Sources: MLB, players talk realignment

mrdrewblue · 06-11-2011, 03:01 PM

MLB talks switching National League team to American League, sources say - ESPN

Wouldn't have expected to hear this, but I guess with the ten team playoff talk, something may happen.

Thoughts?

Also, does anyone do this to their league in OOTP?
Experiences?

cblacker · 06-11-2011, 03:08 PM

Not a big fan of the whole idea. It would be quite drastic. It would appear that some sort of change is coming, but I predict something a bit more conventional.

TDO · 06-11-2011, 03:12 PM

Don't like it one bit. 15 team leagues is too big. At least two 4 division in my opinion. Just seems silly like why not just have a giant 30 team league and top 10 spots make it?

The Wolf · 06-11-2011, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TDO

Don't like it one bit. 15 team leagues is too big. At least two 4 division in my opinion. Just seems silly like why not just have a giant 30 team league and top 10 spots make it?

That's probably coming sooner than any of us would like to think. Something like that may even be inevitable.

oman19 · 06-11-2011, 04:03 PM

Not kidding. Have said it in many posts in the pasts. The universe I create I go to 15 team teams in each league. Although I keep the divisions. The team I move from the NL to the AL .....the Houston Astros. About time. If I can think of it why couldn't they.

I have each team play 5 interleague series each year. Which division you play is just like the NFL. The AL east plays the NL east one year, the NL central the next, then the NL west, then repeat. Thus making the inter-city/state matchups that occur from interleague play more special because they only happen every 3 years.

The all-star break they play the only 4 game series against the opposite league and it's 2 home and 2 away against the same team.

Now if I can only get a salary cap and have ootp and MLB adopt a slary floor, along with having the DH in the NL it would be my perfect universe! LOL.

OMAN FOR MLB COMMISH!!!!!!

kq76 · 06-11-2011, 04:17 PM

There's something very appealing to me about having leagues with no divisions. If you also go to a balanced schedule you're more guaranteed to have the best teams in the playoffs and you get a much better idea of who is better than whom. I guess the one downside is, as LGO pointed out to me, a 12th place team is most likely pretty difficult to market to the fans whereas while a 6th might not be easy to market, it's probably at least easier.

Le Grande Orange · 06-11-2011, 04:42 PM

The way I read the article it seems the most likely thing is they're talking about having six 5-team divisions, which would eliminate the imbalance of a 5-5-4 AL and a 5-6-5 NL.

With three 5-team divisions in each league, many of the scheduling inequities that exist now could be eliminated, and more sane schedules constructed. For example, every club could play 72 games in its division (18 against each opponent); 72 games against the other clubs in the league (two clubs 8 times and the other eight 7 times each); 15 games against one of the divisions in the other league (3 against each team); and lastly 3 games against a 'traditional' interleague rival.

Interleague games could be cleanly and evenly rotated under such a system. And when corresponding divisions play, clubs would have 6 games against the 'traditional' rival that season (e.g. when AL East plays NL East, the Yankees and Mets play 6 times that year; in other years they play only 3. Home field for that one series can be alternated each year.)

The reason why the 5-5-5 alignment in each league wasn't adopted back in 1998 was because MLB wanted interleague games to only happen in specific parts of the season. With 15-team leagues, interleague series have to happen throughout the season. But now that interleague games have been played for fifteen seasons, everyone is used to them, so the argument that they need to be restricted to only certain parts of the season seems less persuasive.

The objection raised in the article...

Quote:

A sticking point involves interleague play. Because of the odd number of teams in each league, it is possible that a team in contention late in the season will have to be playing its final games in interleague play.

... doesn't really hold water I don't think. What's the effective difference between a club playing its final three games of the season against an interleague opponent as opposed to a interdivisional opponent? None. Either one or both clubs are in contention for the post-season or they're not. If one or both are, then the games matter regardless of the opponent. So the fact that the clubs playing the games may be in separate leagues doesn't really seem a detriment.

Qrusher14242 · 06-11-2011, 04:52 PM

ughh Interleague all season? no thanks! At the end of the season,if the dodgers are in contention i dont wanna see them playing the royals or something. I want to see them face someone in the nl west.

Le Grande Orange · 06-11-2011, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oman19

Now if I can only get a salary cap...

It's not needed in MLB. Nor will it ever happen; the Players' Association will never agree to one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by oman19

...and MLB adopt a slary floor...

Not likely to happen either. The Players' Association has always been against an official salary floor because it opens the door to a salary cap, something they do not want.

You may see what amounts to a de facto salary floor, however, by changes in the revenue sharing system. I wouldn't be surprised to see provisions put in which effectively state that if a club receiving revenue sharing funds doesn't put a set percentage of those funds into its player payroll it has to give back some of revenue sharing money it received. Players might not object to something like that, and certainly the high revenue clubs would be happy. (As the leaked financial documents of last summer showed, some low revenue clubs are in fact very profitable businesses due to the amount of revenue sharing money they receive, which the owners then pocket rather that plow back into making the club better.)

professor ape · 06-11-2011, 04:55 PM

Moving to six divisions of five teams would be a good move. It is very unfair to the teams in the NL Central that they are stuck in a six team division while the AL West only has four teams. It makes a significant difference in the odds of making the postseason and is unfair.

Le Grande Orange · 06-11-2011, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qrusher14242

ughh Interleague all season? no thanks! At the end of the season,if the dodgers are in contention i dont wanna see them playing the royals or something. I want to see them face someone in the nl west.

That isn't guaranteed now because there are five teams in the NL West. One of them will have to be playing an interdivisional opponent at the very least. (In which case, playing an interleague opponent isn't really that much of a difference.)

The only two divisions currently which can play entirely divisional games to close out the season are the AL West and NL Central. The other four divisions can't because they contain five teams.

megamanmatt · 06-11-2011, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qrusher14242

ughh Interleague all season? no thanks! At the end of the season,if the dodgers are in contention i dont wanna see them playing the royals or something. I want to see them face someone in the nl west.

Personally I'm not a fan of interleague play anyway. But it generates more money for teams and Bud Selig's guiding principle is "if it makes money it should be implemented." I love listening to Bud Selig talk about how "This is the golden age of baseball" and the only data to quantify that he has is increased dollar amounts. What a d-bag.

Le Grande Orange · 06-11-2011, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by megamanmatt

But it generates more money for teams and Bud Selig's guiding principle is "if it makes money it should be implemented."

Uh, it's professional sports. It has always been about the money, ever since the first player ever got paid.

The Wolf · 06-11-2011, 05:23 PM

So add two new franchises and have two leagues of four regional divisions of four teams each. Eight division champs make the playoffs and the wildcard is dead and buried; it's win your division or go home. Scheduling becomes a snap, everyone has three divisional rivals (divisions would be geographic to increase rivalries), with the two new teams added to balance divisions.

And no team ever finishes worse than fourth.

It might look like this:

American League

Boston
NY Yankees
NY Mets
Toronto

Milwaukee
St. Louis
Kansas City
Minnesota

Baltimore
Washington
Atlanta
New Team (example: Richmond)

Detroit
Chicago Cubs
Chicago White Sox
Cleveland

National League

San Francisco
Seattle
Colorado
Oakland

Cincinnati
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
New Team (example: Indianapolis)

Texas
Florida
Houston
Tampa Bay

Los Angeles Angels
Los Angeles Dodgers
San Diego
Arizona

Chicagofan76 · 06-11-2011, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

So add two new franchises and have two leagues of four regional divisions of four teams each. Eight division champs make the playoffs and the wildcard is dead and buried; it's win your division or go home. Scheduling becomes a snap, everyone has three divisional rivals (divisions would be geographic to increase rivalries), with the two new teams added to balance divisions.

And no team ever finishes worse than fourth.

It might look like this:

American League

Boston
NY Yankees
NY Mets
Toronto

Milwaukee
St. Louis
Kansas City
Minnesota

Baltimore
Washington
Atlanta
New Team (example: Richmond)

Detroit
Chicago Cubs
Chicago White Sox
Cleveland

National League

San Francisco
Seattle
Colorado
Oakland

Cincinnati
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
New Team (example: Indianapolis)

Texas
Florida
Houston
Tampa Bay

Los Angeles Angels
Los Angeles Dodgers
San Diego
Arizona

I am strongly opposed to having that choking team from the North Side competing directly for a playoff spot with my team. I am in hopes of someday seeing a Red Line World Series in my lifetime or seeing an I-5 W.S.
or even a Sunshine State W.S., etc.

While I am all for 15/15 and even more for more interleague games similar to NBA format

megamanmatt · 06-11-2011, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Uh, it's professional sports. It has always been about the money, ever since the first player ever got paid.

No other commissioner has made so many changes simply to make more money. If you're asking me "Is baseball better after Bud Selig than before?" then the answer is no.

Biggio509 · 06-11-2011, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oman19

The team I move from the NL to the AL .....the Houston Astros.

I just don't understand this one. With 15 teams a league you have to interleague play everyday. So I don't get the create a rivalry thing. The Astros and Rangers play every year as it is and it is not a rivarly and I doubt moving them to the AL would change that. It has been rare to see the Astros and Rangers good at the same time. The silver boot series does not get much attention.

If you are going to move someone send the Brew Crew back to the AL where they belong. Alternative you could expand to 32 teams and have 2 16 team leagues. The Brew Crew could move back to the AL then the NL and AL both get a new franchise. Then you have 2 8 team divisions in each league and no need for interleague play everyday. If we kept the historical alignments the AL is still going to be funny in the west but it could look like this if they went to NFL style 4 divisions.

AL
East
NYY
BOS
TOR
CLE

West
LAA
Salt Lake, Portland, or Reno for example (Reno has done well on the revenue side in the minors Portland no longer has a minor league team)
OAK
Seattle

North
Milwuakee
DET
CWS
MIN

SOU
TX
TB
KC
BAL

NL
East
NYM
WAS
PHI
STL

West
CO
SD
SF
LAD

South
ATL
HOU
FLO
AZ

North
CHC
CIN
PIT
Indianapolis or Buffalo (two of the biggest revenue minor league teams)

bailey · 06-11-2011, 06:19 PM

I think there should be 6 5-team divisions. Then each season, the divisions would "pair up" and create 3 leagues of ten teams. The 3rd league would be called the Continental League. After 5 seasons every possible combination of pairing up would have occurred. Within each league the teams would play 18 games against the other 9 opponents. The top 3 in each league and the 4th place team with the most wins make the playoffs.

Advantages: fair scheduling, less travel for the players, all teams eventually play each other in the regular season.

Disadvantages: abolition of traditional AL and NL. Because of the rotation, teams would be switching leagues annually, although the divisions would maintain 4 rivalries for each team annually.

To eliminate this disadvantage, just create 3 leagues of 10 teams and forget about interleague play. All the expansion teams play in the Continental League. Edit: expansion teams after 1962.

endgame · 06-11-2011, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

So add two new franchises and have two leagues of four regional divisions of four teams each. Eight division champs make the playoffs and the wildcard is dead and buried; it's win your division or go home. Scheduling becomes a snap, everyone has three divisional rivals (divisions would be geographic to increase rivalries), with the two new teams added to balance divisions.

And no team ever finishes worse than fourth.

Pretty much the fictional setup I've used for some time. Works like a charm.

Chicagofan76 · 06-11-2011, 06:23 PM

In the league were i play MLB modern i always move Pittsburgh to the AL Central and KC to the AL West. Pittsburgh doesnt have a close AL team to compete with overall.

06-11-2011, 03:01 PM	#1
mrdrewblue Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Detroit, MI Posts: 55	Sources: MLB, players talk realignment MLB talks switching National League team to American League, sources say - ESPN Wouldn't have expected to hear this, but I guess with the ten team playoff talk, something may happen. Thoughts? Also, does anyone do this to their league in OOTP? Experiences? __________________

06-11-2011, 04:03 PM	#5
oman19 All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Metro Detroit Area Posts: 1,343	Not kidding. Have said it in many posts in the pasts. The universe I create I go to 15 team teams in each league. Although I keep the divisions. The team I move from the NL to the AL .....the Houston Astros. About time. If I can think of it why couldn't they. I have each team play 5 interleague series each year. Which division you play is just like the NFL. The AL east plays the NL east one year, the NL central the next, then the NL west, then repeat. Thus making the inter-city/state matchups that occur from interleague play more special because they only happen every 3 years. The all-star break they play the only 4 game series against the opposite league and it's 2 home and 2 away against the same team. Now if I can only get a salary cap and have ootp and MLB adopt a slary floor, along with having the DH in the NL it would be my perfect universe! LOL. OMAN FOR MLB COMMISH!!!!!! __________________ GENERATION 10: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment. My OOTP wishlist: http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...-wishlist.html Last edited by oman19; 06-11-2011 at 04:34 PM.

06-11-2011, 04:17 PM	#6
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 11,695	There's something very appealing to me about having leagues with no divisions. If you also go to a balanced schedule you're more guaranteed to have the best teams in the playoffs and you get a much better idea of who is better than whom. I guess the one downside is, as LGO pointed out to me, a 12th place team is most likely pretty difficult to market to the fans whereas while a 6th might not be easy to market, it's probably at least easier. __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project)

06-11-2011, 04:52 PM	#8
Qrusher14242 All Star Starter Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: CA Posts: 1,253	ughh Interleague all season? no thanks! At the end of the season,if the dodgers are in contention i dont wanna see them playing the royals or something. I want to see them face someone in the nl west. __________________ "Go then, there are other worlds than these"

06-11-2011, 06:19 PM	#18
bailey Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 3,315	I think there should be 6 5-team divisions. Then each season, the divisions would "pair up" and create 3 leagues of ten teams. The 3rd league would be called the Continental League. After 5 seasons every possible combination of pairing up would have occurred. Within each league the teams would play 18 games against the other 9 opponents. The top 3 in each league and the 4th place team with the most wins make the playoffs. Advantages: fair scheduling, less travel for the players, all teams eventually play each other in the regular season. Disadvantages: abolition of traditional AL and NL. Because of the rotation, teams would be switching leagues annually, although the divisions would maintain 4 rivalries for each team annually. To eliminate this disadvantage, just create 3 leagues of 10 teams and forget about interleague play. All the expansion teams play in the Continental League. Edit: expansion teams after 1962. Last edited by bailey; 06-11-2011 at 06:23 PM.

06-11-2011, 03:08 PM	#2
cblacker Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 324	Not a big fan of the whole idea. It would be quite drastic. It would appear that some sort of change is coming, but I predict something a bit more conventional.

06-11-2011, 03:12 PM	#3
TDO Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 163	Don't like it one bit. 15 team leagues is too big. At least two 4 division in my opinion. Just seems silly like why not just have a giant 30 team league and top 10 spots make it?

06-11-2011, 04:55 PM	#10
professor ape All Star Starter Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: The belly of the beast Posts: 1,498	Moving to six divisions of five teams would be a good move. It is very unfair to the teams in the NL Central that they are stuck in a six team division while the AL West only has four teams. It makes a significant difference in the odds of making the postseason and is unfair.

06-11-2011, 06:23 PM	#20
Chicagofan76 Banned Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Diamond, IL Posts: 6,339 Infractions: 2/2 (3)	In the league were i play MLB modern i always move Pittsburgh to the AL Central and KC to the AL West. Pittsburgh doesnt have a close AL team to compete with overall.