Baseball may have a bigger problem.

Too many games.

We're a population that now works too many hours to fund so many gadgets (computers are one thing, iPhones are freakin' addictive). How the heck do we really follow an everyday sport?

Well, Pounder, I will certainly second that.
162 games worked perfectly with 10-team leagues, and also with 12-team leagues having 2 6-team divisions.

The World Series will soon become "the November Classic".

used to be 154 + 7 game WS.
Then 162 + 7 game WS.
Then 162 + 5 game LCS + 7 game WS.
Then 162 + 7 game LCS + 7 game WS
Now 162 + 5 game LDS + 7 game LCS + 7 game WS.
And then I forget the pre-season "international baseball classic", or whatever that silliness is referred to.

Baseball is not alone in thie creepage. Not much different than the other 3 major sports, in fact.

Could we at least settle on a balanced format for 30 or 32 teams, and adjust the 162 (downward preferably to balance the schedule) ? We don't have Donald Fehr around to provide the obligatory knee-jerk objection anymore. Wouldn't the players appreciate a few more off-days ? Or maybe the season could end a week earlier. With so many players (especially pitchers with arm troubles) on the DL, maybe a few less games could translate into a few less injuries and healthier rosters.

Here's a fantasy realignment idea:

* Swap Philly and Tampa Bay:
- both Florida teams could use the heavy scheduling of being in the same division...other "state" rivalries don't need that as badly
- Philly and Pitt become interleague rivals
* Formation of NL South: have the 5 "southern" markets in the same division in the NL (keeps the Hou/Texas interleague intact)
* NL East: new look would be the general footprint for the league...NY/Chi markets in same division


EAST
NY Yankees
Boston
Toronto
Baltimore
* Philadelphia

CENTRAL
Detroit
Chicago Sox
Minnesota
Kansas City
Cleveland

WEST
LA Angels
Oakland
Texas
Seattle


National League

SOUTH
Washington
Florida
* Tampa Bay
Atlanta
Houston

EAST
NY Mets
Pittsburgh
Cincinnati
Milwaukee
Chicago Cubs
St. Louis

WEST
LA Dodgers
San Francisco
San Diego
Arizona
Colorado

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

And a fantasy alignment with Charlotte and Portland as expansion teams (since contraction, my first choice, fell through)

EAST
NY Yankees
Boston
Toronto
Baltimore

CENTRAL
Detroit
Chicago Sox
Minnesota
Cleveland

SOUTH
Tampa Bay
* Charlotte
Kansas City
Texas

WEST
LA Angels
Oakland
Seattle
* Portland

National League

EAST
NY Mets
* Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Cincinnati

SOUTH
Washington
Florida
Atlanta
Houston

CENTRAL
Milwaukee
Chicago Cubs
St. Louis
Colorado

WEST
LA Dodgers
San Francisco
San Diego
Arizona

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

I feel like the owners of hte Royals had rocks in their heads not to jump to the NL (when Milwaukee did) to set up an intra-state rivalry with St. Louis. But the Cards-Cubs is a better traditional rivalry.
Colorado is a bit isolated, and we have two Texas teams in opposite leagues.

How about:

AL EAST
Toronto
Boston
NYY
Baltimore

AL NORTH
Minnesota
Chisox
Detroit
Cleveland

AL SOUTH / CENTRAL
Colorado (from NL)
KC
Texas
Houston (from NL)

AL WEST
Seattle
Portland (expansion)
Oakland
LAA / Anaheim


NL EAST
NYM
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington

NL SOUTH
Charlotte (expansion)
Atlanta
Tampa Bay (from AL)
Florida

NL CETRAL / NORTH
Milwaukee
Chicago Cubs
Cincinnati
St. Louis

NL WEST
San Fran
LA Dodgers
San Diego
Arizona

Three teams change leagues to get into a more regional rivalry situation....
Charlotte is in a new SE division with their NFL / NHL brethren.
Portland gets a rivalry with Seattle.

I just finished reading Bottom of the Ninth by Shapiro. Very interesting history of MLB in 1958-60 with background on the Continental League. They were set to go with
Atlanta, Buffalo, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Minny, New York and Toronto until the majors panicked and rushed through expansion.

NL West/AL West
San Diego/Seattle
San Francisco/Oakland
Los Angeles Dodgers/Los Angeles Angels
Arizona/Colorado (from NL West)

NL East
New York Mets/New York Yankees
Philadelphia/Boston
Pittsburgh/Toronto
Cincinnati/Cleveland

NL North/AL North
Chicago Cubs/Chicago White Sox
St. Louis/Kansas City
Milwaukee/Minnesota
Louisville (expansion)/Detroit

NL South/AL South
Washington/Baltimore
Atlanta/Charlotte (expansion)
Florida/Tampa Bay
Houston/Texas

Teams play their division rivals 14 times each (3 x 14 = 42)
Teams play other teams in the same league 8 times each (12 x 8 = 96)
Teams play opponents in the same division in the other league 6 times each (4 x 6 = 24)

As much as I'd like to see MLB in Louisville, Indianapolis would be more realistic.

Not bad; this would be better:

AL-
Balt, Bost, NYY, Tor
CHW, Clev, Detr, Minn
KC, TB, Tex, NO/Ind/Lou,Nash or whoever
Ariz, LAA, Oak, Sea

NL-
NYM, Phil, Pitt, Wash
CHC, Cinc, Milw, StL
Atl, Char, Mia(new name), Hou
Col, LAD, SD, SF


But really...looking at sone of these so-called MLB "hitters", expansion is the last thing we need.

Ton of news coming out of MLB about evening up the leagues, most think the obvious solution is to move the Astros from the NL Central (that has 6 teams) to the AL West (that has 4) with the Rangers. Some are suggesting scrapping the divisions and just having two leagues other are proposing complete geographical realignment which would increase interest and attendance for many of the struggling franchises. Others claim this would be too radical and would lead to making both leagues either use a DH or outlaw it.

here are a few links...


http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=6651634

http://calltothepen.com/2011/06/12/thou ... alignment/

http://espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office/ ... ealignment

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

It appears that Houston to AL West scenario is the one that is very high on the list.

And it makes sense. Both Houston and Texas would benefit as neither was enough sway. We're not talking Yanks/Mets, Dodgers/Angels, etc. Yes, both are in Texas, but seperate markets.

That said, there are problems with what MLB sees as a simple switch.

One, you already have Texas in a division with Seattle. Lotta miles on top of 2 time zones. Houston is even further.

I'm all for pairing the Texas teams, but I think moving some other teams would help. Won't happen but would help.

If you swap Houston and San Diego for Seattle, you get some more sense in geography:

AL West: Houston, Texas, San Diego, LAA, Oakland
You've got the same 3 time zone problem, but the furthest cities are Houston to Oakland. I get that we're talking only an extra hour flying. But the point is, that Houston and Texas as cities, the culture, is much closer to SD, LAA and Oakland.

NL West: AZ, LAD, SF, Colorado, Seattle
You've got your mountain zone teams together still, but you also team up Colorado with Seattle. Colorado despite it's distance is closer to Seattle in culture...Denver considered somewhat of a northwest city. SF is the bridge between Sea and LAD. Removing SD makes LAD the southern most team.




Of course there are more elaborate ideas too. There's no reason Florida and Tampa Bay should be in different leagues. Being in same division would increase ticket sales for both teams when they play each other.


And of course, the 15 and 15 no-division lineup makes all this moot.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

The best solution would be to have a NBA style realignment and do away with different NL/AL rules (like DH) and make them all the same and then realign into a Midwest/Northeast and a Southeast/Southwest/West/Northwest like this from the 3rd link above minus the divisions.

AMERICAN CONFERENCE NATIONAL CONFERENCE
Eastern Division Southeast Division
Boston Red Sox Atlanta Braves
New York Mets Baltimore Orioles
New York Yankees Florida Marlins
Philadelphia Phillies Tampa Bay Rays
Toronto Blue Jays Washington Nationals
Central Division Western Division
Cincinnati Reds Arizona Diamondbacks
Cleveland Indians Colorado Rockies
Detroit Tigers Houston Astros
Minnesota Twins Seattle Mariners
Pittsburgh Pirates Texas Rangers
Midwest Division California Division
Chicago Cubs Los Angeles Angels
Chicago White Sox Los Angeles Dodgers
Kansas City Royals Oakland Athletics
Milwaukee Brewers San Diego Padres
St. Louis Cardinals San Francisco Giants

Since the MLB teams play 160 some odd games they could easily do away with divisions and have each team play home and home series with every team in the league which would be 84 games [14 (other teams in the league) x 6 (2 series of 6 games)]; with the remaining games they could either play 1 series a piece with the other league rotating home and home every other year which would be 45 games and cut the extra 40 or so others from the schedule and keep the playoffs in October or even expand the playoff bids from 8 to 10 or 12 which would make more money than regular season games. If each league played the exact number of games against the same teams as every other team in their league I think it would be better balanced and then it could have a more exciting playoff series. I think that the MLB should cut a sizable portion of regular season games down and add playoff spots which would increase TV dollars raise ticket prices and hopefully popularity. With a lockout looming this would be an easy way to cutting players salaries by giving them more off season time and adding the extra playoff spots will also make them happy. Don't even get me started on contraction which I think is badly needed in MLB...

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

That Western Division is horrid

I think this is near perfect. The only thing I would say is that there should be a new team out west (but I may be biased being from California). There are just so many teams out east already and most people that call for expansion want more out east. I definitely think we need to add one in the Southeast (just look at the CWS, they like their baseball in the Carolinas). So I definitely favor Charlotte expansion.

I do however think that Cincinnati should stay with the Cubs and Cardinals in the North and Baltimore also has a long history with the Yankees (in fact the Yankees are the original Orioles). Moving Arizona or Colorado to the AL West and making them rivals makes sense (though I move Arizona because they are the newest team, but that really doesn't matter).

I would favor a team in Portland to be matched up with Seattle. Then SD would be matched up with a much more regional rival in Arizona. The only downside to this is if a team is put in Portland and Charlotte, that leaves Colorado to be matched up with Detroit. Not great, but it could be worse.


As for scheduling. Right now teams play 18 division games, usually against 4 opponents. That's 72 games. I would keep it at 72 games (24 vs each team, 12 home, 12 away). Teams then play the other teams in their league anywhere from 6-10 times per year (the NL probably averages 7 with 16 teams). I would make it simply 6 games, 3 at home, 3 away vs every other team in the league). That's 72 games (144 total). That leaves 18 interleague games (which is what the AL has now, while most NL teams only get 15). You could play one division on a rotating basis (12 games) and your rival twice (6 games). Now this would mean every 4 years you play your rival 9 times because you're playing your rival's division but I look at that as a good thing.

As for playoffs you have 4 division winners and 1 wild card team (none of this 6 team stuff, I hate going to 5 as it is). Worst division winner in a best of 3 vs the wild card team.

As you can probably tell, I am a huge fan of divisions and hate the idea of eliminating them. The last month of the year playing all your division rivals is the best time of the year for me. You do this and you have 8 races for a division crown and 2 for wild cards. You could have as many as 18 teams still with realistic playoff chances in the final month.

Phoenix is a NL town, from long before the Dbacks arrived.

1) Cubs influence - from day one when the Wrigleys brought the Cubs to Arizona, the Cub following in Arizona is huge - coupled with hundreds of thousands of Chicago transplants
2) Giants influence - Phoenix was the long-time home of the Giants AAA club - residents followed there Giants/Firebirds in the majors
3) Dodger influence - pre-Dbacks, Phoenix was in the Dodger TV territory - the exposure Phoenix got was to NL baseball
4) San Diego influence - in the summer, San Diego turns into Phoenix-west.

I think people in San Diego would not approve of being called Phoenix west.

Like I said though, doesn't really matter. If the league wants the Rockies or Padres to move to the AL instead then fine by me (in fact I prefer the DBacks in the NL). The point is the NL West will have SF and LA as the core and the AL West will have the A's, Angels, and Mariners as their core. Whether they move an NL team to the AL or expand with a team out west doesn't make much of a difference.

Though, Coors field might make a pretty cool AL park since it has high scoring games all the time.