Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange
Why do so many like four-team divisions? They are way too small. Five teams at a minimum, and six is better.
|
I agree with you, but the problem is while we may both prefer imbalanced schedules, with MLB going more balanced, does it really matter how many teams are in a division when the schedule is balanced? With a fully balanced schedule you might as well have 32 divisions of 1 team each. It's ridiculous, yes, but it doesn't matter. As offensive as an 8x4 structure may be to some of us, when jpeters1734 says, "MLB wants more division winners", he very well may be right. I mean, it's a lot easier to boast about being called a "division winner" than a "wild card", right? Give it enough time with a system like this and being a "division winner" will be as uncool as a "wild card".
What I think might be the key is, what structure keeps the maximum # of teams in the race for as long as possible? And unfortunately, I think 8x might do that. Just think, by the end of the season none of the teams in the AL Central might deserve to be in the playoffs record-wise (I think most people would probably agree sub .500 teams don't belong in the playoffs) yet right now the Twins lead the pack at 42-42 and I'd say all but KC has a shot at winning that division. So 4 of those 5 undeserving teams have a shot and that could very well hold down the stretch. And adding more divisions will only increase the chances of more divisions like that. With an 8x4 structure and a balanced schedule with a handful of wild cards, you could very well see no teams really out of it by September when years ago a lot of teams, maybe even most, would be well out of the race by then. It will suck, yes, but it will accomplish their likely goal.
I'm sure I'm not alone in foreseeing that there are going to be a lot more buyers than sellers at this trade deadline. The Rangers were smart to strike early as a lot of teams are likely to be left without a trade partner by the end. That isn't what I want to see. I want to see a handful of teams trade for some good players on bad teams to make themselves even better and then go on some awesome playoff runs. But I don't think MLB cares about that one bit. They're probably thinking, if more teams are in the hunt late, then more people will watch more games either in person or on tv and maybe they'll continue watching through the playoffs. It probably doesn't matter to them if no teams are seemingly head and shoulders above others leaving us with memories of great dynastic teams decades later. They're all about the now, even if the mediocrity of now leads to fans losing interest in the future.
I hated the As when they were good, but decades later I miss those days. As much as leagues love to promote parity, imparity is far more interesting. I'm not one who wants to go back to the old days of the postseason only consisting of the World Series (that's crazy by today's sensibilities), but I think there should be at least some prestige to making the postseason. And increasing the odds of .500 teams making the postseason just doesn't cut it.