16/14 & 6/4

[44Fishy]

I know I'm 10-12 years late on this topic, but can somebody please explain to me the logic behind the way the divisions and leagues are set up-

 

16 teams in one league and 14 in the other-

6 teams in the NL Central, 4 teams in the AL West-

 

somebody told me it has something to do with balanced/unbalanced schedules or inter-league play, but it didn't make sense to me-

 

it seems ridiculously unfair that the teams in the NL Central have to beat 5 other teams to get a guaranteed playoff spot when the AL West teams only have to be superior to 3 other teams-

[kramnoj]

If you have 15 teams in each league, and you want all 30 teams to play on one day, then you need to have an interleague game every day that all 30 teams are playing. For some people, that isn't a good idea. You don't want to have games in September, when games feel more important, to be decided by interleague play. It's more exciting if September is played between division rivals.

 

it seems ridiculously unfair that the teams in the NL Central have to beat 5 other teams to get a guaranteed playoff spot when the AL West teams only have to be superior to 3 other teams-

 

This is true in theory. I guess the reality of the situation though is that Pittsburgh and the Reds are two of the smaller markets in the game, so it's not quite as bad as it could be. I'd much rather be in the NL Central than replace Baltimore in the AL East, for example.

[Invader3K]

They don't want to have interleague play throughout the whole season. If it was an even 15/15 split, that's what they would have to do.

 

Yeah, it's always bothered me that the Brewers are in the only 6 team division as well.

 

My guess would be someday MLB will expand again, to an even 32 teams, and then things will get balanced out more evenly.

[bjkrautk]

15 teams / league means that either an interleague series is always ongoing, or one team in each league always has a night off. Neither one fits what MLB wants to do with its scheduling.

 

EDIT: Curse my slow typing; there were no replies when I went to post this!

[Invader3K]

As an aside, there was a lot of talk at the beginning of the season that they are giving serious consideration to adding a couple more playoff spots. Maybe there will be more talk about that this off-season.

[kramnoj]

My guess would be someday MLB will expand again, to an even 32 teams, and then things will get balanced out more evenly.

 

That presents it's own questions. Do you have 8 4-team divisions and stay with 4 playoff teams? Do you go to 4 8-team divisions and have 2 WC teams? Or do you go with 8 4-team divisions and then expland the playoffs to 6 teams per league? Go with 2 WC in each division and the two best teams in each league get a bye for the first round? Or go NBA style, and have 8 teams from each league make the playoffs?

[Invader3K]

No, an NBA or NHL style playoff would be terrible for baseball. I think you go with four divisions in each league (North, South, East, West), and have one WC from each league. The only problem with that is I'm not sure what you do with a 10 team playoff system.

 

I think when you have more than a third of the league getting in, it starts to get pretty watered down. If they go to 32 teams, I would hope 10 or 12 teams would be the absolute maximum amount of playoff teams.

[brwrsfan]

The biggest problem with a 10 or 12 team playoff is that teams have to get a bye round. This isn't really a problem in football, as teams use it to prepare and get healthy.

 

In baseball, it would seem a HUGE disadvantage to me to have to sit for a week just because you had the best record in the league. Yes, I know they could use it to get healthy and would be well rested while the other team has just played 3-7 games (depending on the format) but as we all know, baseball players can accumulate a rather large amount of rust after 7-10 days of inactivity. Often times, players are at their best when they're playing almost every day, consitent at-bats, etc. Now the best teams in the league have to sit for a week...just seems like a bad idea.

 

Another issue I could possibly see is the length of the season. If you add another round to the playoffs, they're going to go into November unless they shorten the regular season by 10-15 games. Early-Mid November baseball in places like Minnesota, Cleveland, Detroit, etc could get pretty ugly.

[patrickgpe]

I always felt moving houston to the nl west would be fair. That would take care of the problem and make things more fair.

[joepepsi]

Toronto is the team I feel most sorry for in the current configuration. In either Central division they would have been good enough to compete for a playoff spot most of this decade.

[davego]

I'd assume the regular season schedule would have to be shortened in order to account for another round of playoffs. I'd suspect most teams would oppose that. However, if TV really wanted that extra round (and I wonder if they do) you could see it become viable.

[Invader3K]

I always felt moving houston to the nl west would be fair. That would take care of the problem and make things more fair.

Huh? You mean move them to the AL West? Otherwise I'm not following you.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I'd like to see baseball go back to two divisions per league and then add another wildcard for each league. They could keep the 16/14 NL/AL team breakdown to keep from having a constant interleague series, and give the best 4 teams in each league the best chance to make the playoffs, since there won't be decent teams getting inflated records by beating up on inferior teams in a 4-5 team division.

 

The AL is a great example of how this would work well this season. Angels decimated by injuries to this point, no real stud teams showing up in either the AL west or central, and then the AL east appears to be loaded. both wildcard teams could come out of a hypothetical AL eastern division (AL east + 1/2 the AL central teams), and the AL west would get the division winner as its lone playoff entrant.

 

I'd rather see the Brewers play more games against teams outside of Pittsburgh, Cincy, St. Louis, Cubs, and Astros anyway. The current divisional setup regionalizes baseball too much, IMO.

[Invader3K]

Chorizo, I kind of like that idea. It does get old seeing the Brewers play the same teams, especially bad ones like the Reds and Pirates. Yeah, it's nice to beat up on them, but it's not a compelling ticket buy. It would be nice to see teams like the Braves, Phillies, Mets, or Dodgers more than once a year at Miller Park.

 

If I had my way, I'd probably take it a step further and do away with divisions completely, and just have the top 4 or 6 or whatever teams make the playoffs from each league.

[Patrick425]

I agree that the best 4 teams in each league should make the playoffs in theory. However, until there is full revenue sharing and a hard salary cap, I'm not sure that eliminating the Central Division in both leagues is a fair way to do things.

[patrickgpe]

Huh? You mean move them to the AL West? Otherwise I'm not following you

yeah i don't know what i was thinking, you would create natural rivalries with the teams in the sw but then you have 6 teams in the west.

[owbc]

I'm torn about this because I really like the wild card, but ideally you would have 32 teams with 8 divisions and no wild card. There's something fundamentally wrong with naming a second-place team world champions. I guess it would be fair if there was complete competitive balance, otherwise it would be too unfair for small markets to always have to finish ahead of the big market teams to get in.

[endaround]

The more divisions you have the weaker World Series winners become

[bucks2281]

I'd rather name a second-place team the MLB Champion than have a situation like the NFL where you had an 8-8 and 9-7 team win their respective divisions, while an 11-5 team misses the playoffs altogether. Heck, the 9-7 Cardinals were 2 minutes away from winning the Super Bowl. The two division format does a better job of ensuring that the teams with the best records qualify for the playoffs. I'd settle for an 8 division format if there were 12 total playoff teams, but I'm absolutely against adding an another Wild Card. Why devalue the accomplishment of making the playoffs?

[logan82]

Split it into 2 divisions with 2 division winners and 2 wild card teams. You are more likely to end up with the 4 best teams that way than you would with 4 divisions. Wild card teams are rarely the 4th best team in the playoffs as it is. They are usually the 2nd or third best and happen to be stuck in the division with the best team.

[jhart05]

I really hope they wouldn't go to 4 divisions in each league.

 

You could easily have a .500, or worse, team make the playoffs in that scenario.

 

Just last year with three divisions, we had an 84-win team make the playoffs, while an 89-win and two 86-win teams sat home.

[brewdude15]

All this talk about adding 2 more teams to the league has me wondering....where would they be located and what would they be called? Do you bring back the Expos and another old team? Do you create 2 brand new franchises?

 

Personally, I would add 2 brand new teams (both to the AL - one in the central, one in the west). A team in Indiana (central) and maybe Sacramento (west). I also think North Carolina or Tennessee would be great places for a baseball team.

 

Possible nicknames for Indiana's team:

 

Lakers

Huskers

Express

 

For Sacramento:

 

Miners

Knights

 

 

 

any other suggestions? my creativity isn't coming up with much at the moment...

[kramnoj]

The best place for a new team would be Brooklyn, or Jersey, somewhere around there. The two NY teams built smaller stadiums. That means that some fans are going to be seeing fewer games, or paying more for the games they go to. By increasing the supply of baseball tickets, demand and thus price would presumably go down for the existing NY teams, decreasing the advantage they currently have. It's not likely to happen, but it would be great if it did.

 

Other places that I've seen mentioned: Portland and Vegas

[sbrylski]

NY/NJ is the only place that could support a decently payrolled team.

 

Portland, Sacramento, and San Antonio have three of the best attended minor league franchises. They could probably take on teams, not necessarily competitive ones though.

 

EDIT: As for nicknames, Sacramento was the Solons or Senators for much of their independent PCL existence. I like the former for a big league club. I know we can't have a major league club called the RiverCats.

[brewdude15]

I really don't think there will ever be 3 teams in any sport in New York.