Smaller Fictional Leagues - 8 or 12 Teams?

[Charlie Hough]

Many people play with large leagues and huge universes, but I've never run fictional leagues other than for testing or as a mere observer. I'm finally getting close to creating a fictional historical league, and I would prefer to keep it smaller for realism and immersion.

The league will start in 1950 and will be based in Canada. I prefer to be as realistic as possible, and given the census figures of 1951, there are only about 8 cities that had sufficient metropolitan populations to support a professional baseball franchise.

That works perfectly for me, but I wonder whether it might be worth it to extend the number of franchises to 12 in order to avoid the league becoming too monotonous and to enhance the overall experience. I have no plans of ever expanding the league, so the starting number of clubs will likely remain the same for the next 60 years.

What do people recommend between having 8 teams vs. 12 teams in a fictional league? Does it make a significant difference in enjoyment or richness of the league? Does it help with competitive balance and perhaps the potential to make trades and transactions?

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

That works perfectly for me, but I wonder whether it might be worth it to extend the number of franchises to 12 in order to avoid the league becoming too monotonous and to enhance the overall experience.

With twelve clubs you could set things up with six clubs out west and six out east, with the champions of each playing in the baseball equivalent of the Grey Cup. There would be nice parallels with the CFL in that regard. Six clubs in each 'division' also gives you a number of ways to set up the schedule, either in terms of play within a division only or with interdivisional play.

[GiantYankee]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

What do people recommend between having 8 teams vs. 12 teams in a fictional league? Does it make a significant difference in enjoyment or richness of the league? Does it help with competitive balance and perhaps the potential to make trades and transactions?

When I do play smaller leagues I prefer 12 teams. With only 8 teams, most of the time I would have 3 teams with winning records (bothers me). Also 12 teams gives me a little more diversity with all-star game players coming from a few more teams.

[fhomess]

I think it depends on how you decide to structure the league. I personally find that 6 to 8 teams is the ideal size for a division because I like to have a spread of records in my divisions. I don't like it when there's a 4 team division with only 1 good team or 2 good teams and 2 bad teams. You also run into cases more regularly where a 4 team division is all good or all bad. Once you go to 6 teams, that almost never happens.

With 8 teams in a division, you start to see the progression a team makes from bad to good more, which helps build the narrative of that team, and in fictional leagues, narrative is the key to engagement. You don't have the same natural connection to the teams or players, so you have to look for it more. Of course, with larger divisions, it's less common for a team to jump up suddenly. I find that appealing, but if you like to have total surprise teams come from nowhere, then smaller divisions might be for you.

[David Watts]

Another option is to start with 8 and as you get to know the players and teams better you can expand. If you use the one subleague format you will be able to expand two teams at a time until you reach your desired 12. I think things do get a little stagnant when using only 8 teams.

[Cinnamon J. Scudworth]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Another option is to start with 8 and as you get to know the players and teams better you can expand. If you use the one subleague format you will be able to expand two teams at a time until you reach your desired 12. I think things do get a little stagnant when using only 8 teams.

This is what I'm doing. I'm currently at 10 teams, although playing with a two-subleague format (using one of the custom schedules).

It does get a little monotonous, so if I were choosing between 8 and 12 teams for a league that I never planned to expand, I would opt for 12. Either way, I agree that going slow and making up narratives is key for a fictional league.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I think things do get a little stagnant when using only 8 teams.

I agree with David, which is why I never have a league with fewer than 12 teams in it.

[Bluenoser]

I run a 4 team league that I'm having an absolute blast with. In fact I'd say it ranks pretty close to the top for enjoyment of all the leagues I've ever created since I started playing OOTP with ver 1.

[DreamTeams]

Love small fictional leagues. You really get close to the teams and players. I'm currently running a six team league that will soon expand to 12 teams with six teams in each division. Actually, it has been a blast following the six charter teams. Thought I'd tire of it quickly but find that I love it and I know they will always hold a special place being the 'original' six. The excitement of looming expansion is fun, too, as the next teams will have to build their stature and legitimacy over time. For me, 12 teams is ideal.

[Charlie Hough]

Thanks for the posts and suggestions. I'm now leaning toward running a 12-team league with eastern and western divisions. I'm now working on the additional graphics required to round out a 12-team minor league underneath the big league.

The only problem is that having this many teams is really a stretch when it comes to the historical population for my starting year of 1950. I'm having to dip into some smaller cities to round out the majors and especially the minors, and this is not very realistic.

Also, there simply were not large enough cities in Western Canada to support minor league clubs. So nearly all of the minor league squads will have to be from provinces in Eastern Canada. And some of those cities are a bit too small anyway. Some have never even had a minor league ball club, even in more recent years.

Ultimately, it would be completely unrealistic to have the concentration of the clubs in Ontario, because the province could never support this many franchises in the 1950s. Baseball has hardly been a consistent draw or a source for minor league franchises over the decades.

But I'm doing my best, and here is how the layout of the cities is looking for a 12-team major league:

Western Division
Calgary, AB
Edmonton, AB
Regina, SK
Saskatoon, SK
Vancouver, BC
Winnipeg, MB

Eastern Division
Hamilton, ON
Montréal, QC
Ottawa, ON
Québec City, QC
Toronto, ON
Windsor, ON

Minor League Cities
Halifax, NS
Kingston, ON
Kitchener-Waterloo, ON
London, ON
Oshawa, ON
Saint John, NB
Sault Ste. Marie, ON
St. Catharines, ON
St. John's, NF
Sudbury, ON
Trois-Riviéres, QC
Victoria, BC

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

The only problem is that having this many teams is really a stretch when it comes to the historical population for my starting year of 1950. I'm having to dip into some smaller cities to round out the majors and especially the minors, and this is not very realistic.

I reviewed the Canadian city population data I have on hand. Curiously, the figures differ somewhat from file to file. It could be because of the differences between the incorporated city boundaries, the larger urbanized area, and the official census area. It could be because of the source; I know some of it is from the census itself but sometimes data is revised in later censuses. I gathered this info quite a few years back, so I don't remember exactly what file was what anymore.

But for what it's worth, here are the top fifteen city area populations in 1951 in the eastern and western regions of the country (with west including northern Ontario), and the top eight places in the Maritimes. Places marked with an asterisk indicate the population is for the city only.

WEST

Vancourver, BC: 530,728
Winnipeg, MB: 354,069
Edmonton, AB: 173,075
Calgary, AB: 139,105
Victoria, BC: 104,303
*Regina, SK: 71,319
Fort William-Port Arthur, ON: 71,191
*Saskatoon, SK: 53,268
*New Westminster, BC: 28,639
*St. Boniface, MB: 26,342
*Moose Jaw, SK: 24,355
*Lethbridge, AB: 22,947
*Brandon, MB: 20,598
*Prince Albert, SK: 17,149
*Medicine Hat, AB: 16,364

EAST

Montreal, QC: 1,395,400
Toronto, ON: 1,117,470
Ottawa, ON: 281,908
Quebec City, QC: 274,827
Hamilton, ON: 259,685
Windsor, ON: 157,672
London, ON: 121,516
Verdun, QC: 77,391
Sudbury, ON: 70,884
Trois-Rivieres, QC: 68,306
St. Catharines, ON: 67,065
Kitchener, ON: 63,009
Sherbrooke, QC: 56,128
Brantford, ON: 52,231
Oshawa, ON: 51,582

MARITIMES

Halifax, NS: 133,931
Sydney-Glace Bay, NS: 104,224
St. John, NB: 78,337
St. John's, NL: 67,749
Moncton, NB: 45,283
*Fredericton, NB: 16,018
*Charlottetown, PEI: 15,587
*Edmundston, NB: 10,753

Certainly the east is no problem. Indeed, Montreal and Toronto are both large enough relative to all the others that one or both could host two clubs. (This is not without precedent: Montreal had two teams in the NHL from 1924-38.) Separating out the Maritimes leaves you an area where you could perhaps set up some sort of little independent league, playing on the fringes of the two big leagues. The west is more tricky. By using Victoria or Fort William-Port Arthur you get six top-tier clubs, leaving Saskatchewan with just one (echoing the Roughriders of the CFL). The minors are definitely an issue, there's a small pool, but there are perhaps just enough. (You could also opt to have the minor league affiliates in Vancouver and Winnipeg share the city with its parent as these cities are large enough relative to most of the others in the region; doing so would free up two cities.)

To put the city population sizes into context, in the 1950s organized baseball classified the minors based on the aggregate population of the host cities in the league. Here is the minimum aggregate population required for each classification in 1951:

AAA: 3.000,000
AA: 1,750,000
A: 1,000,000
B: 250,000
C: 150,000
D: up to 150,000

If you take the above and divide by the standard 8-team league size, you get the following average city size per class:

AAA: 375,000
AA: 218,750
A: 125,000
B: 31,250
C: 18,750
D: up to 18,750

That may help give an idea of where the Canadian cities would fall in terms of them being in organized ball in the early 1950s.

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

Baseball has hardly been a consistent draw or a source for minor league franchises over the decades.

I think you have to make some concessions if you want it workable. I'd take the attitude that in that universe baseball is the summer equivalent of hockey, that is, it achieves a level of popularity with the public that exceeds what was the case in real life and thus allows the overall number of ball clubs you're looking to use. You could follow the CFL example and say the west is more inherently baseball crazy and that's why clubs can survive in smaller markets there whereas in the east the interest is not quite as high and thus somewhat larger places are needed to host teams.

It's an alternate universe anyway, so why not make it just a bit more alternate to make things easier for yourself?

[ukhotstove]

Not sure if this will help you.

Home Page Western Canada Baseball

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...-baseball.html

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...ms-anyone.html

[fhomess]

You might also consider putting multiple teams in larger cities like Montreal and Toronto. If you think about Canadian baseball as less mainstream, then it makes some sense to have your league follow the model of US baseball's earlier days.

[sc_superstar]

What about small regions, that may help out in the west if there is some dense population in a few close small cities/towns

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by fhomess

You might also consider putting multiple teams in larger cities like Montreal and Toronto. If you think about Canadian baseball as less mainstream, then it makes some sense to have your league follow the model of US baseball's earlier days.

Well, that wasn't really a model as much as it was a byproduct of a rival circuit, the American League, choosing to compete against the National League in a few major cities. There were two distinct leagues in operation, and if only one had existed, then New York was likely the only place where you would see two major league clubs. And I'm not going to be running two leagues. It's just one league with two divisions.

Setting that aside, however, Montreal in 1951 was roughly the equivalent in population of Philadelphia in 1900. So a case could be made for Montreal in terms of population, but certainly it didn't possess enough appetite for baseball to support two professional clubs in 1951.

New York and Chicago were considerably larger in 1900 than Toronto and Montreal in 1951, and New York was especially larger with almost three times as many people as Montreal in my starting year. So it's a tough sell to think that these two cities could really support multiple clubs, even if one was in the big leagues and the other was a minor league affiliate.

LGO's numbers on the average population size of minor league cities points to a further issue. The smaller cities in Canada that remain for minor league locations are of the size that were more appropriate for class D or C (now class A) in the past. But there are only enough cities and there is only enough population for one level of minors. So, in effect, these all have to be AAA affiliates.

I suppose that I'll have to assume that the big league clubs in Canada are heavily subsidizing their minor league affiliates. Sure, this happens in real life, but the big league clubs would almost have to bankroll the entire operation for a few of these clubs to survive in such small markets.

To LGO's point, I could certainly make it a lot easier on myself by accepting that this is an alternate universe, so maybe these details shouldn't matter. But I'm a stickler for realism, and it's not something that I can easily give up. However, I think there is a way to make this work (just barely) by basing the minor league clubs heavily in Eastern Canada.

I'm not assuming that this is major league level baseball anyway. The reality is that a league like this would have been something like AA at the top level and A at the minor league level. And that's assuming that it could attract some American players to help fill the rosters.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

But I'm a stickler for realism, and it's not something that I can easily give up. However, I think there is a way to make this work (just barely), by basing the minor league clubs heavily in Eastern Canada.

Have you thought about using complete revenue sharing? Or a real high percentage?

This way you won't have the population imbalance affecting your league financials.

Moose Jaw needs a team. If not in the majors, then certainly an affiliated minor league team. Might I suggest "Breakers" for their team name?

[jb28]

For the majors don't worry too much about population. Why does Green Bay still have an NFL team? The fans have been willing to buy shares and pay taxes to support their team, and to go to the games every autumn.

If you think baseball is not popular in Canada and therefore teams will need to be placed in large cities in order to have enough support you're missing an opportunity. Ontario and Quebec have multiple professional hockey teams so it would be unwise to base an entire division there. I'd go with the idea of putting the minors there, maybe based on teams from the Intercounty and Canadian-American leagues.

For the majors I'd go nationwide, and not just to the biggest cities. Maybe go to a larger city in each of the major provinces and the remaining teams can go to smaller markets. You can give teams in smaller markets more fanatical fans and say there's not much to do in those areas but go to the baseball. With national media contracts and revenue sharing you can make it viable.

[fhomess]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

Well, that wasn't really a model as much as it was a byproduct of a rival circuit, the American League, choosing to compete against the National League in a few major cities. There were two distinct leagues in operation, and if only one had existed, then New York was likely the only place where you would see two major league clubs. And I'm not going to be running two leagues. It's just one league with two divisions.

Sorry, I was referring to the time in the 1870's and 1880's when teams were present of their own accord. Similar to how international football is comprised of clubs that compete from whatever population center can support them.

Anyway, I think you're going to have to compromise on something. You seem to be putting so many restrictions due to realism that you need some other backstory to make it work.

[jb28]

There is no fully professional national Canadian baseball league and for many reasons. At some level this league is going to have to be a fiction.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by jb28

For the majors don't worry too much about population. Why does Green Bay still have an NFL team? The fans have been willing to buy shares and pay taxes to support their team, and to go to the games every autumn.

That comparison is of limited usefulness due to the fact that the NFL has had a large degree of revenue sharing from almost its beginning, e.g. 40% of the gate receipts went to the visiting team, as well as its broadcasting rights being pooled and the resulting revenue split equally between teams. Baseball has a history which places a much higher premium on locally-generated revenue with a lower degree of revenue sharing.