# Baseball Tonight? Not A Snowball's chance....



## VegasDen (Jul 12, 2007)

Game 3 of the Philadelphia Phillies-Colorado Rockies playoff on Saturday night has been postponed because of cold, snowy weather.

Major League Baseball rescheduled the game for Sunday night, and Game 4 was pushed back to Monday. Game 5, if necessary, will be played as scheduled on Tuesday in Philadelphia, without a day off for travel.


----------



## Fontano (Feb 7, 2008)

Just more fuel to the fire, that Baseball needs to shave about 30+ games off the schedule.

Start one month later, and finish one month earlier.

It will make Season Tickets more affordable.
It will make every game just that much more important.
Less games canceled from the winterish weather.

Or they could bring back the scheduled double headers.

Less wear and tear on the players (especially the pitchers) can make the playoffs even better.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Fontano said:


> Just more fuel to the fire, that Baseball needs to shave about 30+ games off the schedule.
> 
> Start one month later, and finish one month earlier.
> 
> ...


There's a petition I'd sign in a heartbeat!


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

I wouldn't be in total agreement.

Scale the season back to 154 games - a nod to the "purists".

But, by all means, BRING BACK DOUBLE HEADERS!!!

And third on my "If I Were Emperor of Baseball For A Day" is NO OFF DAYS IN THE PLAYOFFS. Yes, you can have a TRAVEL day, but no OFF days sitting in the same city. In other words, if you're playing 2 games in New York and the first game is Wednesday then GAME 2 IS ON THURSDAY!


----------



## puckwithahalo (Sep 3, 2007)

djlong said:


> "If I Were Emperor of Baseball For A Day"


Allow aluminum bats and lower the pitching mound. :lol:


----------



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

Keep Baseball Starting in April. But end the season around September 15th and start the playoffs in September when the weather is still warmer and have the World Series in the beginning of October, instead of running into Late October. That would be the best solution of all. Or on 2nd thought how about implement a new rule that every new stadium built have a retractable roof? God I hate to even think of how many "snow outs" the Minnesota Twins will start having next year when they move out of the Metrodome and into there new open air facility.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

The great thing about baseball is that the season is so long...the teams that win their divisions deserve to be there unlike some of the flukes that make it to the playoffs in the NFL. Actually, they should just turn the NFL into a large double-elimination tournament.

I would like to see doubleheaders return as well.

There should be no off-days during the playoffs...only travel days. The series should run 2-3-2, not 2-2-1-1-1.

That being said, I wish they'd cut out the wild card and one of the divisions. Have two divisions per league...a best of seven league championship and then the World Series. I know...it won't happen.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

The reason hey went to three divisions was because of expansion. Look at the crowds, historically, when the American and National leagues were 8-team leagues. When you're out of the pennant race in July, attendance plummets.

If you limit the leagues to two divisions, you go back to 7- and 8-team divisions. It's hard enough for there to be interest in Washington, Kansas City and Baltimore now..

Now, imagine that you get off to a bad start in a FOURTEEN or SIXTEEN team league. You will NEVER have a run like Colorado did two years ago or like Minnesota did this year to get into the playoffs.

The wild card also ameliorates one of the problems with division winners being the only ones who get in. Taking this year's AL as an example, the Red Sox had a MUCH better record than the Twins, but the Twins play in the weaker Central Division. So there, you kill two birds with one stone. You get a division where lesser teams have a shot at the playoffs - but you HAVE to win to get in, and you have the Wild Card usually come from a stronger division. Then you set them against each other and the winner gets the right to move on. If the Red Sox had taken on the Twins and lost, well, then the Twins EARNED it - just like how in reality, the Twins earned their shot in by beating the Tigers.

I certainly would NOT add any layers to the playoffs. If I had my choice of something REASONABLE, then I would eliminate the off days in order to squeeze more games in to allow a 7-game divisional series in the same amount of time.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

djlong said:


> The reason hey went to three divisions was because of expansion. Look at the crowds, historically, when the American and National leagues were 8-team leagues. When you're out of the pennant race in July, attendance plummets.
> 
> If you limit the leagues to two divisions, you go back to 7- and 8-team divisions. It's hard enough for there to be interest in Washington, Kansas City and Baltimore now..
> 
> ...


Oh, I understand why they have three divisions and wild cards...doesn't mean I like it. I know they're not going to change back as well. I remember baseball before the LCS and the NHL with six teams. There is always a dichotomy in pro sports between great teams and competition and making money. All of the leagues, led by the NFL are more focused on making money than ever before. Used to be very rich men owned the teams and didn't care that much about making money...their teams were all ego...that's changed...it costs too much and there's too much money out there for it to be ignored.

I think when you cheapen the regular season by making it easier to get into the playoffs you make the championship less impressive. The NFL has become a league where a team can get hot win five or six in a row and be Super Bowl Champs.

BTW, I am an Orioles fan.


----------



## Game Fan (Sep 8, 2007)

First things first. Get rid of Bud Selig as commissioner. Then work out the scheduling issues.


----------



## Galley (Apr 3, 2007)

I consider myself a baseball purist, but with so many teams, the wild card is a necessity. I don't enjoy the thought of the World Series being played in November every four years due to the World Baseball Classic, but I don't want to see the season shortened.


----------



## sorentodd45 (May 12, 2009)

They should cut back the regular season to 160 games. Then make the first round of the playoffs a best of 7.

In this year's playoffs, 3 series in the 1st round were sweeps. How is that exciting for the casual fan of baseball?


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

sorentodd45 said:


> *They should cut back the regular season to 160 games.* Then make the first round of the playoffs a best of 7.
> 
> In this year's playoffs, 3 series in the 1st round were sweeps. How is that exciting for the casual fan of baseball?


Cut 2 games?


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

Baseball needs to do some or all of the following.

1.)Go back to only having one round of post-season,the *World Series*.They play 162 games and if you're not the best team in your league your season should end after 162 games.All the Division and League Championship games are,is more money for the owners,players and TV networks.Since they went to this format,almost every year the same teams make playoffs.

Or
2.)Eliminate 6 teams and go back having 24 teams/6 too a division,east and west.And play a balance schedule,in division 18 games,18X5=90 games out of division play 12 games,12X6=72.

3.)If what i proposed in 1.) is done.Start the World Series the following Tuesday after the regular season ends.Play on Tuesday,Wednesday,Friday,Saturday,and if necessary play on Sunday,Tuesday and Wednesday.And start all the games at 8:05 est.

4.)Or if you do the second one and have a LCS.Make it a best of 5 series and play on Tues,Weds,Fri,if necessary Sat,Sun.Then start the World Series on Tuesday and follow the same schedule.And all games start at 8:05 .est

Those schedule formats for the World Series and LCS worked until everyone got greedy.There's no need of talking about every game for a 1/2 hour before they start playing.And there's definitely no reason for games to start and end how the Phillies&Rockies games did the other night(2:15am .est):nono2:


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Taking your points in order...

1 - Means the death of baseball outside of major metro areas. One 16 and one 14-team league means teams are out of if by the 2nd week of April. Interest plummets and you go back to the days of the St. Louis Browns drawing 400 to a game.

2 - Eliminate 6 teams? Go back a couple of years and you would have had the twins and Rays as prime candidates (remember the Twins were openly talked about for 'contraction'). So there go the '08 AL Champs and the '09 AL central winners.

3 - Start all games at 8:05 EST? Yeah, the Dodger fans would love that. there ARE more timezones than Eastern.

4) They DID have "travel days" back in "the good old days".


----------



## Pete K. (Apr 23, 2002)

World Series games will start at 7:57 p.m. EDT/EST (except Sunday, Nov 1 when it will start a bit later). These are the earliest start times in years. For the California teams this will mean starting in bright sunlight shortly before 5 p.m. While I am a fan of day games, 5 p.m. starts in October are rough on the players and the fans. The players have trouble seeing the ball and the fans complain they can't get to the ball park or get home in time to catch much of the action. Back when all WS games were day games, left coast games started at 1:00 or 1:30 p.m., Pacific time. At least the Sun wasn't blinding the players.


----------



## jerry downing (Mar 7, 2004)

Get rid of the designated hitter in the AL. May be start the season earlier in warmer cities or those that have domes. The season could then end earlier when the weather is still decent. Leave everything else alone.


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

djlong said:


> Taking your points in order...
> 
> 1 - Means the death of baseball outside of major metro areas. One 16 and one 14-team league means teams are out of if by the 2nd week of April. Interest plummets and you go back to the days of the St. Louis Browns drawing 400 to a game.
> 
> ...


1.)I failed to mention in my #1,there would only 24 teams,with 12 in each league.It wouldn't mean the death of baseball outside of Bost,NY,Chi and LA.If you put a competitive team on the field fans will come and see them.Unlike what ESPN and Fox wants us to believe baseball is played outside of those markets.You're not out of it after 2 weeks,have you heard of the 1914 Braves,the 51 Giants,the 64 Cardinals.

2.)Baseball shouldn't of expanded pass 24 teams in 1977,therefore the Rays would never of been the AL champs.If you remember the owner of the Twins at the time(Carl Pohlard)wanted the team contracted and baseball at the time owned the Expos/Nationals.

3.)And East coast fans love staying up till 2-3am watching baseball on work nights

4.)I DID give them a day off for travel,one day.They didn't need more then that unlike they do in "The steroid days"


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Fair enough. 

1) So which 6 teams get the axe? Keep in mind that "poor attendance" is now seen as 20,000 per game average. In "the good old days", that definition was a tenth of that number. At 20K per game, you're still drawing over a million and a half per season. I remember when a million was a lot of souls through the turnstiles. (And the 51 Giants were the only team that had a prayer of catching the Dodgers - I was talking about a mid-pack team out of it by July 4th and a cellar dwellar out of it by May Day, and the 64 Cardinals were the benefits of the worst choke in history to that point)

2) The Rays wouldn't have been the AL champs, the Blue Jays wouldn't have had back-to-back Series wins in the 1990s, Rockies, Marlins or Diamondbacks have their successes in the NL. Baseball's interest spreads when there are more teams. Of course you can't go crazy on that because you then have talent dilution.

3) East Coast fans, and I'm one, can occasionally suck it up. The world doesn't revolve around them. Likewise, starting late on the West Coast is unforgiveable. At least if they start at 6PM PT, you have a prayer of ending by midnight ET.

4) I misinterpreted your remarks. I agree that travel days are fine. In-city off-days aren't and they're only there for the networks.

Oh yeah - lose the DH. If the union whines, expand the rosters from 25 to 26 and be done with it.


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

The six teams i would eliminate are,the Marlins,Rays,Nationals,Padres,Mariners and Royals.I did some research and compared the overall populated of the country with the attendance and found a higher percentage of the population attended the games in the "good ole days"then what they do now.Also during that era people of color weren't allowed too play MLB the majority of time,and therefore not many would attend games.

Since they started having later starting times for the WS,the ratings have dropped significantly.There are 2 generations that never seen a complete WS ending before 11pm.And school age children haven't seen a game past the 5th or 6th inning.

The DH i would eliminate also.A lousy fielder has to play in the field,therefore pitchers should have to bat.I would also eliminate inter-league play.The majority of the match ups there is limited interest in.I am a Reds fan and this i had no interest in seeing them play the Blue Jays.


----------



## jazzyd971fm (Sep 1, 2007)

Laker44 said:


> The DH i would eliminate also.A lousy fielder has to play in the field,therefore pitchers should have to bat.I would also eliminate inter-league play.The majority of the match ups there is limited interest in.I am a Reds fan and this i had interest in seeing them play the Blue Jays.


Good points here;

1 Yes eliminate the DH, All pitchers should have to bat, maybe end some of the beanballing that goes on.

2 If they can't set up inter-league play so that all teams in a division play the same teams from the other league(for division races),eliminate inter-league play.

3 Yes bring back doubleheaders. They would have to be day-night doubleheaders because baseball doesn't want to lose any revenue from the gate(schedule doubleheaders during the summer when kids are out of school).Would have the season end maybe mid Sept. and have the World Series end no later than Oct.31(even before then ! )

4 For the World Series, maybe go to Sat.-Sun.-Tue.-Wed.-Thu.-Sat.-Sun. format. More viewership on weekends(maybe Sat. afternoon games-baseball would lose against the NFL on Sun.)

Just my .02


----------



## jazzyd971fm (Sep 1, 2007)

Also have the All-Star Game back the way it was. Home field in playoffs & World Series by best record. The other sports don't seem to have a problem with this.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

puckwithahalo said:


> Allow aluminum bats and lower the pitching mound. :lol:


Then the average 3 hour game would turn into a 4 hour game


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

djlong said:


> Taking your points in order...
> 
> 1 - Means the death of baseball outside of major metro areas. One 16 and one 14-team league means teams are out of if by the 2nd week of April. Interest plummets and you go back to the days of the St. Louis Browns drawing 400 to a game.
> 
> ...


Actually, I do prefer games starting at 5:00pm PT. I don't have to stay up after 10:00pm to finish watching a game and I can still catch my prime time programs.


----------



## Ryan (Apr 24, 2002)

On the World Baseball Classic and Interleague Play: I believe baseball is out of the Olympics now, so do the WBC every 4 years opposite the summer olympics (I think they may already be on a similar schedule). For Interleague Play, either do it once every four year opposite WBC (and coinciding with summer olympics for added interest to MLB) or do it every other year, on the off years from Olympics and WBC.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Laker44 said:


> The six teams i would eliminate are,the Marlins,Rays,Nationals,Padres,Mariners and Royals.I did some research and compared the overall populated of the country with the attendance and found a higher percentage of the population attended the games in the "good ole days"then what they do now.Also during that era people of color weren't allowed too play MLB the majority of time,and therefore not many would attend games.


Did you factor in the number of other major sports teams or the success of those teams for each city? I.e., the Green Bay Packers are the only game in town, whereas you have the Marlins, Heat, Panthers and Dolphins competing for the Miami sports dollar.

So you would eliminate PROFITABLE teams? What's more, a little research says you'd knock off 4 World Champions, 3 League Champions, 12 Division Champions and a Wild Card (cumulative of those teams since 1976)

I mean, checking some attendance figures, the Expos were between 2nd and 4th in the league from 1977-1983. As the Nationals, you have a team in shables that still drew 23,000 per game this year.

The Marlins? Their attendance problems are the owners (fire sale your players and you won't draw squat) and the ballpark (which is being replaced).

The Rays? Average attendance up 6,000 from two years ago.

The Padres? They were doing well over 30,000 per game before this year's fire sale.

The Mariners? They're mid-pack in the AL with 27,000 per game.

The Royals? Ok, their glory years had them at or slightly under 30,000 per game. But they ARE up 3,000 per game this past year even with a worse record than 2008 and a worse economy - amazing what spending money on making the ballpark nicer can do.

Here's a gentle reminder of perspective. The 1990 Yankees averaged 21,589. In 1972 it was 12,000. Even during the Mantle/Maris chase of 1961 it was only 21,500 - and that was LONG after integration so you can't blame that.

Those same years for the Mets were 33,738 [1990], 27,361 [1972] and 11,532 in their inagural year of 1962 (since they weren't around in '61)

And my Red Sox? 1965 averaged barely over 8,000 per game. In 1990 the average was over 31,000 - almost 10,000 more than the Yankees that year in a ballpark with 2/3 the capacity.

The idea of contracting a team averaging 3 times more than "established" teams did in the years when those "established" teams had far less competition just seems wrong when you look at the historical perspective.

Just out of curiosity, why didn't the Twins make your list when they (and the Expos) were on MLB's own proposed contraction list not that many years ago?


----------

