 |
 Home | Webstore
|
|
Latest News:
OOTP 26 Available
- FHM 11 Available
- OOTP Go! Available
Out of the Park Baseball 26 Buy Now! |
|
|
||||
| ||||
|
|||||||
| OOTP 18 - General Discussions Everything about the 2017 version of Out of the Park Baseball - officially licensed by MLB.com and the MLBPA. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
04-18-2017, 07:39 PM
|
#1 |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,727
|
MLB Expansion
I had this post in OOTP17 forums, but not sure if everyone will see it. I plan to simulate 2017 MLB season and then expand to 32 teams. I have 3 options on the table.
|
|
|
|
04-18-2017, 08:09 PM
|
#2 |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,274
|
My advice is to look for the best uniform and logo set for each choice and go with the ones you like the best. The city you place them in makes a difference as far as market size goes at first but in the long run it won't so much.
|
|
|
|
|
04-18-2017, 08:30 PM
|
#3 |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico (formally San Diego, CA.)
Posts: 4,138
|
2
__________________
 Chargers= Despicable Traitors |
|
|
|
|
04-18-2017, 08:39 PM
|
#4 |
|
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 202
|
I like option 3 because it keeps more of the traditional rivalries in the divisions. I would not put 3 Texas teams in the AL South. Mexico City would be an interesting market because it's huge.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
04-18-2017, 09:29 PM
|
#5 |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,271
|
Any option that puts the Astros in the NL versus two options that don't gets my vote. I vote for No. 1.
|
|
|
|
|
04-18-2017, 11:09 PM
|
#6 |
|
Major Leagues
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 492
|
2 but VAN over POR.
|
|
|
|
|
04-18-2017, 11:29 PM
|
#7 |
|
Minors (Single A)
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 91
|
1 or 2 but more 1 sicne we be in cbs divison which crazy
|
|
|
|
|
04-18-2017, 11:35 PM
|
#8 |
|
Minors (Single A)
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 81
|
2, but I would switch Philadelphia and Pittsburgh around.
|
|
|
|
|
04-19-2017, 11:23 AM
|
#9 |
|
All Star Reserve
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 627
|
4 team divisions are awful. Go with 8 team divisions and it makes realignment much easier.
|
|
|
|
|
04-20-2017, 03:27 PM
|
#10 | |
|
Major Leagues
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 317
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-20-2017, 09:32 PM
|
#11 | |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Up There
Posts: 15,644
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-22-2017, 04:09 PM
|
#12 |
|
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 154
|
I'm late to the thread. I recommend four separate leagues with eight teams each, each playing a closed (intraleague only) 154-game schedule. The four pennant winners advance to the postseason.
__________________
-- Rodney Dunning |
|
|
|
|
12-30-2017, 04:56 PM
|
#13 |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,727
|
How should I align teams if use Montreal and Vegas (or Portland) as the expansion teams?
|
|
|
|
|
12-30-2017, 05:20 PM
|
#14 |
|
All Star Reserve
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 621
|
Option 3, but with San Antonio as the expansion team. It is larger and better equipped than Austin and Nashville, and Mexico City is far too dangerous for teams to visit.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
12-30-2017, 06:00 PM
|
#15 |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 13,104
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
12-30-2017, 08:31 PM
|
#16 |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Belchertown, MA, USA
Posts: 4,504
|
Options #1 and #3 are automatically off the table IMO, because of the teams switching leagues.
The Rays in particular would not agree to a switch because they'd lose the huge crowds of the Red Sox and Yankees series - and as long as the leagues have a differing DH rule, teams would have the right to veto their own switch. In addition, option #3 gives Colorado a DH, which is very bad for the statistical health of the league. |
|
|
|
|
12-30-2017, 10:33 PM
|
#17 |
|
All Star Starter
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The OOTP Forums. Always.
Posts: 1,952
|
Ever thought about 8 team divisions with the top 2 teams in each getting an automatic & 2 wildcards?
__________________
I write a monthly newsletter on the Food Baseball Association. I also listen to music no one's ever heard of in hopes of looking cool and alternative. |
|
|
|
|
03-04-2018, 05:51 PM
|
#18 |
|
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: America's Dairyland
Posts: 203
|
I've typically gone with option #2 but without renaming the divisions. I usually throw Portland into the AL West (creating a rivalry with Seattle) and Montreal back into the NL East. I usually move Washington to the AL East and Tampa Bay to the NL East as well, because it makes more sense to have Washington in the league the Nats called home in their original incarnation and I think having both Florida teams in the same division makes sense as well.
|
|
|
|
|
03-04-2018, 05:56 PM
|
#19 |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,047
|
2 is perfect with that setup and location for the 2 expansion teams
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2018, 12:44 AM
|
#20 |
|
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 133
|
I don't think rivalries matter too much as far as the simulation of this game and I know you are an American League guy but option #3 does the least to slaughter the national midwest rivalries
 option 1 takes the Brewers away from the Cubbies and Cardinals who have built a pretty good rivalry over the years. None of us like the Braves and we can't take a day trip to see a game in Atlanta like we can at Milwaukee or St. Louis or Chicago or even Cincy. option 2 ....same thing. You gave a bunch of rivals a team that we dont care about and we can't drive and go see in a day. Colorado option 3 looks good as far as the NL is concerned. I can give up Pittsburgh just my opinion ....for fun purposes  Maybe we could see some work put into rivalries in a future OOTP....such as attendance boosts for cubs/cardinals games...more brawls... more news hype for an upcoming yankees/red sox series just an idea! I wont get greedy |
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
