue 2 more ways for a couple small markets that would receive revenue sharing. I think the whole expansion thing is to pressure Tampa and keep other markets interested. I do think that if they do expand though Montreal and Portland do have the best shot.

I think the expansion push isn’t revenue. The expansion push is scheduling and format issues. No one is happy with six divisions of 5 and playoffs system that sees the second best record in the league forced into a one-game playoff.

You’re not automatically eliminating that, but you ARE making it less likely.

Having more teams in the playoffs is the best way to get rid of parity concerns. Fair or not, the MLB is seen as unfair. Would teams take the last 20 to prep for the playoffs? Yes but that to me isn't the end of the world. Maybe we can avoid some of those injuries as well.

A) My solution actually increases the number of playoff teams (4 division winners, 8 Wild Cards, with 4 advancing to LDS).
B) The wild-card game was designed to reward division winners, but the teams fighting for the division title are playing the same schedule… and teams fighting for wild cards simply are not. That’s a fairness issue my concept also addresses.



I feel Manfred wants Montreal but he feels that expansion needs to be two teams.

It’s baseball. It HAS to be two teams at a time.

Football can put someone on a bye week each week. Hockey and basketball play only 2-4 games a week.

Baseball is EVERY DAY. They play 162 games in 185 days. You’d have to give one team THREE STRAIGHT OFF DAYS. And do it TWICE a year. That’s 1/5th of their off days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

AdmiralsFan24

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
14,979
3,896
Wisconsin
I would say sabermetrics did change the game but honestly, WAR is ruining the game. JD Martinez was let go by Arizona because sabremetrics said he was a minor league defender. I'm sure the Red Sox love his 40 hrs.

:laugh:

He was let go because Arizona was already carrying a record high payroll (by nearly $30 million) and didn't want to add another $20 million on top of that. Especially knowing that Corbin and Pollock are free agents after this year and Goldschmidt after next year.
 

AdmiralsFan24

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
14,979
3,896
Wisconsin
We wouldn’t have Cubs/Brewers, Dodgers/Rockies pennant races? Depends on how they divide the NL (The old alignment had STL/CHC in the East because Wrigley didn’t have lights. They could be in the West now.) You could have CHC vs MIL for the NL West crown, and then MIL as first WC, with LAD vs COL vs STL for 2nd wild card (no different than now).

You’re also ignoring

You're ignoring that teams like Chicago and Milwaukee don't want to be in the West.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeCubs

MikeCubs

Registered User
May 30, 2018
189
84
What you say is fair about the playoffs, but here's the thing. Having more teams in the playoffs is the best way to get rid of parity concerns. Fair or not, the MLB is seen as unfair. Would teams take the last 20 to prep for the playoffs? Yes but that to me isn't the end of the world. Maybe we can avoid some of those injuries as well.

Baseball was the national sport until the strike. Anything can happen. Right now lack of star power means it has slipped behind the NBA. I believe if you have a 7 game series each round you can provide more money. And not have the feeling of a wasted season. I agree with 154 games and I feel an expanded playoffs would alleviate concerns about revenue.

I feel Manfred wants Montreal but he feels that expansion needs to be two teams. I don't think he likes or want two teams in Florida. People talk about Charlotte but I dont see where the stadium is coming from over there. That's why I think of portland (and the league thinks of Vegas.)

The parity concerns are almost gone with roid testing. You are worried about a problem that is no longer there. The only teams that can't win are badly managed teams like the Jays and Orioles(Peter Angelos). Baseball is NEVER going to have the NBA's star power because most baseball players decline at 30 and even with a great player like Mike Trout no one that is not an Angels fan is going to watch a game of his because most nights even a great player like him isn't going to do something spectacular. Baseball isn't like NBA where a great player like LeBron James/Durant is great almost every game. In baseball a great player is great over the course of a season numbers wise but 1 out of 162 games he probably won't do something great the 1 night you watch unlike basketball. The rise of regional networks has killed baseball nationally and there is no going back. Baseball is what it is. A regional sport.

Manfred has been very support of both markets and says he believes in them. He knows Miami was bungled by having a suburban football stadium for 19 years then Jeff Loria with the new park. No way MLB wants to leave a market of over 6M with a large Hispanic population open.

He's been very supportive of Tampa but wants a new downtown Tampa park but is confident the owner can get it done

Manfred Believes in Tampa Bay As Market, But... | Ron And JP | 620 WDAE

Rob Manfred had a lot to say about the Rays at the All-Star Game
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
You're ignoring that teams like Chicago and Milwaukee don't want to be in the West.

No one wants to be in the West. But "being in the West" is totally different when you have a 4/4 split of CTZ teams and western teams.

Actually, my "ideal" would actually be four LEAGUES based on revisionist history:
American League franchises before 1960 (Senators moving to MIN, KC Royals replacing the As when they moved to OAK)
National League franchises from 1957, moving on from the Dodgers/Giants relocation (MIL Brewers replacing the ATL bound Braves)
Pacific Coast League, as if the Dodgers/Giants left the NL for the PCL in 1958 (LAD, SF, SD, ARZ, COL, OAK, SEA, LAA)
Continental League, as if the league Mets lawyer William Shea started to force the NL into expansion actually happened (NYM, WAS, MON, TOR, TB, MIA, HOU, TEX).

Aside from the initial "Wait, WTF is with that CBL?" everyone would probably be really happy with that alignment.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
First, the “bottom seeds” comment...

My idea situation would be Four division champs, 4 wild card games featuring 2 vs 3 in each division, winner gets the division champ.

We wouldn’t have Cubs/Brewers, Dodgers/Rockies pennant races? Depends on how they divide the NL (The old alignment had STL/CHC in the East because Wrigley didn’t have lights. They could be in the West now.) You could have CHC vs MIL for the NL West crown, and then MIL as first WC, with LAD vs COL vs STL for 2nd wild card (no different than now).

You’re also ignoring the fact that we’d HAVE a TB vs CLE battle for the AL East 2nd Wild Card when the five playoff spots in the AL are wrapped up now.

(Although everything WOULD be different, because those teams wouldn’t have those records when we’re changing the schedules, so the results would be different).

And I think the playoffs would become LESS of a crapshoot, because you’re making it far more likely that the best two teams in each league meet in the LCS. Because both LDS would have the underdog coming in without their top pitcher that won the wild card game.

This accomplishes WHAT THEY WANT to accomplish with the one-game wild card games (Reward for winning division), but makes that accomplishment mean something because it’s less likely an entire division just sucks.

The economic disparity that exists in MLB generally makes the Central Divisions of both leagues more likely to suck.

Average market size (USA/CAN ranks)
NLE: 6.4
ALW: 7.8
ALE: 12.4
NLW: 13.0
ALC: 19.8
NLC: 21.0




I think the expansion push isn’t revenue. The expansion push is scheduling and format issues. No one is happy with six divisions of 5 and playoffs system that sees the second best record in the league forced into a one-game playoff.

You’re not automatically eliminating that, but you ARE making it less likely.



A) My solution actually increases the number of playoff teams (4 division winners, 8 Wild Cards, with 4 advancing to LDS).
B) The wild-card game was designed to reward division winners, but the teams fighting for the division title are playing the same schedule… and teams fighting for wild cards simply are not. That’s a fairness issue my concept also addresses.





It’s baseball. It HAS to be two teams at a time.

Football can put someone on a bye week each week. Hockey and basketball play only 2-4 games a week.

Baseball is EVERY DAY. They play 162 games in 185 days. You’d have to give one team THREE STRAIGHT OFF DAYS. And do it TWICE a year. That’s 1/5th of their off days.
I like this. Maybe 4x4 for the divisions but this I can support.

:laugh:

He was let go because Arizona was already carrying a record high payroll (by nearly $30 million) and didn't want to add another $20 million on top of that. Especially knowing that Corbin and Pollock are free agents after this year and Goldschmidt after next year.
True. But that tells you why teams like Arizona never win anything. Boston is likely going to win it all this year, because they take risks and don't rely on
You're ignoring that teams like Chicago and Milwaukee don't want to be in the West.
4x4 division avoids this.

The parity concerns are almost gone with roid testing. You are worried about a problem that is no longer there. The only teams that can't win are badly managed teams like the Jays and Orioles(Peter Angelos). Baseball is NEVER going to have the NBA's star power because most baseball players decline at 30 and even with a great player like Mike Trout no one that is not an Angels fan is going to watch a game of his because most nights even a great player like him isn't going to do something spectacular. Baseball isn't like NBA where a great player like LeBron James/Durant is great almost every game. In baseball a great player is great over the course of a season numbers wise but 1 out of 162 games he probably won't do something great the 1 night you watch unlike basketball. The rise of regional networks has killed baseball nationally and there is no going back. Baseball is what it is. A regional sport.

Manfred has been very support of both markets and says he believes in them. He knows Miami was bungled by having a suburban football stadium for 19 years then Jeff Loria with the new park. No way MLB wants to leave a market of over 6M with a large Hispanic population open.

He's been very supportive of Tampa but wants a new downtown Tampa park but is confident the owner can get it done

Manfred Believes in Tampa Bay As Market, But... | Ron And JP | 620 WDAE

Rob Manfred had a lot to say about the Rays at the All-Star Game
Sorry, I meant to say Manfred is not a big fan of two teams in florida, not the marlins. Remember the NFL had to be publically supportive of St. Louis for legal reasons, same here with Tampa. And I liked the steroid era. Baseball might be in the NHL's position without it.
No one wants to be in the West. But "being in the West" is totally different when you have a 4/4 split of CTZ teams and western teams.

Actually, my "ideal" would actually be four LEAGUES based on revisionist history:
American League franchises before 1960 (Senators moving to MIN, KC Royals replacing the As when they moved to OAK)
National League franchises from 1957, moving on from the Dodgers/Giants relocation (MIL Brewers replacing the ATL bound Braves)
Pacific Coast League, as if the Dodgers/Giants left the NL for the PCL in 1958 (LAD, SF, SD, ARZ, COL, OAK, SEA, LAA)
Continental League, as if the league Mets lawyer William Shea started to force the NL into expansion actually happened (NYM, WAS, MON, TOR, TB, MIA, HOU, TEX).

Aside from the initial "Wait, WTF is with that CBL?" everyone would probably be really happy with that alignment.
Agreed 100%.
 

AdmiralsFan24

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
14,979
3,896
Wisconsin
No one wants to be in the West. But "being in the West" is totally different when you have a 4/4 split of CTZ teams and western teams.

No, it's really not because a large number of games are still going to start at 9 pm. No team in the Central Time Zone is going to be happy about that. Maybe we should stick Colorado in the East and see how those teams like late starts. This is really simple. The two obvious expansion candidates or at least the two that are the most interested are Montreal and Portland.

AL East

New York
Boston
Toronto
Baltimore

AL North

Minnesota
Cleveland
Detroit
Chicago

AL South

Texas
Houston
Tampa
Kansas City


AL West

Seattle
Portland
Oakland
Los Angeles

NL East

New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Montreal

NL South

Atlanta
Washington
Cincinnati
Miami

NL North

Chicago
Milwaukee
St. Louis
Colorado

NL West

San Francisco
Los Angeles
Arizona
San Diego
 
  • Like
Reactions: oknazevad

MikeCubs

Registered User
May 30, 2018
189
84
of two teams in florida, not the marlins. Remember the NFL had to be publically supportive of St. Louis for legal reasons, same here with Tampa. And I liked the steroid era. Baseball might be in the NHL's position without it.

I don't think it's just legal reasons. The Rays over the years have had good local TV ratings

Fans are watching Tampa Bay Rays on TV — a popularity that could pay down the road
Rays television ratings hold steady in 2017
Rays top local television ratings, draw more than UF College World Series win and The Bachelorette

and just signed a big local tv deal.

snip

Per SBJ, the 15-year agreement would pay the Rays about $50 million in 2019 and an average of about $82 million a season through 2033. That would represent a sizable boost for the team, which will collect about $35 million in 2018 in the final year of its current deal, which has reportedly paid out an average of only $20 million per.
Despite their low attendance and reputation as one of baseball’s forgotten teams, the Rays tend to draw solid TV ratings. Per Forbes, the team ranked a respectable 18th in baseball in primetime ratings, after ranking 13th the season before. Both years, Rays games were the most-watched primetime programming on cable in the Tampa-St. Petersburg market.

Tampa Bay Rays reportedly nearing deal with Fox Sports Net that would quadruple average TV income

There absolutely is interest in Tampa for baseball. The ballpark is a dark depressing poorly located prison.

MLB won't become the NHL but the NBA is going to kill it long term and the NFL too as long as they can solve CTE. I'm mixed on the steroid era. I love how testing makes it mostly even for every market but baseball is no where close to the star power they had during the steroid era. No Bonds, Sosa, McGwire home run updates anymore. Steroid testing has depressed attendance because of how it's almost mandatory you tank for a few years if you want to win big. Having so many guys flame out at 30 and killing free agency kills the hot stove talk during winter. Baseball is my favorite sport and I barely thought about it all last winter since there was almost no news. With NBA you have off-season draft and free agency moves/speculation football you got mostly the draft and free agency to an extend(though the franchise tag kills movement). Baseball with testing will have mostly dark off seasons.
 
Last edited:

MikeCubs

Registered User
May 30, 2018
189
84
Here's another idea if more playoff TV is a must. Make round 1 best of 7. It would be more fair since more games equals a greater likely hood of the best team winning.

If the current format is kept use the NBA format where a wild card with a better record than a division winner gets the higher seed. For example under an NBA format it would be Cleveland vs. Oakland with the Yankees,Sox and Astros with byes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
No, it's really not because a large number of games are still going to start at 9 pm. No team in the Central Time Zone is going to be happy about that.

AL East: NYY, BOS, TOR, BAL
AL North: MIN, CLE, DET, CWS
AL South: TEX, HOU, TB, KC
AL West: SEA, PORT, OAK, LAA

NL East: NYM, PHI, PIT, MON
NL North: CHC, MIL, STL, COL
NL South: ATL, WAS, CIN, MIA
NL West: SF, LAD, ARZ, SD

I understand what you’re saying with regard to TV times.

I’m saying it’s still ridiculous to have “Well, we want more TV start times” dictating the fairness of your playoff structure (Which is why my AL, NL, PCL, CBL model is pure genius).

What’s the schedule model of 4x4 per league?
18 vs division, 8 vs league, 3 vs rival interleague division = 162 games. This is honestly schedule perfection.

(Or course, one problem with that is each league isn’t dividing lines in the same place (i.e. KC South, STL North; CIN South, CLE North.

AL South vs NL South and AL North vs NL North gives you KC-ATL, TEX-WAS, HOU-CIN, DET-COL, CLE-STL rivalries instead of KC-STL, WAS-BAL, CIN-CLE, DET-PIT. That’s a pretty easy fix though. (And I’d swap ARZ and PORT, personally).

But either way you slice it, that’s still an increase for NL Central teams visiting the MTZ/PTZ: 23 instead of 14.



But the real problem is the playoffs. You’re taking four divisions winners, no wild cards and reducing the number of teams in the playoffs from 10 to 8? Probably not.

You’re keeping the one-game playoffs because they’re TV gold, but.. uh, who wins a division and has a one-game playoff? The two division winners with the worst records? In an unbalanced schedule? That’s kind of insane.


EVEN IF they schedule your way, they should still align the divisions my way and use my playoff model.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
(Four divisions of Four)

If you go back and divide the AL and NL into the four divisions you proposed and pretend the new expansion teams were 81-81 in the previous 10 seasons and everyone else’s results were the same (even though the schedule changes)…

2017: Portland (81) wins AL West, NYY (91) miss playoffs.
2017: Montreal (81) wins NL East, ARZ (93), COL (87), MIL (86) and STL (83) miss playoffs

2016: SEA (86) wins AL West, BAL (89), TOR (89), DET (86) miss playoffs
2016: NYM (87) wins the NL East, SF (87) miss playoffs

2015: MIN (83) wins AL North, LAA (85) wins AL West; TEX (88), NYY (87), HOU (86) miss playoffs
2015: WAS (83) wins NL South, CHC (97), NYM (90), SF (84) miss playoffs

2014: AL division champs are 1-2-3-4
2014: PIT (88) wins NL East, SF (88) misses playoffs

2013: AL division champs are 1-2-3-4
2013: NL division champs are 1-2-3-4

2012: DET (88) wins AL North, BAL (93) TB, (90) miss playoffs
2012: Montreal/Philly (81) win NL East; ATL (94), STL (88), LAD (86), MIL (83), ARZ (81) miss playoffs

2011: LAA (86) wins AL West; TB (91), BOS (90), misses playoffs
2011: ATL (89) wins NL South, STL (90) misses playoffs

2010: OAK/Portland win AL West (81), TEX (90), BOS (89), CWS (88), TOR (85), DET (81) miss playoffs.
2010: STL (86) wins NL North, ATL/CIN (91), SD (90) miss playoffs

2009: MIN (87) wins AL North, TEX (87) wins AL South; BOS (95) misses playoffs
2009: FLA (87) wins NL South, SF (88) misses playoffs

2008: CWS (89) wins AL North, NYY (89) miss playoffs
2008: FLA (84) wins NL South, MIL (90), HOU (86), STL (86) miss playoffs


This system fails to put the top four teams in the AL and NL into the playoffs in 17 of 20 league seasons.

I hate the three-division system because it fails 68% of the time.

I don’t want to switch to a system that fails 85% of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
No, it's really not because a large number of games are still going to start at 9 pm. No team in the Central Time Zone is going to be happy about that. Maybe we should stick Colorado in the East and see how those teams like late starts. This is really simple. The two obvious expansion candidates or at least the two that are the most interested are Montreal and Portland.

AL East

New York
Boston
Toronto
Baltimore

AL North

Minnesota
Cleveland
Detroit
Chicago

AL South

Texas
Houston
Tampa
Kansas City


AL West

Seattle
Portland
Oakland
Los Angeles

NL East

New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Montreal

NL South

Atlanta
Washington
Cincinnati
Miami

NL North

Chicago
Milwaukee
St. Louis
Colorado

NL West

San Francisco
Los Angeles
Arizona
San Diego
No to less playoff teams. And no to Toronto in the AL east and Cincinnati in the NL south.
I don't think it's just legal reasons. The Rays over the years have had good local TV ratings

Fans are watching Tampa Bay Rays on TV — a popularity that could pay down the road
Rays television ratings hold steady in 2017
Rays top local television ratings, draw more than UF College World Series win and The Bachelorette

and just signed a big local tv deal.

snip

Per SBJ, the 15-year agreement would pay the Rays about $50 million in 2019 and an average of about $82 million a season through 2033. That would represent a sizable boost for the team, which will collect about $35 million in 2018 in the final year of its current deal, which has reportedly paid out an average of only $20 million per.
Despite their low attendance and reputation as one of baseball’s forgotten teams, the Rays tend to draw solid TV ratings. Per Forbes, the team ranked a respectable 18th in baseball in primetime ratings, after ranking 13th the season before. Both years, Rays games were the most-watched primetime programming on cable in the Tampa-St. Petersburg market.

Tampa Bay Rays reportedly nearing deal with Fox Sports Net that would quadruple average TV income

There absolutely is interest in Tampa for baseball. The ballpark is a dark depressing poorly located prison.

MLB won't become the NHL but the NBA is going to kill it long term and the NFL too as long as they can solve CTE. I'm mixed on the steroid era. I love how testing makes it mostly even for every market but baseball is no where close to the star power they had during the steroid era. No Bonds, Sosa, McGwire home run updates anymore. Steroid testing has depressed attendance because of how it's almost mandatory you tank for a few years if you want to win big. Having so many guys flame out at 30 and killing free agency kills the hot stove talk during winter. Baseball is my favorite sport and I barely thought about it all last winter since there was almost no news. With NBA you have off-season draft and free agency moves/speculation football you got mostly the draft and free agency to an extend(though the franchise tag kills movement). Baseball with testing will have mostly dark off seasons.
The local ratings are nice as thy provide big money but it means the sport draws during ambulance chaser commercials imo. I agree without abut being a national game but what you say here is why I was never against steroids, without them baseball turns into soccer where everyone is out by age 30.

Here's another idea if more playoff TV is a must. Make round 1 best of 7. It would be more fair since more games equals a greater likely hood of the best team winning.

If the current format is kept use the NBA format where a wild card with a better record than a division winner gets the higher seed. For example under an NBA format it would be Cleveland vs. Oakland with the Yankees,Sox and Astros with byes.
Still want more teams But this is a great start.
If you go back and divide the AL and NL into the four divisions you proposed and pretend the new expansion teams were 81-81 in the previous 10 seasons and everyone else’s results were the same (even though the schedule changes)…

2017: Portland (81) wins AL West, NYY (91) miss playoffs.
2017: Montreal (81) wins NL East, ARZ (93), COL (87), MIL (86) and STL (83) miss playoffs

2016: SEA (86) wins AL West, BAL (89), TOR (89), DET (86) miss playoffs
2016: NYM (87) wins the NL East, SF (87) miss playoffs

2015: MIN (83) wins AL North, LAA (85) wins AL West; TEX (88), NYY (87), HOU (86) miss playoffs
2015: WAS (83) wins NL South, CHC (97), NYM (90), SF (84) miss playoffs

2014: AL division champs are 1-2-3-4
2014: PIT (88) wins NL East, SF (88) misses playoffs

2013: AL division champs are 1-2-3-4
2013: NL division champs are 1-2-3-4

2012: DET (88) wins AL North, BAL (93) TB, (90) miss playoffs
2012: Montreal/Philly (81) win NL East; ATL (94), STL (88), LAD (86), MIL (83), ARZ (81) miss playoffs

2011: LAA (86) wins AL West; TB (91), BOS (90), misses playoffs
2011: ATL (89) wins NL South, STL (90) misses playoffs

2010: OAK/Portland win AL West (81), TEX (90), BOS (89), CWS (88), TOR (85), DET (81) miss playoffs.
2010: STL (86) wins NL North, ATL/CIN (91), SD (90) miss playoffs

2009: MIN (87) wins AL North, TEX (87) wins AL South; BOS (95) misses playoffs
2009: FLA (87) wins NL South, SF (88) misses playoffs

2008: CWS (89) wins AL North, NYY (89) miss playoffs
2008: FLA (84) wins NL South, MIL (90), HOU (86), STL (86) miss playoffs


This system fails to put the top four teams in the AL and NL into the playoffs in 17 of 20 league seasons.

I hate the three-division system because it fails 68% of the time.

I don’t want to switch to a system that fails 85% of the time.
Agreed.
 

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,089
727
I like this. Maybe 4x4 for the divisions but this I can support.


True. But that tells you why teams like Arizona never win anything. Boston is likely going to win it all this year, because they take risks and don't rely on
4x4 division avoids this.

Sorry, I meant to say Manfred is not a big fan of two teams in florida, not the marlins. Remember the NFL had to be publically supportive of St. Louis for legal reasons, same here with Tampa. And I liked the steroid era. Baseball might be in the NHL's position without it.
Agreed 100%.
As early as last year They where talking about getting rid of the al nl and going by regions for example a northeast division with NYM/Philadelphia/NYY/Boston/Toronto losing the Red Sox/Yankees in favor of the marlins/braves whould be a big blow for Tampa bay but it whould be great for the Red Sox/Yankees to have more northeastern rivals
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

AdmiralsFan24

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
14,979
3,896
Wisconsin
Who said anything about taking away playoff teams? I would add playoff teams in the 4x4. Cut the schedule to 150 games. 18 games against the 3 teams in your division, 6 games against the 12 teams in the same league, a home series against each team from a division in the opposite league (12 games) and a road series against the teams from another division in the opposite league. For example, the AL East would play a home series against every team from the NL East and a road series against every team from the NL South. The next year they would play a home series against every team from the NL North and a road series against every team from the NL West. The next year they would play a home series against every team from the NL South and a road series against every team from the NL East and just have it keep alternating.

Regular season ends in mid-late September, 4 Division winners and 4 wildcard winners in each league. Best of 5 series the first two rounds, best of 7 the last two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
So, hypothetically, we’d be looking at:

1 BOS (107 wins) vs WC4 LAA (78)
2 HOU (100 wins) vs WC3 SEA (86)
3 OAK (96 wins) vs WC2 TB (88)
4 CLE (89 wins) vs WC1 NYY (97)

1 CHC (92) vs WC4 ARZ (81)
2 ATL (89) vs WC3 STL (87)
3 LAD (88) vs WC2 COL (88)
4 WAS (81) vs WC1 MIL (92)

16 of 32 teams are going to make the playoffs. And all 16 have the same number of games to win the World Series (14), with zero advantage other than home field going to teams winning 30 more games than their opponent (who could be a playoff team while being under .500).

I’m physically recoiling in horror at the thought of that.

“It happens in football and basketball” isn’t a reason to make the playoff system worse. The goal is a playoff system that is as fair as it possibly can be (while putting a large significance on TV start times and making money).



Four 8-team divisions gives you four division winners, four 2 vs 3 wild card one-game playoff games for TV.

I don’t LIKE a one-game playoff, but 2 vs 3 in each division rewards the division winner; Everyone competing for the same playoff spot is playing pretty much the same schedule, or ridiculously close to the same schedule (unlike both now, and you’re model). So your wild cards are basically accepting “yeah, we finished second/third playing the same schedule, we’ve got to face the best team after using our top starter”


The ONLY sticking point for four divisions of 8 is the TV start time argument that SIX teams in the Central Time Zone would not like an increase in the number of games on their schedule starting at 9 p.m. (which could be as high as 32 in my model if you ignore weekends, holidays and get away days).

CWS, MIN, KC currently have 10, MIL, CHC, STL currently have 16. (HOU, TEX currently have 38, so 32 would be better for them).


But my four-league concept of AL, NL, PCL, CBL “fixes” that by pretending it’s 1957 with 8-team leagues and instead of the NL having two teams move to California and adding the New York, Houston, Anaheim and Washington for 10-teams in each league and going to 162 games; the Dodgers, Giants and Angels join the PCL (which becomes a Major League) and the New York, Houston and Washington form the Continental League.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

AdmiralsFan24

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
14,979
3,896
Wisconsin
The ONLY sticking point for four divisions of 8 is the TV start time argument that SIX teams in the Central Time Zone would not like an increase in the number of games on their schedule starting at 9 p.m. (which could be as high as 32 in my model if you ignore weekends, holidays and get away days).

And you are never going to get those teams to agree to that. Late night starts suck. You think these teams are going to want 20% of their games starting then? Do you think Pacific teams are going to like the idea of a larger number of their games starting at 5 pm? I'll gladly take a few .500 teams in the playoffs over having 30+ games start at 9 pm.
 

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,089
727
Who said anything about taking away playoff teams? I would add playoff teams in the 4x4. Cut the schedule to 150 games. 18 games against the 3 teams in your division, 6 games against the 12 teams in the same league, a home series against each team from a division in the opposite league (12 games) and a road series against the teams from another division in the opposite league. For example, the AL East would play a home series against every team from the NL East and a road series against every team from the NL South. The next year they would play a home series against every team from the NL North and a road series against every team from the NL West. The next year they would play a home series against every team from the NL South and a road series against every team from the NL East and just have it keep alternating.

Regular season ends in mid-late September, 4 Division winners and 4 wildcard winners in each league. Best of 5 series the first two rounds, best of 7 the last two.
the older owners don’t have to votes to keep al/nl if realignment is ever purposed the new guard wants regional divisions not historical ones Expansion Could Trigger Realignment, Longer Postseason
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
the older owners don’t have to votes to keep al/nl if realignment is ever purposed the new guard wants regional divisions not historical ones Expansion Could Trigger Realignment, Longer Postseason

They're ALL older owners. I'm right on the verge of old school vs new school. I like Sabremetrics and analytics; and I like stir-ups, no interleague and big divisions. Hal Steinbrenner (48 years old) is the only principle owner who doesn’t have a diploma older than me.


Secondly, I absolutely HATE that concept in the article. It’s a money grab for TV start times and “more rivalry games” which rips apart 120+ years of tradition for NO ($#$@ING) REASON!

Their “alleged” primary reason for this: a “massive reduction in travel” which is total non-sense. I broke it down on the other thread, but here’s the cliff notes:

1. TRAVEL is dictated by the ORDER of games (series in baseball), not who’s in your division.
- i.e. - NYM going to PHI-WAS-ATL-MIA-home is shorter than going to WAS-MIA-PHI—ATL-home.

2. Their proposal INCREASES the number of road series that ETZ/CTZ travel play at PTZ/MTZ teams; from 98 to 110
- There are 13 of 22 teams in the CTZ and ETZ who’d have MORE ROAD SERIES at the West than right now.

3. The season is fewer games, but the total number of SERIES is unchanged (52). Each series means “Changing Cities” aka TRAVEL.

4. Eliminating three-series road trips and making every roadtrip/homestand two-series sequences increases the number of flights you take in a year from 34-36 to 39 or 40.

5. It also adds mileage. Best example, the AL has LAA-SEA-OAK in the PTZ. That's ONE road trip a year. In Their plan, you have to take TWO trips in order to play four of the eight teams out West.
- NYY to LAA-SEA-OAK-KC-home: 6,647 miles.
- NYY to LAA-LAD-home; then OAK-SF-home: 10,021 total miles. (Next year COL-SEA-home; ARZ-SD-home: 9,927 total miles)


5. You could MASSIVELY REDUCE TRAVEL, while protecting 120 years of NL/AL tradition with five simple words: ONLY PLAY FOUR-GAME SERIES.
4x4x4x4 = 16 vs division, 8 vs rest of league; 4 vs interleague rival division = 160 games. 40 series. 30 flights.
8x8 = 16 vs your division, 4 vs rest of league = 160 games. 40 series, 30 flights.



6. The Interleague rivalries they want to happen more often will shift from “Events” to “Ordinary” and attendance will go down, so it won’t be the bonanza they want.

In 2012, Houston was in the NL Central and LOST 107 games. Texas was in third place, competing for the wildcard. The six interleague games drew an average of 42,000 fans.
In 2016, Houston was in the AL West with Texas. Houston competed for the wild card all year (3 GB entering final series with Texas, who won the West). The 18 games drew an average of 31,000.

That sounds like I’m cherry picking (but really that post was a 14 months old). 32,621 in 2017 (relocated Hurricane Games removed) and 36,918 this year. Still down from 42,000.
 
Last edited:

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
And you are never going to get those teams to agree to that. Late night starts suck. You think these teams are going to want 20% of their games starting then? Do you think Pacific teams are going to like the idea of a larger number of their games starting at 5 pm? I'll gladly take a few .500 teams in the playoffs over having 30+ games start at 9 pm.

The only way to "solve that" is either:
A. Eliminate AL/NL tradition of 120 years, which would be bad for business.

B. Ruin the playoffs by having 4 divisions per league, with the winners and four wild cards, 16 of 32 (some of whom are under .500) teams making the playoffs.

C. Find some solution that let's the Western teams play each other A LOT, while not completely destroying the AL/NL or ruining the playoffs.

This line of thought is how I got to my Four League idea.
 

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,089
727
They're ALL older owners. I'm right on the verge of old school vs new school. I like Sabremetrics and analytics; and I like stir-ups, no interleague and big divisions. Hal Steinbrenner (48 years old) is the only principle owner who doesn’t have a diploma older than me.


Secondly, I absolutely HATE that concept in the article. It’s a money grab for TV start times and “more rivalry games” which rips apart 120+ years of tradition for NO ($#$@ING) REASON!

Their “alleged” primary reason for this: a “massive reduction in travel” which is total non-sense. I broke it down on the other thread, but here’s the cliff notes:

1. TRAVEL is dictated by the ORDER of games (series in baseball), not who’s in your division.
- i.e. - NYM going to PHI-WAS-ATL-MIA-home is shorter than going to WAS-MIA-PHI—ATL-home.

2. Their proposal INCREASES the number of road series that ETZ/CTZ travel play at PTZ/MTZ teams; from 98 to 110
- There are 13 of 22 teams in the CTZ and ETZ who’d have MORE ROAD SERIES at the West than right now.

3. The season is fewer games, but the total number of SERIES is unchanged (52). Each series means “Changing Cities” aka TRAVEL.

4. Eliminating three-series road trips and making every roadtrip/homestand two-series sequences increases the number of flights you take in a year from 34-36 to 39 or 40.

5. It also adds mileage. Best example, the AL has LAA-SEA-OAK in the PTZ. That's ONE road trip a year. In Their plan, you have to take TWO trips in order to play four of the eight teams out West.
- NYY to LAA-SEA-OAK-KC-home: 6,647 miles.
- NYY to LAA-LAD-home; then OAK-SF-home: 10,021 total miles. (Next year COL-SEA-home; ARZ-SD-home: 9,927 total miles)


5. You could MASSIVELY REDUCE TRAVEL, while protecting 120 years of NL/AL tradition with five simple words: ONLY PLAY FOUR-GAME SERIES.
4x4x4x4 = 16 vs division, 8 vs rest of league; 4 vs interleague rival division = 160 games. 40 series. 30 flights.
8x8 = 16 vs your division, 4 vs rest of league = 160 games. 40 series, 30 flights.



6. The Interleague rivalries they want to happen more often will shift from “Events” to “Ordinary” and attendance will go down, so it won’t be the bonanza they want.

In 2012, Houston was in the NL Central and LOST 107 games. Texas was in third place, competing for the wildcard. The six interleague games drew an average of 42,000 fans.
In 2016, Houston was in the AL West with Texas. Houston competed for the wild card all year (3 GB entering final series with Texas, who won the West). The 18 games drew an average of 31,000.

That sounds like I’m cherry picking (but really that post was a 14 months old). 32,621 in 2017 (relocated Hurricane Games removed) and 36,918 this year. Still down from 42,000.
a more practical way to align by geography is to keep 3 divisions in each conference Atlantic Division (NBA) - Wikipedia a NBA like Atlantic division makes perfect sense in baseball with the Jays/Redsox/Mets/Phillies/Yankees
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
As early as last year They where talking about getting rid of the al nl and going by regions for example a northeast division with NYM/Philadelphia/NYY/Boston/Toronto losing the Red Sox/Yankees in favor of the marlins/braves whould be a big blow for Tampa bay but it whould be great for the Red Sox/Yankees to have more northeastern rivals
I would be fine with this but swap Toronto with Pittsburgh

So, hypothetically, we’d be looking at:

1 BOS (107 wins) vs WC4 LAA (78)
2 HOU (100 wins) vs WC3 SEA (86)
3 OAK (96 wins) vs WC2 TB (88)
4 CLE (89 wins) vs WC1 NYY (97)

1 CHC (92) vs WC4 ARZ (81)
2 ATL (89) vs WC3 STL (87)
3 LAD (88) vs WC2 COL (88)
4 WAS (81) vs WC1 MIL (92)

16 of 32 teams are going to make the playoffs. And all 16 have the same number of games to win the World Series (14), with zero advantage other than home field going to teams winning 30 more games than their opponent (who could be a playoff team while being under .500).

I’m physically recoiling in horror at the thought of that.

“It happens in football and basketball” isn’t a reason to make the playoff system worse. The goal is a playoff system that is as fair as it possibly can be (while putting a large significance on TV start times and making money).



Four 8-team divisions gives you four division winners, four 2 vs 3 wild card one-game playoff games for TV.

I don’t LIKE a one-game playoff, but 2 vs 3 in each division rewards the division winner; Everyone competing for the same playoff spot is playing pretty much the same schedule, or ridiculously close to the same schedule (unlike both now, and you’re model). So your wild cards are basically accepting “yeah, we finished second/third playing the same schedule, we’ve got to face the best team after using our top starter”


The ONLY sticking point for four divisions of 8 is the TV start time argument that SIX teams in the Central Time Zone would not like an increase in the number of games on their schedule starting at 9 p.m. (which could be as high as 32 in my model if you ignore weekends, holidays and get away days).

CWS, MIN, KC currently have 10, MIL, CHC, STL currently have 16. (HOU, TEX currently have 38, so 32 would be better for them).


But my four-league concept of AL, NL, PCL, CBL “fixes” that by pretending it’s 1957 with 8-team leagues and instead of the NL having two teams move to California and adding the New York, Houston, Anaheim and Washington for 10-teams in each league and going to 162 games; the Dodgers, Giants and Angels join the PCL (which becomes a Major League) and the New York, Houston and Washington form the Continental League.
But network execs would love this. That's the problem. Of course teams would be prepping for the playoffs in mid August but that's the price to pay sometimes.

And you are never going to get those teams to agree to that. Late night starts suck. You think these teams are going to want 20% of their games starting then? Do you think Pacific teams are going to like the idea of a larger number of their games starting at 5 pm? I'll gladly take a few .500 teams in the playoffs over having 30+ games start at 9 pm.
I guess 4x4 it is.

the older owners don’t have to votes to keep al/nl if realignment is ever purposed the new guard wants regional divisions not historical ones Expansion Could Trigger Realignment, Longer Postseason
I would change some teams around but I like it.
They're ALL older owners. I'm right on the verge of old school vs new school. I like Sabremetrics and analytics; and I like stir-ups, no interleague and big divisions. Hal Steinbrenner (48 years old) is the only principle owner who doesn’t have a diploma older than me.


Secondly, I absolutely HATE that concept in the article. It’s a money grab for TV start times and “more rivalry games” which rips apart 120+ years of tradition for NO ($#$@ING) REASON!

Their “alleged” primary reason for this: a “massive reduction in travel” which is total non-sense. I broke it down on the other thread, but here’s the cliff notes:

1. TRAVEL is dictated by the ORDER of games (series in baseball), not who’s in your division.
- i.e. - NYM going to PHI-WAS-ATL-MIA-home is shorter than going to WAS-MIA-PHI—ATL-home.

2. Their proposal INCREASES the number of road series that ETZ/CTZ travel play at PTZ/MTZ teams; from 98 to 110
- There are 13 of 22 teams in the CTZ and ETZ who’d have MORE ROAD SERIES at the West than right now.

3. The season is fewer games, but the total number of SERIES is unchanged (52). Each series means “Changing Cities” aka TRAVEL.

4. Eliminating three-series road trips and making every roadtrip/homestand two-series sequences increases the number of flights you take in a year from 34-36 to 39 or 40.

5. It also adds mileage. Best example, the AL has LAA-SEA-OAK in the PTZ. That's ONE road trip a year. In Their plan, you have to take TWO trips in order to play four of the eight teams out West.
- NYY to LAA-SEA-OAK-KC-home: 6,647 miles.
- NYY to LAA-LAD-home; then OAK-SF-home: 10,021 total miles. (Next year COL-SEA-home; ARZ-SD-home: 9,927 total miles)


5. You could MASSIVELY REDUCE TRAVEL, while protecting 120 years of NL/AL tradition with five simple words: ONLY PLAY FOUR-GAME SERIES.
4x4x4x4 = 16 vs division, 8 vs rest of league; 4 vs interleague rival division = 160 games. 40 series. 30 flights.
8x8 = 16 vs your division, 4 vs rest of league = 160 games. 40 series, 30 flights.



6. The Interleague rivalries they want to happen more often will shift from “Events” to “Ordinary” and attendance will go down, so it won’t be the bonanza they want.

In 2012, Houston was in the NL Central and LOST 107 games. Texas was in third place, competing for the wildcard. The six interleague games drew an average of 42,000 fans.
In 2016, Houston was in the AL West with Texas. Houston competed for the wild card all year (3 GB entering final series with Texas, who won the West). The 18 games drew an average of 31,000.

That sounds like I’m cherry picking (but really that post was a 14 months old). 32,621 in 2017 (relocated Hurricane Games removed) and 36,918 this year. Still down from 42,000.
The NFL has 97 years of tradition and the division have changed so many times. Same with the NHL.

Here's my alignment (4x2, no AL/NL)

Eastern Conference
East: NYY, NYM, Montreal, Miami, Philadelphia, Boston, Tampa Bay and Washington.
Central: Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota, Cincinnati, Baltimore and Toronto, Atlanta
Western Conference
Midwest: Both Chicago franchises, Colorado, Houston, Kansas City, Milwaukee, St. Louis and Texas.
West: Anaheim, Arizona, Los Angeles, Oakland, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco and Seattle.

156 games

Top 4 in each divison, quarters-semi-conf final world series best of seven. Creates the most revenue.
 
Last edited:

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,089
727
I would be fine with this but swap Toronto with Pittsburgh

But network execs would love this. That's the problem. Of course teams would be prepping for the playoffs in mid August but that's the price to pay sometimes.

I guess 4x4 it is.

I would change some teams around but I like it.
The NFL has 97 years of tradition and the division have changed so many times. Same with the NHL.

Here's my alignment (4x2, no AL/NL)

Eastern Conference
East: NYY, NYM, Montreal, Miami, Philadelphia, Boston, Tampa Bay and Washington.
Central: Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota, Cincinnati, Baltimore and Toronto, Atlanta
Western Conference
Midwest: Both Chicago franchises, Colorado, Houston, Kansas City, Milwaukee, St. Louis and Texas.
West: Anaheim, Arizona, Los Angeles, Oakland, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco and Seattle.

156 games

Top 4 in each divison, quarters-semi-conf final world series best of seven. Creates the most revenue.
your idea with Tampa and Miami in the east makes sense because teams like the rays have snowbirds that make up most of the attendance figures when they play teams from major northeastern markets
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
your idea with Tampa and Miami in the east makes sense because teams like the rays have snowbirds that make up most of the attendance figures when they play teams from major northeastern markets
I was about to ask you what you thought! I think so as well.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
The NFL has 97 years of tradition and the division have changed so many times. Same with the NHL.

Here's my alignment (4x2, no AL/NL)

Eastern Conference
East: NYY, NYM, Montreal, Miami, Philadelphia, Boston, Tampa Bay and Washington.
Central: Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota, Cincinnati, Baltimore and Toronto, Atlanta
Western Conference
Midwest: Both Chicago franchises, Colorado, Houston, Kansas City, Milwaukee, St. Louis and Texas.
West: Anaheim, Arizona, Los Angeles, Oakland, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco and Seattle.

156 games

Top 4 in each divison, quarters-semi-conf final world series best of seven. Creates the most revenue.

The NFL has 97 years of tradition playing one game a week. They can literally do anything and be fine. The NHL has 100+years of tradition and has changed alignments dozens of times. But EVERYONE breaks from tradition in a "dragged kicking and screaming" way.

The AFC/NFC separation is going strong after 50 years. The Dallas Cowboys in the East with Washington, Philadelphia and NY Giants has been going strong since 1970, despite Atlanta, Miami, New Orleans, Tampa, Jacksonville, Carolina and Houston joining the NFL since.

The NHL went from 6 to 12 and instead of geography, did Existing Six and New Six as divisions. They've also returned PHI-PIT to the same division after five years even though it's made zero geographic sense to do so. People hated the change of tradition.


We can get into this in the macro view or the micro view, whichever you like. And I have a few dozen times: Geographic Conferences are a stupid idea that do not make business sense.

Rivalries form for competing for the same thing, not from a map. (Local rivals will always hate each other. Fans will hate the fans of the team in the market that isn't YOUR TEAM, i.e. Mets/Yankees; Cubs-White Sox, Angels-Dodgers, Cardinals-Cubs. But... )

For everyone else, it doesn't matter. NHL Network isn't going to talk about the "Carolina Hurricanes vs Atlanta Thrashers" rivalries. But we've seen specials on the "Colorado Avalanche vs Detroit Red Wing" rivalry.

The idea that grouping teams by geography is going to mean more ticket sales is foolhardy. I've proved it multiple times with multiple examples, like the Sabres' attendance vs opponents, the drop in attendance for HOU vs TEX baseball games when the Astros joined the AL West.

The ONLY positive business effect of radical MLB realignment will be "more local TV start times." Which you could accomplish in other ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->