MLB Realignment Lookback

[RyanB06]

I prefer to pass judgement on whether something is a success or failure based on more than one season's worth of data, thank you very much.

Let's see what happens four, five years out before declaring Houston AL to be a mistake.

[ScoffingYayap]

I personally think that the Rockies should have moved to the AL instead of the Astros. They're a much better fit for the AL West, and that would also allow the Astros to move to the NL West.

However I personally don't have much of a problem with the Astros being an AL team; Texas feels like an American League state if I'm honest. A good opposite-counterpart with Pennsylvania.

[Gothamite]

I can't tell you why Milwaukee fans wanted to switch to the NL. Perhaps it was hearing about the Braves' glory days (and for many of them, remembering when the Braves were in town). Maybe it was trading the White Sox for the Cubs. I don't know why they wanted it. I'm only telling you that they did.

[FiddySicks]

I personally think that the Rockies should have moved to the AL instead of the Astros. They're a much better fit for the AL West, and that would also allow the Astros to move to the NL West.

This is what I would've liked as well. Houston has such a long history in the NL, and they've even been in the NL West before. Moving them back there shouldn't have been any issue. The Rockies fit perfectly in the AL with their elevation issues, and they really don't have a terribly strong history in the NL (07 was nice, but still ultimately forgettable).

[CubsFanBudMan]

Long-term, I think the Astros will like having Texas in their division over renewing any old NL West rivalries. I'm sure the Rangers already love it. Spreading both Wests across three time zones doesn't make much sense to me.

[JayMac]

Wow the Rockies would have been a good choice. I didn't even think of them. The Astros will be an NL team to me for a while. It took me a while to get used to the Brewers being in the NL.

[BBTV]

The arguement that states witih two teams should have them in opposite leagues is really a dumb one (with the obvious exception of when there's multiple teams in the same market.)

State != market.

[Gothamite]

True. It's not like fans in Philadelphia are going to drive to Pittsburgh to see AL games.

If anything, I would think an intrastate rivalry would be great for both clubs. That's why it boggles my mind that the Royals turned down a chance at all those games with the Cardinals.

[BBTV]

True. It's not like fans in Philadelphia are going to drive to Pittsburgh to see AL games.

If anything, I would think an intrastate rivalry would be great for both clubs. That's why it boggles my mind that the Royals turned down a chance at all those games with the Cardinals.

I don't even get that. The state line thing is so overrated and just creates contrived rivalries ("the Battle for Ohio!"). OMG we have the same governer so we're rivals! I suppose every case is different, but I would imagine that in a lot of cases, the team from the other end of the state is just another city, as opposed to a true rival.

[JayMac]

True. It's not like fans in Philadelphia are going to drive to Pittsburgh to see AL games.

If anything, I would think an intrastate rivalry would be great for both clubs. That's why it boggles my mind that the Royals turned down a chance at all those games with the Cardinals.

I don't even get that. The state line thing is so overrated and just creates contrived rivalries ("the Battle for Ohio!"). OMG we have the same governer so we're rivals! I suppose every case is different, but I would imagine that in a lot of cases, the team from the other end of the state is just another city, as opposed to a true rival.

Exactly. The Phillies and Pirates have not been rivals for a long time. Even the Flyers and Penguins haven't always been great rivals (except for the present).

[ScoffingYayap]

True. It's not like fans in Philadelphia are going to drive to Pittsburgh to see AL games.

If anything, I would think an intrastate rivalry would be great for both clubs. That's why it boggles my mind that the Royals turned down a chance at all those games with the Cardinals.

I don't even get that. The state line thing is so overrated and just creates contrived rivalries ("the Battle for Ohio!"). OMG we have the same governer so we're rivals! I suppose every case is different, but I would imagine that in a lot of cases, the team from the other end of the state is just another city, as opposed to a true rival.

Exactly. The Phillies and Pirates have not been rivals for a long time. Even the Flyers and Penguins haven't always been great rivals (except for the present).

I still don't see why the Pirates aren't in the NL East (Just move the friggin Braves or Marlins to the Central)

[Gothamite]

Because the NL Central is (now) a pretty geographically-contained division. Florida? No thanks.

Maybe Pennsylvania isn't the same, but it doesn't surprise me when cities compete for influence within a state. I do know that Cleveland and Cincinnati have a natural rivalry just as cities (or at least they used to), and there's LA and SF in California. Does Houston ever chafe at the attention Dallas gets?

[BBTV]

Because the NL Central is (now) a pretty geographically-contained division. Florida? No thanks.

Maybe Pennsylvania isn't the same, but it doesn't surprise me when cities compete for influence within a state. I do know that Cleveland and Cincinnati have a natural rivalry just as cities (or at least they used to), and there's LA and SF in California. Does Houston ever chafe at the attention Dallas gets?

Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are nothing alike, geographically, economically, even culturally. They simply aren't rivals (at least out here - I know the thought of Philadelphia gets some blood boiling out west - probably a "big brother" kind of thing) due to the size (Philadelphia is more rivals with Boston, NY, NJ, DC both in sports, and business wise when it comes to luring companies to move etc). (No, I'm not delusional and saying it's in the same category as NY, but then again nothing really is... though the NY Times called it the 6th burrough due to the number of commuters both ways.) Most people in Pittsburgh will at some point in their lives have to come to Philadelphia, while most people in Philadelphia would never think of Pittsburgh if not for their sports teams. None of that is meant to sound derogatory (even though I know it does), it's just fact. .

Maybe Ohio is different since their geographically both kinda in the same region (I know they are in different parts of the state, but not like PA where one city is clearly on the coast and part of the I95 corridor while the other is closer to the Ohio / Great Lakes region) and I guess relatively same size.

I realize that it's not fair to compare Pittsburgh to Buffalo or Phila to NYC, but do Rangers fans get pumped up for the matchups with Buffalo? My guess would be only if the two teams are competing for a playoff spot or actually in the playoffs against each other, and even then, they're just "opponents".

[Cosmic]

Because the NL Central is (now) a pretty geographically-contained division. Florida? No thanks.

Maybe Pennsylvania isn't the same, but it doesn't surprise me when cities compete for influence within a state. I do know that Cleveland and Cincinnati have a natural rivalry just as cities (or at least they used to), and there's LA and SF in California. Does Houston ever chafe at the attention Dallas gets?

Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are nothing alike, geographically, economically, even culturally. They simply aren't rivals (at least out here - I know the thought of Philadelphia gets some blood boiling out west - probably a "big brother" kind of thing) due to the size (Philadelphia is more rivals with Boston, NY, NJ, DC both in sports, and business wise when it comes to luring companies to move etc). (No, I'm not delusional and saying it's in the same category as NY, but then again nothing really is... though the NY Times called it the 6th burrough due to the number of commuters both ways.) Most people in Pittsburgh will at some point in their lives have to come to Philadelphia, while most people in Philadelphia would never think of Pittsburgh if not for their sports teams. None of that is meant to sound derogatory (even though I know it does), it's just fact. .

Maybe Ohio is different since their geographically both kinda in the same region (I know they are in different parts of the state, but not like PA where one city is clearly on the coast and part of the I95 corridor while the other is closer to the Ohio / Great Lakes region) and I guess relatively same size.

I realize that it's not fair to compare Pittsburgh to Buffalo or Phila to NYC, but do Rangers fans get pumped up for the matchups with Buffalo? My guess would be only if the two teams are competing for a playoff spot or actually in the playoffs against each other, and even then, they're just "opponents".

I think those rivalries sort of work, but only one way. Like how you described Philly vs. Pittsburgh, that's similar to the way I think of Buffalo vs. NYC. There is some natural resentment towards NYC from other parts of New York, because they are such a dominant force in state politics that the rest of the state doesn't matter much. NYC doesn't give a damn about Buffalo, though.

[dbadefense1990]

Because the NL Central is (now) a pretty geographically-contained division. Florida? No thanks.

Maybe Pennsylvania isn't the same, but it doesn't surprise me when cities compete for influence within a state. I do know that Cleveland and Cincinnati have a natural rivalry just as cities (or at least they used to), and there's LA and SF in California. Does Houston ever chafe at the attention Dallas gets?

The only kind of rift between those two cities I've ever known was Dallas (and pretty much every other Texas city not-named Austin) calling Houston "too liberal" and "not having enough Texas in them" to be an actual Texas city.*

*I got all this information from "King of the Hill"

[Top Shelf]

True. It's not like fans in Philadelphia are going to drive to Pittsburgh to see AL games.

If anything, I would think an intrastate rivalry would be great for both clubs. That's why it boggles my mind that the Royals turned down a chance at all those games with the Cardinals.

I don't even get that. The state line thing is so overrated and just creates contrived rivalries ("the Battle for Ohio!"). OMG we have the same governer so we're rivals! I suppose every case is different, but I would imagine that in a lot of cases, the team from the other end of the state is just another city, as opposed to a true rival.

Exactly. The Phillies and Pirates have not been rivals for a long time. Even the Flyers and Penguins haven't always been great rivals (except for the present).

I still don't see why the Pirates aren't in the NL East (Just move the friggin Braves or Marlins to the Central)

Better yet, kill off the NL and AL Central and go back to 4 divisions:

AL East

Baltimore Orioles

Boston Red Sox

Cleveland Indians

Detroit Tigers

New York Yankees

Tampa Bay Rays

Toronto Blue Jays

AL West

Chicago White Sox

Houston Astros

Kansas City Royals

Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim

Minnesota Twins

Oakland Athletics

Seattle Mariners

Texas Rangers

NL East

Atlanta Braves

Cincinnati Reds

Miami Marlins

New York Mets

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

Washington Nationals

NL West

Arizona Diamondbacks

Chicago Cubs

Colorado Rockies

Los Angeles Dodgers

Milwaukee Brewers

St. Louis Cardinals

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

[FiddySicks]

True. It's not like fans in Philadelphia are going to drive to Pittsburgh to see AL games.

If anything, I would think an intrastate rivalry would be great for both clubs. That's why it boggles my mind that the Royals turned down a chance at all those games with the Cardinals.

I don't even get that. The state line thing is so overrated and just creates contrived rivalries ("the Battle for Ohio!"). OMG we have the same governer so we're rivals! I suppose every case is different, but I would imagine that in a lot of cases, the team from the other end of the state is just another city, as opposed to a true rival.

Exactly. The Phillies and Pirates have not been rivals for a long time. Even the Flyers and Penguins haven't always been great rivals (except for the present).

I still don't see why the Pirates aren't in the NL East (Just move the friggin Braves or Marlins to the Central)

Better yet, kill off the NL and AL Central and go back to 4 divisions:

AL East

Baltimore Orioles

Boston Red Sox

Cleveland Indians

Detroit Tigers

New York Yankees

Tampa Bay Rays

Toronto Blue Jays

AL West

Chicago White Sox

Houston Astros

Kansas City Royals

Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim

Minnesota Twins

Oakland Athletics

Seattle Mariners

Texas Rangers

NL East

Atlanta Braves

Cincinnati Reds

Miami Marlins

New York Mets

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

Washington Nationals

NL West

Arizona Diamondbacks

Chicago Cubs

Colorado Rockies

Los Angeles Dodgers

Milwaukee Brewers

St. Louis Cardinals

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

I actually don't mind this idea. Swap St. Louis and Cincinnati in the NL and make a few changes here and there in the AL (Indians trade spots with the Twins, you might as well leave Hohston in the west too) and that's almost exactly the breakdown during Spring Training. Split the Cactus League and Grapefruit League into AL and NL and there are your divisions. It would also give these teams another crack at one another exclusively during Spring Training.

[Gothamite]

I rather like the way divisions are aligned now. At least having the three in each league. Along with the wild card, which I opposed but was totally wrong about, MLB has an almost-perfect postseason format.

[Soarindude]

How about we get rid of the dumb NL/AL rules and make them the same so playing in the NL or playing in the AL isn't nearly as important.

[Gothamite]

No, because that would undoubtedly mean the DH in both leagues and I don't want to see that.