TVIXX

MLB Changes 2017

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, jerseyjunk said:

the on field caps now look like fashion caps 

They arguably are. It seems like the purpose of the caps now are more "so that the fans can see them and buy them" than being "part of the uniform." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 10:37 PM, RangersFan4ever said:

Why did the Astros get rid of the all Orange cap for a two-tone Orange cap? 

 

Also, Why did the Astros wear the all navy cap in Boston the other day?

 

They didn't necessarily swap those hats, but rather, they introduced the one with the navy bill to pair with their navy uniforms. 

 

They stopped wearing the all orange cap (with orange uniform accents) bc players just didn't like the look, which is a shame bc that was a great look (minus the batting helmets). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SilverBullet1929 said:
11 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

It is kind of ironic that the distinction on the question of the DH persists even long after the leagues themselves have died.  One wonders how long that will last.

Not for long I say. Like you I love that the DH is in one league and not the other but it makes too much sense from a business perspective to eventually have the DH in both leagues and sadly that day will come sooner than later because baseball is still a business at the end of the day.

 

Unlike many though, Interleague play doesn't bother me. I see more positives to it than negatives and it also isn't going anywhere. I also think there are ways that interleague play could work (or could have worked) even if the leagues were still different/apart. 

 

 

The things I hated about interleague play were the following:
 

  1. League records for each accomplishment meant almost as much as the Major League record.  When Pete Rose was a free agent in 1979, this was before it became apparent that he would catch Ty Cobb's hit record; the focus was on his trying to pass Stan Musial's N.L. mark.  For that reason he didn't even consider signing with an Americal League team.

    Also, Rose's 44-game hitting streak became a National League record, tying him with Wee Willie Keeler.  How would someone reach that mark now that the concept of a "National League game" is gone?  If a National Leaguer hit in 45 consecutive games, would he hold the N.L. record, even though some of those hits would have came against A.L. teams, and some even in A.L. parks?  There is no good answer to this.  The record book is just f-ed.
     
  2. Interleague play ruins the scheduling.  People tout Yankee-Met games and Cubs-Sox games. But, for every one of those, there are plenty of Cardinals-Mariners games or Tigers-Diamondbacks games or some other matchup that no one thinks is special.  So we lose games between actual rivals in order to accommodate this silly gimmick.

    Also, teams within a given division play different schedules. Teams in different divisions play different schedules, a fact which diminishes the fairness of the wild cards; but this occurs also within divisions because of the "rivalry matchups". The Mets play the Yankees every year, even if the N.L. East is matched up with a different A.L. division for that year.  This undermines the integrity of the divisional races.
     

At the next expansion when two new teams come in and bring the total of teams to 32, Major League Baseball could drop interleague play and the wild card, and could realign each league into four 4-team divisions.  Every team could play its three divisional rivals 14 times (42 games) and the 12 teams from the other three divisions 10 times a piece (120 games), for a total of 162 games.  And only division winners would advance to the playoffs, restoring the prestige and the importance of finishing in first place.
 
The result would be that the identities of each league would be strengthened, and that the World Series would have added meaning.
 

Of course I realise that that will not happen, as the people running the game (and also most of the fans) have no respect for baseball history. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

And only division winners would advance to the playoffs 

And that’s why this won’t happen. That would revert to only a two-round playoff, like 1969-1993. Less revenue, not happening. 

 

Shame. I like that idea, too. Especially your ideas about scheduling in a four-division league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Quillz said:
1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

And only division winners would advance to the playoffs 

And that’s why this won’t happen. That would revert to only a two-round playoff, like 1969-1993. Less revenue, not happening. 

 

Shame. I like that idea, too. Especially your ideas about scheduling in a four-division league.

 

Note that four divisions per league would result in three rounds of post-season play including the World Series, just like today: the first round with all 8 divisional champions, the LCS round, and then the World Series.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh right, forgot about that. It could work then. Granted, is the MLB actually considering expansion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much more can a league expand? I feel like 32 should be the max but who knows. 

Also the day they do expand and create a 4 divisions, they’ll probably just follow the NFL playoff system and have the top 2 Division winners in the Division Series while everyone else fights in the Wild Card. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the two division format as well. I actually like that the NHL went back to it. The playoff structure is less than ideal but still. MLB was great when only having the east and west divisions in each league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jmac11281 said:

I love the two division format as well. I actually like that the NHL went back to it. The playoff structure is less than ideal but still. MLB was great when only having the east and west divisions in each league.

It’s because of the 2 divison format we got that mess of a playoff system. I hate it! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, insert name said:

How much more can a league expand? I feel like 32 should be the max but who knows. 

Also the day they do expand and create a 4 divisions, they’ll probably just follow the NFL playoff system and have the top 2 Division winners in the Division Series while everyone else fights in the Wild Card. 

You can't take off two weeks in baseball like you can in football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wild Card could go away if they go to 8 total divisions but Interleague play is going nowhere. The only way Interleague play could go away is if the leagues actually went back to splitting apart and then it might happen only if the two leagues really wanted to differentiate from each other again. With that said, I could also see the leagues splitting but the leagues and team owners still wanting to maximize revenue so then interleague would stay even with separate leagues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(I’m pretty sure there’s a thread elsewhere on this website that can be used to argue interleague and realignments)

Back to having NL and AL logo on hats, I think I’ve seen New Era sell fashions caps like that and I don’t like it. Seems too busy. A sleeve patch might work better but even then, I’m not to big on the idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Quillz said:

Oh right, forgot about that. It could work then. Granted, is the MLB actually considering expansion?

 

 

 

Quotes from him about Charlotte, Montreal, and Mexico City here:

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/

 

 

Article from a couple years ago where he said he wants to settle the stadium situations in Tampa and Oakland first:

 

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/rob-manfred-gives-expansion-timeline-names-two-possible-cities/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if they added a new expansion team in Montreal would they be called the Expos? Normally I'd say no but the whole point of returning to Montreal is how much that city misses the Expos right? So while they wouldn't be the same franchise that has now become the Nationals wouldn't it be fair enough to start a new Expos franchise up there? Throughout history we've had two franchises for the Senators, Braves, and Orioles right? Would they make a second Expos franchise too? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Nats still own the rights to the Expos name, it might be available for an expansion team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Quillz said:

If the Nats still own the rights to the Expos name, it might be available for an expansion team. 

Typo? I'm assuming you meant it might not be available? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

So if they added a new expansion team in Montreal would they be called the Expos? Normally I'd say no but the whole point of returning to Montreal is how much that city misses the Expos right? So while they wouldn't be the same franchise that has now become the Nationals wouldn't it be fair enough to start a new Expos franchise up there? Throughout history we've had two franchises for the Senators, Braves, and Orioles right? Would they make a second Expos franchise too? 

 

The name "Braves" has been borne by only one franchise.

I wouldn't mind if a new team in Montreal were called "Expos" as long as there were no f-ed up record-book shenanigans like with the Browns or the Hornets.   The Senators model is the one to follow.  (Maybe the sensible Canadians will notice that the Winnipeg Jets followed that model, and will do likewise.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

Typo? I'm assuming you meant it might not be available? 

 

If it’s in the hands of MLB, as opposed to an unrelated party, then I’d say it’s available. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

The name "Braves" has been borne by only one franchise.

So Boston Braves and Atlanta Braves are the same franchise? Damn that BOS-ATL interleague "rivalry" for making me think there was actually something to fight for between those two teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:
1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

The name "Braves" has been borne by only one franchise.

So Boston Braves and Atlanta Braves are the same franchise? Damn that BOS-ATL interleague "rivalry" for making me think there was actually something to fight for between those two teams. 

 

Same franchise, with a stop in Milwaukee in between.  And Eddie Mathews played for them in all three cities.


59e65cd4205a0_mathews3cities.thumb.png.bbc72838c4b0ee180ea5104aaef21858.png

 

They had a strong intracity rivalry with the Red Sox; so linking the two teams for an interleague rivalry does make some sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.