Oh, by the way. If Texas heads to the NL South, what will happen to the Interleague state rivalry between the Rangers and the Houston Astros? It would not make sense just like the others (N.Y.: Mets-Yankees, Chcago: Cubs-White Sox, Missouri: Cardinals-Royals, Florida: Marlins-Devil Rays, California: Dodgers-Angels or Giants-A's, Canada: Expos (now Nationals)-Blue Jays, etc.). For me, it would be better if New Orleans comes to the NL South and Texas stays in the AL South. Let's find out if others have their opinions. Imagine that you're the Commissioner of MLB. What would you do if so? Think about it.

_________________
Florida State Seminole fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)!

Here is my plan for baseball. Somehow get the salary cap. Figure it out somehow. Okay, now to teams and realingment. First I would move Oakland to Portland. Then I would expand to Nashville and Charlotte. Next I would move Colorado to the AL. Nashville would be in the American League, while Charlotte would be in the NL. Switch to the 4 division lineup similar to the NFL.

American League
East - Baltimore, Boston, New York, Toronto
North - Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota
South - Kansas City, Nashville, Tampa Bay, Texas
West - Colorado, Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle

National League
East - New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington
North - Chicago, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, St. Louis
South - Atlanta, Charlotte, Florida, Houston
West - Arizona, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco

Then each team has a travel partner.
Boston, New York
Baltimore, Toronto
Chicago, Minnesota
Cleveland, Detroit
Kansas City, Texas
Nashville, Tampa Bay
Los Angeles, Colorado
Portland, Seattle

New York, Philadelphia
Pittsburgh, Washington
Chicago, Milwaukee
Cincinnati, St. Louis
Atlanta, Charlotte
Florida, Houston
Arizona, San Francisco
Los Angeles, San Diego

Then for Interleague matchups:
Baltimore-Washington
Boston-Philadelphia
New York-New York
Toronto-Pittsburgh
Chicago-Chicago
Cleveland-Cincinnati
Detroit-Charlotte
Minnesota-Milwaukee
Kansas City-St. Louis
Nashville-Atlanta
Tampa Bay-Florida
Texas-Houston
Colorado-Arizona
Los Angeles-Los Angeles
Portland-San Diego
Seattle-San Francisco
(All of these are fairly good expect Detroit-Charlotte, the odd ducks of it all)

Now then Triple A needs expansion and realingment. Loses the Portland, Nashville and Charlotte franchises, Portland moves to San Jose, Nashville moves to San Antonio and Charlotte moves to Birmingham. Expansion is needed in the International League, adds Orlando and Jacksonville. Ottawa then moves to Harrisburg like is rumored. I know San Jose is Giants A afflialte and they will now become AAA. There is a rumor of a new stadium there for a triple A franchise.

Pacific Coast League
East
Iowa (Chicago Cubs)
Memphis (Nashville)
New Orleans (Milwaukee)
Omaha (Kansas City)

South
Albuquerque (Minnesota)
Oklahoma (St. Louis)
Round Rock (Houston)
San Antonio (Texas)

North
Colorado Springs (Colorado)
Las Vegas (Los Angeles)
Salt Lake (Los Angeles)
Tucscon (Arizona)

Pacific
Fresno (San Diego)
San Jose (San Francisco)
Sacramento (Portland)
Tacoma (Seattle)

International League
South
Birmingham (Chicago White Sox)
Durham (Charlotte)
Jacksonville (Florida)
Orlando (Tampa Bay)

Central
Columbus (NY Yankees)
Indianapolis (Pittsburgh)
Louisville (Cincinnati)
Toledo (Detroit)

Atlantic
Harrisburg (Baltimore)
Norfolk (NY Mets)
Richmond (Atlanta)
Scranton (Philadelphia)

North
Buffalo (Cleveland)
Pawtucket (Boston)
Rochester (Washington)
Syracuse (Toronto)

Also speaking of minor league baseball, if Charlotte gets a MLB team it could be possible to have their whole minor league system with cities in North Carolina.
AAA - Durham
AA - Carolina
A - Kinston or Winston-Salem
A - Kannapolis, Greensboro, Asheville, or Hickory
Rookie - Burlington

This is for several years down the road.

American League

East: Baltimore, Boston, New York Yankees, Tampa Bay, Toronto
Central: Chicago White Sox, Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, Minnesota, Texas(From AL West)
West: Colorado(From NL West), Las Vegas 51's(Expansion team), Los Angeles Angels, Oakland, Seattle

National League

East: Atlanta, Florida, New York Mets, Philadelphia, Washington
Central: Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati, Houston, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, St. Louis
West: Arizona, Los Angeles Dodgers, Mexico City Parrots(Expansion Team), San Diego, San Francisco

_________________
Do you ahhhhh......realign?

I think MLB will always use Mexican cities as vaporware... they're not that impressed with the actual income potential.

Furthermore, as to possible expansion cities, while I think Portland should be a shoo-in, while Las Vegas is utter vaporware (though it gives Oscar Goodman another chance to flaunt showgirls and Elvii in front of really rich folks who already have mob lawyers ;D ), MLB will very likely choose based on a funky little formula...

Public funding package for stadium + TELEVISION market size

I can't begin to guess the weight placed on these factors. We can see the latter. We probably can't predict the former, but I can think of one place that'll gum up the works if MLB actually gets around to expansion:

Meadowlands.

Can't imagine Steinbrenner and Wilpon giving up a territorial right or two, but I CAN imagine the other owners voting to override that, allowing intrusion to dilute their power. It'd certainly be worth charging admission to owners' meetings.

So why don't you mention Oregon and Oregon State in regards to Portland?

Oregon's rather show-off bunch in the Sports Marketing Department has rather consistently represented the MLB to Portland effort as being questionable in its eventual success (both in terms of getting the team AND how healthy a theoretical team would be in Portland). Whether this has influenced public opinion or not is questionable in itself, but it sure rankles the Stadium Campaign folks.

Of course, the other questionable part of this issue is whether the U of O people are providing self-serving criticism. Well, let's just say that their poker faces show.

The only markets viable for MLB right now is probally just Portland and Charlotte. Portland taking away from the Mariners it would some, but the distance between the two is actually farther than St. Louis and Kansas City. Trouble with the Carolinas is that Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham are similar, but Charlotte should be the one for the team. Nashville/Tennessee has the potential to be a good city for baseball as well. I also think if its an American League team, then it will benefit the area since the Braves are NL. Same with Portland/Seattle even though I believe the A's will be the team for that market.

How I'd fix MLB.....

If we stay with the current 30 teams, at least equalize the divisions....

I guess that is most easily accomplished by moving the Astros to the AL west. They'd probably object, but they'd have a rivalry with the Rangers.

The grand idiot Bud, moved his Milwaukee Brewers to the NL when he claimed that you need an even number of teams in both leagues OR you will have BYES all the time. YES, but one way to solve that is by spreading out inter-league play so that there is ONE inter-league series occurring essentially continuously.

Here's what I would propose:

2 leagues, each with 3 5-team divisions.

Play your 4 division rivals 12 times (6 H, 6 A) = 48 games

Play the other 10 teams in your league 6 times (3 H, 3 A) = 60 games

Play ONE of the 3 other-league divisions every year (5 teams X 10 games (5 H, 5 A) = 50 games.

Total Regular Season Schedule = 48 + 60 + 50 = 158 games.

Rotate the inter-league division pairings through a 3-year rotation.

This gives MLB 150 = [(30 teams / 2 teams per game) X 10 games] intra-league games per year. If we schedule intra-leagues game at one per day for 150 days, we have essentially no need for BYES (off-days, more than usual).

This brings the following equities:

Divisions have the same number of teams.
Every team in a given division plays the same schedule.

Fans get to see every team in the other league regularly, every 3 years.


The other thing screaming to be fixed is the non-standardization of rules between the AL and NL.

Bud made a lot of headway in consolidating all umpires under the MLB umbrella, and dissolving the league offices. I believe this standardized the strike zone. The AL used to be armpits to top of knees (at least the AL umps called a higher strike zone), and the NL used to be bottom of the kneecaps to somewhere slightly above the belt, although not QUITE the letters). I believe now all umps are schooled together, and balls and strikes are called more uniformly.

The other rule inconsistency is the obvious - DH. Let the fans choose, and then go with a single rule across the board. Personally, I dislike the DH, although the increased offense it provides is probably an improvement. But having two sets of rules is utterly silly. I'd rather see the DH adopted than continue with two sets of rules.



The ONE PLACE that SCREAMS for a DH is where they never use it - the All-Star Game. For Christ's Sake, that game is so utterly contrived, and nobody wants to watch a pitcher bat in a game that is billed as the game's best pitchers vs. the game's best sluggers !

Go ahead and use the DH in the All-Star. It might have even prevented the ridiculous situation, where a few years ago, Bud had to terminate the game and award a tie, in front of his beloved Milwaukee fans ! What a fiasco !!!!


So much for the rules !

Please, please install a salary cap ! I am so sick of the Yankees... Why should specific franchises have such incredible advantages ? Why should a fan in Milwaukee or KC, or Oakland, or Cincy, or Pittsburgh be a fan, when he/she has to know on opening day that the local team has NO CHANCE of competing ? It's nuts....

I live in St. Louis, but am a Pirate fan for life. But I will not pay to attend a baseball game as long as it subsidizes this unfair system. Look at the NFL - the players get a nice share of the revenue... they can change teams via free agency after a few years of servitude... any team can be competitive and go from the pent-house to the ****-house and back again very rapidly, based on having astute management (or not). Isn't that far more interesting from a fan's perspective ? As a hockey fan, I applaud the owner's stance. I want to see all teams on a level footing.

Bullet2-

I would try not to do the "natural rivalry" thing. This year the Cubs are whining that their woes are due to 6 games vs. the White Sox, while division rivals get to play the Devil Rays.

A few years ago, the Cards played 6 vs. their natural rivals - The Anaheim Angels !!! What the hell !!!

But my favorite - in either 2003 or 2004, the Montreal Expos played their natural rivals - the other Canadian team - Toronto Blue Jays.... A series that MIGHT have allowed the Expos to draw more than their typical paltry 1000 or so fans. You'll recall the Expos played about 20 or so games in San Juan, Puerto Rico. I think the concept was to see how well a MLB franchise might be supported in P.R. The schedulers (in all their brilliance) moved the Expos - Blue Jays series to San Juan.

How about a sensible schedule with no gimmicks ?
I don't think the number 162 is in any way sacred. 154 used to be plenty. And that was during an era of 7 post-season games, not 19.


But the salary cap is the most sorely-needed fix.

Immediately prior to the strike in 1994, the Expos, with youngsters like Larry Walker, Pedro Martinez, Mark Grudzielanek, and Moises Alou had THE BEST record in baseball, and decent fan support. After the strike they all left in fairly short order, and the fans were left high and dry, and never returned. I saw the Pirates gutted at the same time, and the Marlins after their World Series victory in 1997. How can this huge disparity that creates a wide gulf between haves and have-nots be good for a sport?

I think Bud's management team is a plot by Steinbrenner to deflect attention from his own efforts to destroy competition. The last few times the owners attempted to wrest some control of the game back from the player's union, Steinbrenner has under-mined Bud and the small-market owners.

I don't begrudge players attaining free agency, and the ability to earn top dollar IF THEY ARE ELITE PLAYERS. But the huge payroll disparities have turned the small market franchises into "farm teams" for the Yankees (and to a lesser extent) the next 6-7 top payroll teams. Do Yankee fans thrill to the thought of drubbing teams with $40 million payroll (to their $200 million) ? Then stealing that team's best player ? It's absolutely perverse.

The NFL model provides decent competitive balance, a fair share of revenue for the players, and owner-labor harmony as increases in revenue allow the salary cap to wratchet upward.

Right now St. Louis is building a $400 million ballpark, and preparing to destroy a perfectly beautiful functional park. Why ? Cause everyone else is doing it !

The team's arguments are silly / non-sense / voo-doo economics. The only thing the new edifice might offer is more luxury boxes. Same seating capacity - about 48,000. But the owners expect a revenue windfall...
HOW ??? I assume all tickets will cost more, as will concessions. They estimate an extra $15 mill per year.
OK, lets assume they are correct, and the fans willingly cough up these extra bucks for the same product....

Team payroll seems to be climbing at $5-$10 mill per year. If team owners claim poverty now, they will piss away their extra $15 mill within 3 years on player salaries alone. I just don't understand what the plan is here !!! And I sure as hell don't want to subsidize it.

I like the sport. I grew up listening to the Pirates game, then west coast games on my transistor radio, hidden under the pillow. It was very fan-friendly, but the players had no power, and had to practically win the Triple Crown to earn $100,000. Now it's out of control, in the other direction, and the fans are getting raped. I'll consider coming back if and when some happy medium is achieved, but I'm not optimistic.

I first met KC on the Oregon Stadium Campaign board, so I'm just rippin' dismayed that he missed the distances issue. Mind you, between the general suprising amount of traffic on I-5 and Puget Sound in particular, I'm not sure that the average KC to StL drive doesn't take the same amount of time as the PDX to SEA drive.

BTW, while some Oakland locals think Lew Wolff will find a way to make the A's work in Oakland by hook or by crook, I'm pretty certain from recent comments that it's either downtown Oakland (or close by) or out of the Bay Area. Wolff just canned the ballpark proposal in the current parking lot of the Coliseum complex, which seemed to me to be the one realistic option for the A's before seeking something that steps on too many politically adept toes.

Baseball does NOT want an interleague game every day of the season. Schedule equalization doesn't sell tickets. Rivalries do. Really, an expansion is a lot simpler than most of these goofy realignments.

As for dave, don't hold your breath. It's not voodoo economics. It's 85% of the fan base is in the top 15% of income earners. Sponsors throw out more bucks to chase them. This is what happens when you vote Republican... well, I'm only half-kidding.