The Indians get to play the Devil Rays 10 times this year, while the Tigers only get them 7 times. Meanwhile, the Indians only have to play the Yankees 6 times, while the Tigers get them 8 times. I figure that is about a 3 or 4 game swing in favor of the Indians. What luck. Why can't they have symmetrical schedules? The Indians have to beat the Tigers by at least 5 games, in order for it to be a bona fide division championship. Otherwise, this unfair schedule will forever be my bogeyman.
They should go back to 2 divisions with 7 teams in each. Get rid of the Marlins - they draw no one. Probably the Devil Rays, too. Florida doesn't need a team, they have Spring Training. Everyone living there is a transplant anyways - they all root for their northern team that they left for no taxes and smoother joints.
Then cut the schedule to 158 games. They can still have their beloved interleague play, too - 18 for each team. Then play your division foes 14 times each (84 games), and the other division teams 8 times each (56 games).
Get rid of the wild card - only the two division winners in the LCS's. Play a 9 game series in the LCS and WS. Do a format of 3-4-2 with the team with the best record getting home field.
Play more DH's and get the post-season done by October 15th.
I should be Commissioner.
Unfair Schedules
Discussion in 'Sports Forum' started by Andy T., Aug 16, 2007.
Page 1 of 2
-
who said the devil rays are a professional baseball team...:laugh:
Let's see, if I remember correctly 1997 world series was won by whom? Over who? for the uninformed, like our future commissioner it was the Marlins over the Indians.
And the Marlins won again in 2003.
So I think that if we're going to eliminate teams, we ought to eliminate team that haven't won a world series in the last 80 or more years and push out the Indians! :tonofbricks: (said entirely with good humor) -
-
By the way, I get the impression from your post that you think I'm an Indians fan. Nothing could be further from the truth.
-
They do the schedule this way because fans complained about the way they used to do it. A few years ago, the schedule was more balanced, but fans complained that teams didn't play their division rivals enough times in comparison to the number of times they played teams out of their division. Add in the expansion teams and that led to the unbalanced schedule.
Every season, I hear some Tator say, "The Milwaukee Brewers only play the St. Louis Cardinals 3 more times this year, but they play the Arizona Diamondbacks 6 more times." Or whoever the leading teams are. The implication being that the "idiots" who make up the major league schedules screwed up by somehow not knowing that the Brewers were going to be good this year. Or whoever the surprise team is.
I don't have any problem with your changes. I don't mind a 9 game series because we likely wouldn't see teams that barely made it past .500 in the regular season win the World Series, like the 2006 St. Louis Cardinals.
I've never liked the wild card in baseball anyway.
Of course, it's easy to say that I don't mind your changes because they're never going to be enacted anway. :) -
-
I like the idea of a 9-game series, because it would mean that teams actually need some pitching depth to win it. A team's 4th (and maybe 5th) starter will have pitch at least once, maybe twice. Plus, I think it would be exciting and would be a better determiner of which team is better.
-
I don't see how the 5th pitcher would start and I only see the 4th starter going out once. For example, let's say that Selig decrees a 9 game series. If Boston is in it and their choices are Wakefield/Beckett in games 8/9, or Beckett/Schilling in games 8/9, the latter choice is the one they would take. I don't think the pitching depth argument is a compelling one, but the better argument is that the better team is more likely to win a 9 game series than a 7 game series.
Again, it's all academic, because I just don't see MLB making that kind of a change. -
You're right. I just charted it out. Of course, I charted it out with the #1 pitcher starting game 1. Many times, teams don't have that luxury. If anything, a 9-game series would test the depth of a team's bullpen, but probably not their starters.
-
I did the same thing because there's typically enough time between the end of the LCS and the World Series for a team to start their ace. And I don't think that should change either.
That was one of my gripes about the NBA in the 80s was that they started the Finals so soon after the Conference Championship was decided. In particular, this pretty much killed the 1987 Celtics chances of winning the Finals. I don't think they would have won anyway considering they had 0 depth, but it was just an unnecessary roadblock to throw in front of them.
Sorry, didn't mean to hijack. Sometimes bitterness comes out in the most unexpected places. :) -
The unbalanced schedules are what they are. Go out and win your games. Beat your divisional rivals. Besides, just because a team plays the Yankees more or less doesn't matter as when they played. A game against the Yankees now means a heckuva lot more than it did when the Yankees were in the tank earlier this year.
I would like to see the WS go to 9 games, but I don't know about the 3-4-2. I wish the NL would adopt the DH. I like your scheduling plan, though. However, there's no way the post-season can be finished by 10/15, especially if you're playing two (potentially) 9 game series.
A lot of folks whine about the Cards last year. If they shouldn't be there, then beating them in a series shouldn't be so hard. But to placate these folks, I say the team with the league's lowest win pct in the playoffs (or the WC, or both) 5 in a best of 7 to advance (or 6 in the best of 9). That would never be adopted, though. -
The schedule-makers don't get my wrath. It is just dumb luck. Of course, why are they so unbalanced? I understand that IL games will be different, but you would think they could figure out a way to have divisional rivals plays the other AL teams the same number of times. It's stupid.
Oh, and the Tigers get to play their 8 games against the Yankees starting tonight and going through next week. More grand luck for the Tigers! Meanwhile, the Indians get to beef up on their tilted schedule with the Devil Rays. Bottom line is, the Tigers are better than the Indians and deserve the Central way more. The Indians have been lucky this year. -
Ed -
To bring it down to 28 teams, get rid of the Florida teams and move the Brewers back to the AL.
AL East
Tigers
Yankees
Red Sox
Indians
Orioles
Blue Jays
White Sox
AL West
A's
Angels
Mariners
Rangers
Brewers
Royals
Twins
NL East
Phillies
Cubs
Cardinals
Reds
Nationals
Mets
Pirates
AL West
Dodgers
Padres
Giants
Rockies
D-backs
Astros
Braves -
-
-
So the Jazz were better than the teams they beat in the Playoffs? The Warriors were better than the Mavs?
I understand getting hot...but if you're hot, you're the better team at that moment. Playoffs are not played in a vaccum. And they aren't played in the Regular season, or whenever. They're played right then and there, and that's the nature of the beast. -
More dumb luck for the Tigers - half the team has the flu. The flu? In August? What are the chances? Of course, Guillen hit a granner and Pudge homered, both of whom had a mild case of it. Can't complain since they won last night. But it's a long road ahead with 7 more against the Yankees, as the Indians play their cushy schedule.
-
In the NFL, the teams that have the best records get the hardest schedule. Could it be the same in MLB?
I am sure that the Players Association will be glad to toss out a bunch of teams. NOT
To me going to a 9 game World Series is like adding the designated hitter, lights to Wrigley and all night games in the world series... all bad ideas. Leave the game alone. -
Page 1 of 2