Interleague Play

[mjrbaseball]

I got a news update from mlb.com like I do, and it noted that there are some never-before-seen match-ups in the upcoming session of Interleague Play (at least in terms of one team at another). I thought after all these years, all of the match-ups would have happened at least once by now. For example, the story says it's the first time the Red Sox have played at Great American Ball Park in Cincinnati, the Braves are making their first trip to play the L.A. Angels in Anaheim, the Rockies will be at the White Sox for the first time ever, and the Texas Rangers will play the Mets in New York.

Of course, what the story doesn't say is these are the first regular season meetings of these types. We all know the Red Sox played in Cincinnati for the 1975 World Series. (This is their first visit to GABP, I guess they mean.)

And for the Rangers, it may be their first time playing at the Mets, but it isn't their first trip to Shea. ... They played there when the Yankees made Flushing their home in 1975.

[CC97]

The Astros and Padres have still yet to play at Toronto (and once again won't be in 2008), the Jays are making their first ever appearance at Pittsburgh next weekend.

[Dilbert]

The Reds have yet to play interleague play at Camden Yards

[saturn93]

The Cubs have never been to Fenway to play the Red Sox and the Coliseum against the Athletics. Also, the Angels have never been to Wrigley Field.

However, this will be the first trip for the Cubs to Tropicana Field next week, and the week after, the Orioles make their first trip to Wrigley Field.

[BaltimoreFan]

The Orioles are playing at Wrigley for the first time ever this season.

I really think that MLB has to make a decision with this. Either equalize the leagues so the schedules are even, or end interleague play (expansion or contraction seem out of the question). Interleague play has really become a mess.

[Hat Boy]

The Astros and Padres have still yet to play at Toronto (and once again won't be in 2008)

One of the big arguments for inter-league play was so that fans can see star players they might not otherwise get a chance to see. So, here we are 11 years later and that little boy in Toronto who dreamed of seeing Craig Biggio and Jeff Bagwell play is SOL.

Either equalize the leagues so the schedules are even, or end interleague play (expansion or contraction seem out of the question). Interleague play has really become a mess.

In 2008, the Red Sox play more games in Philadelphia than the do in Cleveland. How messed up is that?

[PeytonManningRocks]

As far as I know, the Indians will be making their first visit to Dodger Stadium. Also the Dodgers have yet to come to Yankee Stadium in the regular season.

[CC97]

The Astros and Padres have still yet to play at Toronto (and once again won't be in 2008)

One of the big arguments for inter-league play was so that fans can see star players they might not otherwise get a chance to see. So, here we are 11 years later and that little boy in Toronto who dreamed of seeing Craig Biggio and Jeff Bagwell play is SOL.

I wasn't quite "a little boy" but in 2003 I couldn't wait to see Sammy Sosa when the Cubs came to town, what happens? He gets caught with cork in his bat, and appeals his suspension just long enough to be suspended throughout the entire series in Toronto.

In hindsight I don't really care, but at the time I thought I just been robbed of my only chance to ever see Sammy Sosa play in person (remember this was back when he was a real fan favourite)

[Shumway]

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think the Angels have ever ventured to Philadelphia...they might've played before, but I think it was in Anaheim, during the Mo Vaughn/Randy Velarde/Jorge Fabregas era. I can't wait for next Friday's game. It looks like I'm gonna see Ervin Santana pitch for the first time.

[HedleyLamarr]

Off the top of my head, the only two places the Braves haven't played in is Anaheim (which will happen in about 10 minutes), and Kansas City.

Of the teams that haven't come to Atlanta, I definitely know Seattle hasn't played here (that'll change next weekend), and I can't remember Texas playing here, which boggles me because the Braves have played a few times in Texas.....

[HedleyLamarr]

I really think that MLB has to make a decision with this. Either equalize the leagues so the schedules are even, or end interleague play (expansion or contraction seem out of the question). Interleague play has really become a mess.

MLB can do one of two options to make Interleague play more fair, at least when it comes to divisions:

1. Reduce the divisional games to 12, and use those extra 3-game series towards more Interleague games.

2. Divide the NL and AL into two halves/groups (Think the old divisional alignment) such as these:

NL "Eastern": Atlanta, Florida, Philadelphia, NY Mets, Washington, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Houston

NL "Western": Arizona, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Colorado, Chicago, St. Louis, Milwaukee

AL "Eastern": Boston, Baltimore, NY Yankees, Tampa Bay, Toronto, Detroit, Cleveland

AL "Western": Anaheim, Oakland, Seattle, Texas, Kansas City, Minnesota, Chicago

Each group plays a 3-game series at one group from the other league, and one 3-game series at home against the other group, then vice-versa the next season, like this:

NL "Eastern": vs. AL Eastern, @ AL Western

NL "Western": vs. AL Western, @ AL Eastern

AL "Eastern": vs. NL Western, @ NL Eastern

AL "Western": vs. NL Eastern, @ NL Western

Teams no longer are able to claim an unequal schedule, as every team plays each other. Fans are rewarded by being able to see every team at home every two years.

The traditionalists wouldn't like this because it adds even more Interleague games to the schedule, but most fans would gladly trade in a 3rd home series with a divisional team for one 3-game series against an Interleague opponent that they've never/rarely played before. Fans of the natural rivalries won't be happy about losing half of their Interleague games against each other, but you've got to give a little to get a little more schedule equality across the board for everyone.

[IronChefShark]

I dont think the Giants have played at Jacobs Field/Progressive Park yet.

I could be wrong though

EDIT: If they haven't, next week will be thier first visit to Cleveland.

[BaltimoreFan]

I really think that MLB has to make a decision with this. Either equalize the leagues so the schedules are even, or end interleague play (expansion or contraction seem out of the question). Interleague play has really become a mess.

MLB can do one of two options to make Interleague play more fair, at least when it comes to divisions:

1. Reduce the divisional games to 12, and use those extra 3-game series towards more Interleague games.

2. Divide the NL and AL into two halves/groups (Think the old divisional alignment) such as these:

Personally I think it'd be best to just have one of the NL teams switch to the AL. Then you'd have 5 teams in each division. The problem is that there would have to be at least one interleague match-up every series. However I don't think that would be such a horrible/hard thing to do.

Your plan is better than the current system, but you'd still have the mess of uneven divisions.

[njmeadowlanders]

The Astros and Padres have still yet to play at Toronto (and once again won't be in 2008)

One of the big arguments for inter-league play was so that fans can see star players they might not otherwise get a chance to see. So, here we are 11 years later and that little boy in Toronto who dreamed of seeing Craig Biggio and Jeff Bagwell play is SOL.

Either equalize the leagues so the schedules are even, or end interleague play (expansion or contraction seem out of the question). Interleague play has really become a mess.

In 2008, the Red Sox play more games in Philadelphia than the do in Cleveland. How messed up is that?

Yeah, the Mets are @ the Yankees and Angels 3x, yet only played 2 at Wrigley. It's BS...especially for an old NL-East rivalry...

And FYI, the Mets have never had the ChiSox visit Shea...(to add to that list...)

[friarcanuck]

The Astros and Padres have still yet to play at Toronto (and once again won't be in 2008)

One of the big arguments for inter-league play was so that fans can see star players they might not otherwise get a chance to see. So, here we are 11 years later and that little boy in Toronto who dreamed of seeing Craig Biggio and Jeff Bagwell play is SOL.

Either equalize the leagues so the schedules are even, or end interleague play (expansion or contraction seem out of the question). Interleague play has really become a mess.

In 2008, the Red Sox play more games in Philadelphia than the do in Cleveland. How messed up is that?

Screw that kid. I want to see the Killer B's.

[ZapRowsdower8]

*Homer Alert*

My biggest gripe about interleagueplay is the "rivalry week" series. Every year the Mets/Yankees, Dodgers/Angels, Reds/Indians, Cubs/White Sox, O's/Nats (Am I missing any?) get to play a home and home series against each other while my Buccos are forced to play a National League series against some other NL team getting the end of the stick or an AL team nobody else wants. (Yes, I realize the Pirates are the NL team nobody wants.)

I like interleagueplay, not enough to miss it if it went away, but its enjoyable. The best baseball game I have ever been to was the Pirates vs. Indians at Three Rivers. Fans from both sides were totally into it.

I wish every team could have that one home and home "rivalry" series. Unfortunately I really only see two options for the Pirates and both already have "interleague rivals." First, of course, is Cleveland. Long time ongoing feud between the two towns. From Cleveland, it takes about half the time to get to Pittsburgh than it does to get to Cincinnati.

Second would be Baltimore. The two cities share a very similar history, both very tradition blue collar towns that have reinvented themselves as medical research centers.. They have met in the World Series twice within recent memory ('71 and '79) and the two towns already hate each other immensely because of the Steelers and Ravens rivalry.

*End Homer Alert*

Thank you for putting up with me, my wife is in Chicago for a medical conference and all I had on hand was Beast Ice.

[HedleyLamarr]

Personally I think it'd be best to just have one of the NL teams switch to the AL. Then you'd have 5 teams in each division. The problem is that there would have to be at least one interleague match-up every series. However I don't think that would be such a horrible/hard thing to do.

Your plan is better than the current system, but you'd still have the mess of uneven divisions.

This wouldn't bother me, playing Interleague games in April and September. It's not like a Braves-Mariners matchup counts differently in the standings just because of the month the game's played in.

[no97]

Personally I think it'd be best to just have one of the NL teams switch to the AL. Then you'd have 5 teams in each division. The problem is that there would have to be at least one interleague match-up every series. However I don't think that would be such a horrible/hard thing to do.

Your plan is better than the current system, but you'd still have the mess of uneven divisions.

This wouldn't bother me, playing Interleague games in April and September. It's not like a Braves-Mariners matchup counts differently in the standings just because of the month the game's played in.

If we're gonna keep this up (interleague), I would really rather go this way as well (six five team divisions). I'm typically a traditionalist, but one of the things that I've grown sick of is the constant complaining that "my team has to play the Yankees and Boston, and yours only has to play the Rays and Baltimore." (Of course, that turned around a bit this year, but that's not the point...). Also, the whole four teams in the AL West, vs. six in the NL Central thing. Perhaps it's just time for a completely ballanced schedule?

The only thing, is that you would likely have to either eliminate the DH, or institute full time DH in the NL (since they would use it so often). I know I wouldn't be a fan of a NL with the DH...

Moose

[Cujo]

Personally I think it'd be best to just have one of the NL teams switch to the AL. Then you'd have 5 teams in each division. The problem is that there would have to be at least one interleague match-up every series. However I don't think that would be such a horrible/hard thing to do.

Maybe this it a little off-topic, but one thing that has bothered me for the longest time has been the 6-team National League Central and the 4-team American League West.

For ten years now, NL Central teams have had to to compete against five other squads for a division crown and a playoff spot, when at the same time the AL West winner only has to finish ahead of three teams to qualify for post-season play. I can't say I really agree with or understand this logic at all. Perhaps Selig and MLB should have thought this over before expanding to 30 teams in 1998, thus giving us this ridiculous 16 and 14 team layout.

The only thing, is that you would likely have to either eliminate the DH, or institute full time DH in the NL (since they would use it so often). I know I wouldn't be a fan of a NL with the DH...

MLB will never abort the DH now that it has been accepted and established in the AL. Utilizing the DH in the National League needs to be adressed, especially if they are going to continue with interleague play.

For example, if the Cubs and Red Sox do battle at Fenway, the Red Sox would naturally use David Ortiz ... Yet, the Cubs would have call on a player like backup infielder Mike Fontenot for DH duties?? Yeah, that's fair!

[philly97flyer]

*Homer Alert*

My biggest gripe about interleagueplay is the "rivalry week" series. Every year the Mets/Yankees, Dodgers/Angels, Reds/Indians, Cubs/White Sox, O's/Nats (Am I missing any?) get to play a home and home series against each other while my Buccos are forced to play a National League series against some other NL team getting the end of the stick or an AL team nobody else wants. (Yes, I realize the Pirates are the NL team nobody wants.)

I like interleagueplay, not enough to miss it if it went away, but its enjoyable. The best baseball game I have ever been to was the Pirates vs. Indians at Three Rivers. Fans from both sides were totally into it.

I wish every team could have that one home and home "rivalry" series. Unfortunately I really only see two options for the Pirates and both already have "interleague rivals." First, of course, is Cleveland. Long time ongoing feud between the two towns. From Cleveland, it takes about half the time to get to Pittsburgh than it does to get to Cincinnati.

Second would be Baltimore. The two cities share a very similar history, both very tradition blue collar towns that have reinvented themselves as medical research centers.. They have met in the World Series twice within recent memory ('71 and '79) and the two towns already hate each other immensely because of the Steelers and Ravens rivalry.

*End Homer Alert*

Thank you for putting up with me, my wife is in Chicago for a medical conference and all I had on hand was Beast Ice.

Beast Ice? Enjoy the headache brotha.