OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post - Base-Ball World: A Stupidly Ambitious Dynasty

Trebro · 03-28-2014, 09:20 PM

So I am debating two options for 1876 in terms of the pro leagues, and I was wondering if anyone had any opinions:

Option 1: Abrupt double-cross: Chicago teams with New York, despite the things I've had them say, and they kick out the low-population teams, no matter how successful.

OR, start the American Association early, with...

Option 2: Split semi-geographically (Chicago, Cincy, Cleveland Fort Wayne, Rockford) (Boston, NY, Wash, Troy, Philly), with each league adding 1 or 3 new members, who may cut into each other's turf. So the Chicago group might add Brooklyn out of spite, while the NY group nabs the highly successful new Chicago semi-pro team.

I'm leaning towards 2, to really give this a different direction from history. I mean, there's only so much you can re-create perfectly anyway (we aren't playing in fields, teams can't fold mid-season, pitchers are throwing overhand fastballs, and don't even get me started on integration, which I would do no matter what), so why not play out having a second pro-level league early, especially since my goal is a more Bill James-ian, no affiliated minors world, where there may end up being up to 6 pro-level leagues in the US, to say nothing of other countries.*

One change I am doing is increasing pay for the pro-level players. This will help put the squeeze on teams like Rockford, who should be losing money, not making it. By 1900, I don't think there should be more than maybe 2 or 3 cities with market size under five playing at a pro level across the country.

Anyway, thoughts welcomed on which way the Base-Ball World should zig!

*Told ya this is ambitious!

03-28-2014, 09:20 PM	#38
Trebro All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 755	Interlude: Pro Split Options So I am debating two options for 1876 in terms of the pro leagues, and I was wondering if anyone had any opinions: Option 1: Abrupt double-cross: Chicago teams with New York, despite the things I've had them say, and they kick out the low-population teams, no matter how successful. OR, start the American Association early, with... Option 2: Split semi-geographically (Chicago, Cincy, Cleveland Fort Wayne, Rockford) (Boston, NY, Wash, Troy, Philly), with each league adding 1 or 3 new members, who may cut into each other's turf. So the Chicago group might add Brooklyn out of spite, while the NY group nabs the highly successful new Chicago semi-pro team. I'm leaning towards 2, to really give this a different direction from history. I mean, there's only so much you can re-create perfectly anyway (we aren't playing in fields, teams can't fold mid-season, pitchers are throwing overhand fastballs, and don't even get me started on integration, which I would do no matter what), so why not play out having a second pro-level league early, especially since my goal is a more Bill James-ian, no affiliated minors world, where there may end up being up to 6 pro-level leagues in the US, to say nothing of other countries.* One change I am doing is increasing pay for the pro-level players. This will help put the squeeze on teams like Rockford, who should be losing money, not making it. By 1900, I don't think there should be more than maybe 2 or 3 cities with market size under five playing at a pro level across the country. Anyway, thoughts welcomed on which way the Base-Ball World should zig! *Told ya this is ambitious!