The 1955 MLB/PCL Project

[BigCity]

The Way It Could Have Been, by BigCity

In 1958, the New York Giants and Brooklyn Dodgers moved to San Francisco and Los Angeles in what was a blatant (and successful) attempt by major league baseball to wrestle control the sport on the West Coast from the Pacific Coast League.

What if, instead, the PCL had been integrated into Major League Baseball?

Read the complete story, and check out my plans for a project to bring such a league to the new OOTP 2006 game HERE.

[Mike Donlin]

This sounds awesome.

I too am fascinated by the PCL. Great work--keep it up and good luck.

[jtb]

I like the premise. Should be a cool turn of events.

[dcpcarmona]

Very interesting idea. I plan on going in this direction, but with my fictional league. Enjoy the journey!

dcc

[JoeRockHead]

Great idea! I really look forward to this. I would definatley have an interest in the league.

[eswan9]

Bigcity,

Probably want to check your website, as the lawyers may start poking there next

No BM's allowed

[a1steak]

Interesting. Wouldn't mind taking control of a PCL league team.

[eriqjaffe]

I have a solo league based on the same premise - I originally ran it in OOTP3 and made it all the way up until the mid 60's. I re-did it for OOTP6, but haven't really played with it yet.

Now you've got me inspired, darnit.

[cephasjames]

This is a good idea. Maybe I'll do this for my world #4.

[BigCity]

The organization for the MLB/PCL merger is complete, as well as the plans for future expansion. Read about it here...

http://www.bigcitybaseball.com/home/...viewtopic&t=18

[Le Grande Orange]

I think I have to disagree with your proposal, at least from the point of view of an alternate reality reflective of the actual 1955. There's no way the leagues would have been split into three divisions. With very few exceptions, there was no divisional play at all in baseball at that time, and that includes the minors.

Had the NL had its way in 1969, it would have been a single division of 12 teams. It was only the AL insisting on two divisions which eventually brought the NL on board with the divisional idea. The earliest year that I'm aware of that divisional play was proposed was an idea floated by some in the AL to split into two 5 team divisions in 1968 (which of course never came to pass).

The idea of a single division and balanced schedule were extremely well entrenched in the mindset of the baseball world, so going with a three division format for 1955 (even allowing for the alternate reality of the PCL getting to major league status) would have been an utterly foreign concept.

Three distinct leagues of eight teams each was what was fully expected (though no one ever put forth a satisfactory idea of how to handle the post-season in such a scenario).

If PCL teams are taken into the existing AL and NL rather than as a league on their own, I would say it should start off as two leagues each having a single division of 12 teams. Then perhaps in 1969, mimicking what really happened, the leagues split into two divisions of 7 teams each.

From a schedule standpoint (and I'm sure you knew this was coming ), the above suggestion works well because a single division of 12 teams can play a balanced schedule of 154 games, the same length as that used in the 8 team league years. A 12 team single division sees each club playing 14 games against each of the other 11 clubs in the league (14 x 11 = 154). When the leagues expand and split into two divisions of 7 teams, a 154 game schedule can still be retained. A team then would play its 6 divisional rivals 14 times each and play the 7 teams in the other division 10 times each (6 x 14 = 84 divisonal games plus 7 x 10 = 70 interdivisional games equals 154 games overall). Such a system would mean you would have a very long stretch of "statistical integrity" since the schedule length doesn't increase as it did historically.

This idea also works fairly well inside your alternate universe. You can say how the 12 team single division format proved unweildy and unpopular, and after 14 seasons of use MLB was actually eager to get rid of it and try out a divisional format in 1969.

Anyway, just some food for thought...

[JoeRockHead]

I like the divisional layouts. The expansion format was interesting as well. This looks great. Keep the updates coming! I enjoy alternate history.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by JoeRockHead

I like the divisional layouts.

You know, it took LGO a few paragraphs to get his argument acrossed. You might need to do better than that. Just kidding.

[BigCity]

If nothing else, LGO, you always get us thinking - or thinking again! LOL

I had thought through what you mentioned and ultimately figured the divisional layout would (1) increase attendance as compared to a team not in the top 6 of a 12 team league, and (2) would insure a PCL team actually got into the Playoffs at least.

I do agree that the concept would have likely not been considered at the time - but on the other hand, I can't imagine anyone of the time thinking a 12 team division/league wouldn't actually hurt the attendance figures of the teams in 7th thru 12th place.

What would you think of the possibility of two (East & West) 6 team divisions in 1955, expanding to 3 divisions in (East, Central, and West) in 1969? 14 years of 2 12 team leagues just seems wrong...

[JoeRockHead]

I think the format you set down is ok. This is an alternate history. This could be seen as coinsiding with the merger. The league decides (with a possible kicking and screaming session from the NL) that splitting into divisions and expanding to a playoff format(including wild cards), rather than League winners just automatically playing in the world series, Is good for increased fan interest and revenue making possiblites.Expanding to a playoff format would increase the number of games played which in turn makes them more money. The divisional format increases fan interest due to promoting divisional rivilries. It would be a win win situation for all concerned. MLB,PCL and the fans. Sound reasonable? Money eventually changes peoples minds. MLB would definatley not be immune to it. I think that could be a feasible scenario. Hope this didn't sound to off base.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by BigCity

I do agree that the concept would have likely not been considered at the time - but on the other hand, I can't imagine anyone of the time thinking a 12 team division/league wouldn't actually hurt the attendance figures of the teams in 7th thru 12th place.

Certainly, but then, it didn't stop the leagues from having 10 team divisions from 1961/62 through 1968. Even in 1969 the NL president was talking about how the only proper way to send a representative to the World Series was to send the team which finished with the best winning percentage in a single division league. It was only the prospect of a large structural disparity between the leagues which finally made the NL change its mind and follow the AL's idea.

Originally Posted by BigCity

What would you think of the possibility of two (East & West) 6 team divisions in 1955, expanding to 3 divisions in (East, Central, and West) in 1969? 14 years of 2 12 team leagues just seems wrong...

Well, the NL lasted 8 seasons with a 12 team division from 1892-1899.

But a two division alignment in 1955 is a more realistic alternative (if that term can be used when discussing alternative history ) and could be tied into a demand by the PCL clubs as compensation for being split up from their own league. However, I'm not sure that such a trilogy of huge changes — merging with PCL franchises, splitting into divisions, and increasing the schedule to 162 games — could have all been swallowed at the same time. MLB, as we all know, is generally not big on radical change.

Historically speaking, the earliest reference to a three division alignment in the majors I've come across was a proposal for the AL to split into 3 divisions for the 1978 season. It was actually under serious study, but ultimately the status quo won out.

Given this, I offer this counter-proposal:

Start off with 12 team divisions. This lasts from 1955-1960, or 6 seasons. Much dissatisfaction amongst fans and owners with the format leads to the decision to split the leagues into two divisions of 6 teams in 1961 (and possibly an increase in the schedule to 162 games, if you opt to use the schedule format used by MLB with this alignment. You could go with 156 games easily instead, which would be a less jarring change than a jump from 154 to 162 games. The AL's original proposal for 1969 was for a 156 game schedule).

The leagues expand in 1969, but retain the two division format, with each league now having two divisons of 7 teams.

In 1977, the leagues each decide to split into a three division format (with or without interleague play; without will be easier on your schedule maker).

What's nice about this proposal is that you have some major changes happening in years which had some big changes in real life but for which you previously didn't have anything happening: 1961 and 1977. So that echoing is kind of nice IMHO.

But of course, in the end it's entirely your call and you can feel free to ignore any of my ramblings.


One other historical item that may be of interest. The talk of the PCL becoming a major league was the strongest in the early 1950s. At around this same time was some discussion that if that happened, not long afterwards the four biggest market teams from the AA and IL would leave their respective leagues and join together to form a fourth major league. Of course, the departure of half the clubs from each of the AA and IL would have crippled those minor leagues, and disputes over territorial rights would have been considerable, but is was being mentioned as a serious and quite possible eventuality. This was strengthened by the fact that MLB had not moved into any new markets for some 50 years.

But as it happened, the Braves departed to Milwaukee in 1953, displacing the AA club that had been in the city; in 1954 the Browns moved to Baltimore, displacing that city's IL franchise; and in 1955 the Athletics moved to Kansas City, knocking out the AA club that had been there. With those moves, three of the larger AA-IL markets had been taken over by MLB, and any prospect of an eventual AA-IL major league was dead.

[rogmax11]

You dont know how many nights Ive lain awake juggling issues like these ( divisions/no divisions, which cities to incorporate into the league, schedule length and travel ramifications, etc...). I'll betcha you guys have too!

I like the symmetry of tri-division set-ups, and the regional flavor that results. I like the continuity of statistical baselines that you get with 156 game schedules as opposed to 162 games. Conversely, I like the balance that you get with two divisions per league and the subsequent elimination of wildcard teams. Dilemma! Sleepless nights!! I suppose I will try all those variants, but the one I really keep coming back to, and seem to have no way to implement, is three 8-team leagues ( without interleague play--sorry, Im a purist--but with an 8 team playoff tourney that would of necessity incorporate 5 wildcards in the mix.

By the way, how would you resolve which cities go where in a 2 division 12 team format? And BC, why not change the KC team to Royals and allow the Atlanta franchise to become the A's?

[Dark Horse]

This is a great thread, BC. i'm glad you started it. It's a good way to pass the time while waiting for the latest greatest, or at least a blog or some screenshots.

Anyway, like Rogmax, stuff like this always gets me searching for a pen and pad so i can move divisions around. And do some what if scenarios and i came up with a couple of ideas. Both might have been radical at the time, i'll let you guys be the judge.

i'm assuming that the PCL had some power in the dealings with the MLB and could dictate somethings. And like, LGO, i don't think that they would have gone with a two league, six division set up.

My thinking is that the PCL wouldn't want to lose their identity and rivalries. If all the leagues are on equal footing, why should they be absorbed into the other leagues and half of their rivals taken away? Plus, they would be at disadvantage because they'd be traveling across country twice as much as the east coast teams. Or they would have to take longer road trips.

My first idea was keep all the leagues separate. The league's identities and rivalries are intact. And travel would be the same. The playoffs would be the problem. i don't know if they would've decided on a wild card. So don't the three leagues idea would work. However, a way they could've done the playoffs with just the three pennant winners would've been to have a double elimination tournament, like the College World Series. It could've had the impact of a Super Bowl, except stretched over three or four days. The pennant winners meet at one spot. Seed the teams by record. i say do like the Super Bowl and rotate sites. But the highest seed could host. Everyday there's a double header. On the first day, the 2nd and 3rd seeds play first. The winner plays the 1st seed. When a team loses two games they are eliminated. The last team standing is the champion. i think a double elimination tourney with three teams would last three days, four at the most. A triple elimination tourney would last at least four days and, i think, five at the most. If they do a double elimination, start the tourney on Friday. If they do a triple elimination, start the tourney on Monday. Anyway, you couldn’t do that with OOTP. But it’s cool to think of such an event. I’m gonna’ have to pull out the Ken Burns documentary and look at the fifties era and imagine what an event like that would look like.

[Dark Horse]

My second idea is merge all the leagues into one league. This would’ve been easy to do in 1955. There was no DH rule yet. The All Star Game was big because it gave fans a chance to see star players from the “other” league. With one league they’d have an opportunity to see all the teams and players. So now we have a 24 team, Continental League or United League or United States League. Then you split the teams into four six team divisions. They’d be split up like this:

In the East:

New York Yankees
New York Giants
Brooklyn Dodgers
Boston Red Sox
Baltimore Orioles
Washington Senators

Pittsburgh Pirates
Philadelphia Phillies
Cincinnati Reds
Cleveland Indians
Chicago White Sox
Detroit Tigers

In the West:

Hollywood Stars
Sacramento Solons
Los Angeles Angels
San Francisco Seals
Oakland Oaks
San Diego Padres

Seattle Rainiers
Portland Beavers
Milwaukee Braves
Kansas City Athletics
St. Louis Cardinals
Chicago Cubs

i was thinking either a 158 game schedule where teams play teams outside their division six times. And inside their division they’d play each team ten times. Or they could do a 152 game schedule where teams play each team outside their division four games. And inside their division they’d play each team 16 times. Either way the two division winners in the east would meet in the playoffs and the two division winners in the west would meet in the playoffs. And the two winners of the playoffs would meet for the World Series.

In between the 55 and the first expansion, I’d pay close attention to the teams sharing markets, if one team struggles, maybe i relocate them. i would just relocate to a team in their region. i would do expansion in 1970 and 2000, just so it’d be on even years. Each year four teams would be added and that would that.

[BigCity]

Some really great ideas guys, and I thank you for the ideas. I still want to think about the configuration based on your input - and what I can live with :-)

rogmax11,

By the way, how would you resolve which cities go where in a 2 division 12 team format? And BC, why not change the KC team to Royals and allow the Atlanta franchise to become the A's?

I'd split the Central Division up best I could geographically into East and West. As far as the question about KC and Atlanta, I stayed true to the situation in 1955. I didn't want to make anything happen outside of real history up to the point of the PCL merger.