Master Index of Archived Threads


realignment

iramets Dec 26 2006 08:48 AM

This has probably been discussed to death before, b ut reading the "Show me the money" thread, I realized that MLB will probably do almost literally anything to enhance revenues, and I think it's a matter of time before we see this: a 32-team setup, with 8 divisions of 4 teams. Each division to be geographically organized to maximize "road trips" by fans. In our case, our division rivals would be the Yankees, the Red Sox and the Phillies, all easily accessible. (Out west it gets a little tougher). 16 or 18 games intra-division. You end up knowing your principal three opponents' rosters almost as well as you know your own. Aggressive marketing for out-of-town tix--every game a virtual sellout is the goal. Tix prices through the roof (oh, they just did that already.) Corporate luxury boxes aplenty, on a scale that makes today's couple of dozen look quaint. The rest of the schedule would be against the 3 other divisions in your half of the country. A shortened season, to accomodate the complex NFL-style playoffs, with 8 division winners playing 8 wild card teams in the first round. (Maybe even more than 8 WC, if we give Byes for teams with best record, or best in each half of the country, etc.) Post season starts mid-August, after 125-game season. Maybe one or two of the post-season teams consists of an All-Star team comprised of players from non-playoff teams. (Traditional AS game, btw, OUT! We've got a 125 game-season to squeeze in here. Can't spare a square, even if it's one-ply.) WS to be played in a neutral domed stadium around early November. (Revenue-sharing helps out the teams eliminated from the post-season. Their stadia are now mostly empty in September anyway. Are Ya Ready For some BASEBALL? Bap ba ba BAAAAHHHH!

Yancy Street Gang Dec 26 2006 08:52 AM

I may be wrong, but I think if such a thing were to happen I'd lose about 75% of my interest in the game.

iramets Dec 26 2006 08:57 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: I may be wrong, but I think if such a thing were to happen I'd lose about 75% of my interest in the game. For the first half-hour, sure. But you'll come back, with your pants hitched up around the nipples, squawking about how this isn't baseball anymore, not like when you were a young whippersnapper...

Yancy Street Gang Dec 26 2006 09:06 AM

Maybe, and maybe not. My interest halved after the 1994 strike, and hasn't nearly rebounded all the way, and never will. If they mess with the game too much too quickly, they'll lose me. I'm no longer hooked like I once was, and I never will be again.

attgig Dec 26 2006 01:28 PM Re: realignment

iramets wrote: a 32-team setup, with 8 divisions of 4 teams. you still need the NL/AL distinction. Players union would have a fit if DH'ers were suddenly out of a job. Owners/GM's would have a fit if they have to change the make up of their teams if they had to jump leagues.... if it ever were to happen, it would be a tough sell.

iramets Dec 26 2006 01:45 PM Re: realignment

attgig wrote: ="iramets"]a 32-team setup, with 8 divisions of 4 teams. you still need the NL/AL distinction. Players union would have a fit if DH'ers were suddenly out of a job. Owners/GM's would have a fit if they have to change the make up of their teams if they had to jump leagues.... if it ever were to happen, it would be a tough sell. Hail! (This is fun, hailing on people) Okey-dokey, call the western half the AL and the eastern half the NL. No big deal.

metsguyinmichigan Dec 26 2006 02:42 PM

HAIL SEAVER!!!!!!!! I think the divisions work pretty well the way they are now. There aren't too many atrocities -- Braves, Reds in the west -- like there were before.

sharpie Dec 26 2006 03:23 PM

Hail!

iramets Dec 26 2006 11:10 PM

metsguyinmichigan wrote: I think the divisions work pretty well the way they are now. It's not a matter of how well baseball worked in recent years. It's all about the money--do you suppose I'm proposing some of those barbarities above because I think they're cool? But MLB will do anything for cash, and I'm trying to figure out what atrocious ideas might pull in more revenue, which is the only thing that matters.

Nymr83 Dec 27 2006 12:55 AM

i don't think that idea will really increase revenues enough to make it worthwhile even from a purely economic standpoint. I think the Rockies started the next big thing when they started making different games cost different prices, the Mets caught on pretty quickly and I'm sure other have or soon will, its a pretty good means of upping profits.

Vic Sage Dec 27 2006 02:47 PM

here is my proposal in the selig thread 3 weeks ago: http://cybermessageboard.ehost.com/getalife/viewtopic.php?p=136863&highlight=#136863

Yancy Street Gang Dec 28 2006 09:51 AM

This really doesn't make sense: why would the post-season have to start in mid-August? You're proposing 16 playoff teams. There are already eight. Doubling the number of playoff teams would only add one round to the playoffs, or about ten days to the post-season. It certainly wouldn't require slashing 37 games and six weeks off of the regular season. If you start the playoffs in mid-August, and plan to keep the World Series in late October, you'd be able to have 128, or maybe even 256 teams in the post-season. And no matter how high anybody's nipples get, I don't see that happening.

attgig Dec 28 2006 11:20 AM

I feel like i'm missing something, with the hail.... what's giong on?

Yancy Street Gang Dec 28 2006 11:24 AM

The idol-worshippers among us post messages hailing Tom Seaver after a member's post count reaches 41.

ScarletKnight41 Dec 28 2006 11:24 AM

It's Crane Pool tradition to hail a poster's 41st post (i.e., The Sacred Seaver Post).

attgig Dec 28 2006 11:28 AM

ScarletKnight41 wrote: It's Crane Pool tradition to hail a poster's 41st post (i.e., The Sacred Seaver Post). gotcha. thanks for the clue in =)