Does MLB have a "weather issue" that it needs to address?

[cephasjames]

The Detroit Free Press has an article from yesterday (Major League Baseball would be better, and less vulnerable to weather, with 142-game season) suggesting that that MLB has a weather issue to address. The author suggests cutting the season down to a 142 game schedule by eliminating inter-league play and starting the season later, giving the weather a chance to improve.

Does the MLB have a weather issue? If so, how do you think that issue can be addressed? Is the season too long? Does it start too early? Does it need more scheduled double-headers in order to start the season later? Thoughts?

[RchW]

Maybe we should look at what we are doing to the environment that causes such extreme weather. The effect on the MLB schedule is inconsequential in the big picture.

[Cobra Mgr]

The problem is playing so many early series in the north. Start the year in domes, Florida & Cali. You can't be shocked Chicago & Cleveland have freezing rain & wind before tax day. That was the norm before everyone started crying about the environment. Give the northern teams maybe 1 series out of the 1st 4 or 5 at home.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by RchW

Maybe we should look at what we are doing to the environment that causes such extreme weather. The effect on the MLB schedule is inconsequential in the big picture.

Unless the MLB can have an immediate-ish impact on curtailing weather extremes, maybe they should focus on adapting to what weather currently exists until the weather extremes can be curtailed (which is what most humans tend to).

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

The problem is playing so many early series in the north. Start the year in domes, Florida & Cali. You can't be shocked Chicago & Cleveland have freezing rain & wind before tax day. That was the norm before everyone started crying about the environment. Give the northern teams maybe 1 series out of the 1st 4 or 5 at home.

It's kind of a no win situation though. Teams in the north are not going to want to start their seasons on a month long road trip year in and year out. Teams in the warm weather /domes are going to beef about having too many home games early in the season when kids are still in school and their attendance will suffer.

Still say get rid of interleague play. It sucks, always has. Move one team from the AL to the NL or one from the NL to the AL. Milwaukee or Houston come to mind. Do the schedule so teams make at least two trips into every opponents city. Example, Texas would play a series in Detroit once in the first half and once in the second half of the season. Detroit would go to Texas once in the first half and once in the second half.

Play more doubleheaders. Even if they have to be of the split variety. Play more doubleheaders. Make roster rules to make doubleheaders less of a burden.

But, in the end I don't see interleague play going away. Ugh! Instead, It think we will see the 19 games against division opponents go away in favor of a more balanced schedule.

Not sure what I think of a 142 game schedule though. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to get used to, but I think I would prefer 154 if the season is shortened.

[Galeg]

Originally Posted by David Watts

It's kind of a no win situation though. Teams in the north are not going to want to start their seasons on a month long road trip year in and year out. Teams in the warm weather /domes are going to beef about having too many home games early in the season when kids are still in school and their attendance will suffer.

Still say get rid of interleague play. It sucks, always has. Move one team from the AL to the NL or one from the NL to the AL. Milwaukee or Houston come to mind. Do the schedule so teams make at least two trips into every opponents city. Example, Texas would play a series in Detroit once in the first half and once in the second half of the season. Detroit would go to Texas once in the first half and once in the second half.

Play more doubleheaders. Even if they have to be of the split variety. Play more doubleheaders. Make roster rules to make doubleheaders less of a burden.

But, in the end I don't see interleague play going away. Ugh! Instead, It think we will see the 19 games against division opponents go away in favor of a more balanced schedule.

Not sure what I think of a 142 game schedule though. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to get used to, but I think I would prefer 154 if the season is shortened.

I love doubleheaders. I suppose doubleheaders might hurt gate sales and tv viewership or something. The Indians and Twins get a 26th man for their Puerto Rico trip. I don't see why it would be such a big deal to allow larger rosters for a day at a time.

[rudel.dietrich]

No possible way that the league or the players would ever agree to lose 600 total games.

[Déjà Bru]

I was too young to protest the move from 154 games to 162 games in 1961/1962 but I am old enough now to squawk about going backwards!

I'm a traditionalist when it comes to baseball. We have been playing (well, watching . . . I need to be careful how I use the word "we" but I do identify with baseball very much) 162 games per season for 57 years. Many career stats and records are now based on that standard of 162 games.

If anything, if we must, then I would return to 154 games because that is how it was for decades leading up to 1961. But 142 games? I do protest!

[Déjà Bru]

Meanwhile, there would be no "weather issue" if MLB were not so G** d****ed greedy and played more doubleheaders as David suggests. The back-to-back kind, not the day/night variety which the players do not like for good reason. What a great tradition that the G** d****ed owners did away with in order to maximize profits. Don't get me started. Well, I'm already started. Don't make me continue, then! ()

[Westheim]

If anyone cares, over here at 50°N we're at 20°C / 68°F

In all seriousness though, how does it help to start the season later? Yes, this is the worst postponement parade that I have witnessed (which is not that long), but it's not like the weather is guaranteed to be splendid during, oh, say, hurricane season?

But yeah, climate change is such a hoax ...

If anything, MLB needs more domes. I can't fathom how the Twins, who play right next to the Arctic Circle, were allowed to get rid of theirs.

Also, as has already been said, there is no way for hundreds of games (300?) to be culled from the schedule. Think of all the $45 tickets, $8 bratwursts, and countless ad revenue going to waste... Before the Rob Manfred MLB will lose a single dime, they will sacrifice a few Dominicans to lose toes to frostbite...

[RchW]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Unless the MLB can have an immediate-ish impact on curtailing weather extremes, maybe they should focus on adapting to what weather currently exists until the weather extremes can be curtailed (which is what most humans tend to).

It was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I should have put a emoticon to it. Overreaction ie changing the schedule in response to an unusual set of weather also deserves a , heck the Jays game at the dome was postponed due to a leak caused by ice falling off the CN Tower. The KC Royals bus was hit by falling ice injuring the bus driver. I've lived here 52 years and don't remember anything like that happening in mid April.

[ForeverRoyalKC]

I agree with a shortened schedule. I know it wont happen, but I do agree with the point of it. The weather is ridiculous anymore. When you have to scrap FOUR or FIVE games in one day for ice, winter weather, etc., it's too much.
Heck, just the Royals postpone a game due to winter conditions and ice hanging off of the railings at THEIR stadium, then go to Toronto where ice punctured the roof of Rogers Centre.

Hey MLB....hint, hint

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Westheim

If anyone cares, over here at 50°N we're at 20°C / 68°F

In all seriousness though, how does it help to start the season later? Yes, this is the worst postponement parade that I have witnessed (which is not that long), but it's not like the weather is guaranteed to be splendid during, oh, say, hurricane season?

But yeah, climate change is such a hoax ...

If anything, MLB needs more domes. I can't fathom how the Twins, who play right next to the Arctic Circle, were allowed to get rid of theirs.

Also, as has already been said, there is no way for hundreds of games (300?) to be culled from the schedule. Think of all the $45 tickets, $8 bratwursts, and countless ad revenue going to waste... Before the Rob Manfred MLB will lose a single dime, they will sacrifice a few Dominicans to lose toes to frostbite...

I was at 64°N last week, Dawson City, and the weather was better than both Vancouver and Toronto

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by David Watts

It's kind of a no win situation though. Teams in the north are not going to want to start their seasons on a month long road trip year in and year out. Teams in the warm weather /domes are going to beef about having too many home games early in the season when kids are still in school and their attendance will suffer.



Play more doubleheaders. Even if they have to be of the split variety. Play more doubleheaders. Make roster rules to make doubleheaders less of a burden.

It doesn't have to be a long road trip. 2019, let the Indians open up on the road the 1st week, come home for a series, then back on the road for a week. 2020, 1 series on the road, next at home, next 3 on the road. 2021, open at home, next 3 on the road, come back home. 2022 start 3 on the road, then 3 series @ home. You rotate it around the league.

Teams may not want long rd trips or home stands in early April. But they don't want DH's either. Yet they risk it anyway. So since they have 1-2 10-14 day trips anyway, why not go ahead & do it early to prevent having to do makeup days & DH's? Not to mention having miserable weather that causes attendance numbers in 3 digits?

[Déjà Bru]

I'm surprised none of you guys mentioned the iceout - at Rogers Centre! Apparently ice falling from the CN Tower came crashing down and pierced the roof in one spot.

Damage to Rogers Centre roof causes rare postponement at domed stadium

Game canceled and rescheduled as a doubleheader.

EDIT: Oops, apology to ForeverRoyalKC whom I see on closer inspection did mention this odd occurrence earlier.

[actionjackson]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

EDIT: Oops, apology to ForeverRoyalKC whom I see on closer inspection did mention this odd occurrence earlier.

*Hesitates, then sheepishly points out* Er...That would be RchW. Actually they both did, but RchW posted six minutes earlier. You may now throttle me for being an out and out pedant.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

The Detroit Free Press has an article from yesterday (Major League Baseball would be better, and less vulnerable to weather, with 142-game season) suggesting that that MLB has a weather issue to address. The author suggests cutting the season down to a 142 game schedule by eliminating inter-league play and starting the season later, giving the weather a chance to improve.

My first thought is that the Detroit Free Press apparently hasn't done any research.

Yes, it's been (seemingly) unusually wet and cold so far this April in many locales. But the postponement troubles in MLB this season pale into insignificance compared to the past. The percentage of originally scheduled games which were postponed from selected previous seasons:

1919: 14.6%
1925: 10.1%
1926: 11.1%
1927: 13.3%
1928: 12.7%
1929: 11.6%
1930: 10.0%
1931: 12.5%
1932: 10.4%
1933: 13.1%
1934: 11.1%
1935: 14.4%
1936: 9.0%
1937: 10.8%
1938: 12.5%
1939: 10.1%
1940: 13.1%
1941: 8.0%
1942: 10.4%
1943: 8.6%
1944: 7.5%
1945: 12.3%
1946: 9.8%
1947: 11.9%
1948: 9.3%
1949: 5.8%
1950: 9.3%
1951: 7.2%
1952: 10.0%
1953: 8.0%
1954: 5.8%
1955: 6.3%
1956: 6.5%
1957: 4.2%
1958: 5.8%
1964: 4.3%
1969: 4.1%
1975: 4.0%
1982: 2.7%
2004: 2.0%
2008: 1.7%
2009: 1.5%
2010: 0.9%
2011: 2.1%
2012: 0.9%
2013: 1.5%
2014: 1.4%

Basically, MLB has gone from having one in ten (or more) games postponed to one in fifty (or less).

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Galeg

I love doubleheaders. I suppose doubleheaders might hurt gate sales and tv viewership or something.

Single-admission Sunday doubleheaders used to be very popular draws back in the 1940s and earlier. As the decades went on that gradually went away.

[Galeg]

So this season the Indians opened their season on the west coast against Seattle. Fans were pretty snippy about it since they were very late games for us, but the team loved it because it was one less time zone changing flight (they have ST in Arizona). Why not just have the teams most likely to have cancellations plays most of their Southern/West Coast games early on?

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Galeg

Why not just have the teams most likely to have cancellations plays most of their Southern/West Coast games early on?

Terminology nitpick: postponements, not cancellations. Postponed games are those which aren't played when scheduled but which will be played at a later date; cancelled games are those which weren't played as scheduled and which will NOT be played later. (MLB these days has few games cancelled.)