Kramerica Industries

The introduction graphics to each telecast from that time, seen more-so on the last page, are high ranking on the nostalgia meter for me.

Also reminds me of the time when the SNB theme was slower and more melodic.

Because, historically, the Mariners are ing awful.

Only existing American League franchise to never reach the World Series. If memory serves, their only playoff appearances came in 1995, 1997, 2000, and 2001, they made the ALCS in three of those seasons, but the closest they have ever come to the World Series was a pair of 4-2 ALCS defeats in '95 (vs. Cleveland) and '00 (vs. New York).

Seattle's the most irrelevant baseball team in the American League, and arguably MLB altogether.

So I decided to venture onto HFBoards and OH GOD

is it really an issue of readiness? Cleveland is more ready than either, the NHL just doesn't want to be there

sorry for Cleve'jacking the thread, but yeah that's another one that would totally make the "HFBoards Comment Aggregator Thread that Never Was"

Yeah, this can't go on any longer:

http://boards.sportslogos.net/topic/93216-hfboards-bad-comment-aggregator-thread/

Done.

I think we also need to point out that the provisionally named "Seattle Totems" have a best case scenario of being 4th banana on the local sports scene, and will drop to 5th if the city ever gets its baseball team. Hell, depending on the support Washington gets up there they might drop another rank. Market size or not, does this league really want to put itself in a position where it will lose attendance and ratings wars to the ing MLS?!

There's a Freudian Slip if I've ever heard one.

It's like there's an eternal nut kicker on the city of Quebec.

I mean, jeez, like seeing their team leave town and win the Cup the next year, something that never happened in French Canada, wasn't bad enough.

The closest thing I can think of, and I'm not sure if it's done anymore, is the Swedish League from roughly 2003-2004.

I played a Swedish season one time on NHL 2004 (MIF Redhawks, who have only played one season in the top flight since being relegated after that season). Back then, there were 50 games in a season, and 12 teams in the league. I guessed the system was to play four games against five teams, and five against six teams (home/road divvied up however). Instead, the system was four games against eight teams, and SIX against the other three. From the Redhawk perspective, then, it worked like this:

Six game opponents: Frolunda, Linkoepings, and HV71

Four game opponents: Everybody else

So, even though the league format doesn't have any divisions, it kinda sorts creates mini-divisions for scheduling ease.

Is this what you mean?

I very rarely stick up for Quebec, because French Canada seems like an entirely different dimension from the rest of the Canadian land of which I am very fond of, but the NHL really needs to return the provincial capital. Seattle isn't a bad choice, it's a good northern city that has a good sports base, but they don't have a suitable arena at the present and that area already (probably) has a good percentage of Canucks fans.

Bring Quebec City back to the fold. We will all be happier for it.

The little trick I discovered, as to prevent getting sent to a page of your notifications, is to hover over your name until the basic information comes up, and then click on the notifications.

This may work if you hover over other names, for all I know, but I know your own name works.

To clarify, I meant since interleague play started in 1997. New York has been the visitor in 2004 and 2010, but the Dodgers haven't been there for a regular season game.

I think the Yankees have been to LA three times, actually.

It's pretty mind-boggling that probably the most historic inter-league (not interleague) rivalry has seen the Dodgers not make the trek to Yankee Stadium until the 17th year of IL play. They've only met in the World Series 11 times before.

More-so than anything else, my idea was borne out of the idea of eliminating the weak sister division winner, again, like the NHL is doing beginning next year. A 38-44 team had home ice in the East last year, which is unforgivable. In baseball, there have been a number of 80-89 win division winners and 85-90+ win teams that missed the playoffs in those same seasons. Flukes will happen, but they shouldn't be so frequent. A year like 2002 is a case where three divisions worked, since the division winners that year were 103, 103, and 95 wins.

I dunno. Maybe it's just parity that is at the true source of the problem. The best teams in any sport should be legitimately excellent teams. We don't really have that in baseball these days.

If we're talking about previous iterations of this thread, then I'm left to wonder why they were burned off in the first place.

All I can think of is that these threads get broken off like we break off seasonal threads. You know, like the 2009-10 buffoonery of Glendale, then the 2010-11 buffoonery, and the beat goes on.

That's just a strike against MLB deciding to even out the leagues then. Put Houston back in the NL, though it would create a mildly sticky situation about who to put in the NL East. Chicago is the only team I could think of, based on geography, but even then that's a team west of the Mississippi and also has a ton more rivalries in that division than they would in the East. Ditto with St. Louis and Milwaukee. I guess Houston?

I wanted to keep things within the general parameters of the league sizes and playoff qualification. In general, a two-division format will yield more teams that should've been in the playoffs than a three-division format does. It was pretty heinous last year that 7th place Detroit not only won their division, but they were actually the first AL team to clinch. Thus, they were able to set themselves up for the playoffs while the 95, 94, and 93 win Yankees, A's, Rangers, and Orioles had to duke it out to the finish line, and even a little bit beyond that.

Also, I don't want to insinuate that Miggy had a poor season or something in 2012. In most years, I would agree with being an MVP winner. But Trout's combination of power, speed, and top-flight defense at a premium position like CF, not to mention Anaheim's stellar record with him in the lineup, put him over the top, in my eyes. Miggy was not exactly as adequate as we think he was at 3B. He was one of the worst defensive 3B in the league.

I've refused to delve into this thread before, but it really dawned on me while thinking about Trout/Cabrera from the 2012 MVP discussion (yeah, that still happens with me) earlier today about how MLB could benefit from a simplified two division format than the somewhat cluttered three division format. This thinking was also inspired by the NHL re-alignment, which, for many of the problems I have with its execution (which I've discussed in the NHL thread), I do like the premise of.

Of course, the first question would be - why realign at all?

A: Kinda like how the NHL at times tends to have one weak division get an automatic high seed (Southeast Division almost every time), this also happens regularly in baseball, and seems to happen quite a bit with the AL Central. Detroit won 88 games in 2012, which was fewer than Texas (93), Tampa Bay (91), and Anaheim (89), all teams who missed the playoffs. In 2009, Minnesota won 87 games, but had a worse win percentage than Texas (due to playing a Game 163; Minnesota and Detroit won 86 games in the 162 game slate). In 2008, Chicago eked past Minnesota in a Game 163, but had a worse win percentage than the Yankees (89-73 vs. 89-74). Obviously, the 2005 NL West is the most egregious example, when 82-80 San Diego got in the playoffs (and then got BLASTED in the NLDS), and the 2006 Cardinals winning the Central at 83-78 is also pretty memorable (for some wrong reasons).

Yes, the 1972 Mets won a remarkably weak NL East with a miserable 82-79 record (and then beat the Reds juggernaut in the best-of-5 NLCS, showing the randomness of short series'). This is about the only memorable example of a two division format yielding a horribly weak division in the 25 years this lasted in MLB (1969-1993). Sometimes, random happens, but it happens much less often than it does now.

So, with that in mind, my proposal would be able to keep a four-team playoff in each league, while doing a better job at getting the best teams in the playoffs.

AL East:

New York Yankees

Boston

Baltimore

Toronto

Tampa Bay

Cleveland

Detroit

AL West:

Anaheim

Texas

Seattle

Oakland

Houston*

Chicago White Sox

Minnesota

Kansas City

NL East:

New York Mets

Atlanta

Washington

Philadelphia

Florida

Pittsburgh

Cincinnati

NL West:

Los Angeles

San Francisco

Arizona

Colorado

San Diego

St. Louis

Chicago Cubs

Milwaukee*

*I fully agree that the Brewers should've returned to the AL, not switching the Astros over after 50 NL seasons. But, since Milwaukee would go in the AL West anyway (geographic rivalries with Chicago and Minnesota), this is a very simple swap if you so wish it to be that way.

If this were applied to 2012, for instance, then the Yankees, A's, Rangers, and Orioles all get into the playoffs without any dispute, and in the NL, the Nationals, Giants, Reds, and Braves all do the same. In other words, the four best records in each league (...wait for it...) ALL REACH THE PLAYOFFS!

And, really, isn't that the way it's supposed to work anyway? Detroit, talent-wise, was one of the best teams in the AL, but they actually would've gotten punished for their immense underachievement in the regular season. So it goes.

And Mike Trout might've won the MVP award he so deserved, too.

This is why I used to love going to Yankees/Rays games at Tropicana Field.

I never sat in the crummy upper deck seat ticket I purchased. I like sitting (standing) in the outfield seats. This came in handy in September of 2010 when there were some high stakes games being played. Room to roam. In that one respect, and only that one respect - God bless the Trop.

For anyone watching Chicago/Detroit today - there is an obvious Datsyuk fake at times visible from the main camera angle, on the left-facing side.

Straight nameplate AND the "13" portion on the back is all sorts of weird, color-wise.

I'm sure you've been more than just a follower in the past...

Wouldn't really have thought that one qualifies under the sock puppeting restriction.

Gotta be careful, I guess.

The changing username function hasn't worked for, like, 1.5 years now. Either you're stuck with your current ID, or you'd have to create a new account and start from scratch.

Knowing the NHL, the realignment will take place and THEN Phoenix gets the heave-ho back to Quebec City.

Why else would realignment be such a popular talking point when it is impractical under the current circumstances?

I think even the Tampa Bay Rays have managed to sell out two games at some point during their franchise history...

I might get ripped apart for this, but this is the worst the Seahawks have ever looked in their history...

This one is just too hard for me to fully ignore. Not because you're not entitled to your own opinion, but because those are the only uniforms I use for the Seahawks when I play Madden. Those things are beauts. I wish the Seahawks still used the silver britches exclusively, even now. Their home look would shoot up a number of levels.

I like how the Buccaneers look when they wear their white pants. They don't look better than their pewter pants, but I think it still works as an alternative, especially when they go all white.

Right with you on that one. I'll take it a step further and say that I actually like the white pants a bit more than the pewter ones.

But I can appreciate that the Bucs are the only team in the league that has pewter pants.

I thought that plaid phase was just that - a phase - back in 2010. If memory serves, they even had one of their theme roadtrips with everyone wearing double-blue plaid sportcoats. I haven't seen anyone wear those caps around here since that year.

The only reason the Giants looked bad in red jerseys is because, well, they are "Big Blue", so wearing red never made any sense.

If they were ever going to wear alts, they should've gone the throwback route. As it is, the Giants really don't need alts.

This is the best the Bobcats ever looked, imuo...

Did they rip off Dallas' font?