Interleague Play

[Sport]

I know you guys will be able to help me out on this one.

Is there an official list of each team's "Rivalry Matchup" for interleague games? Do all teams have a designated rival they play every year, or do some teams just not have one?

I tried going through all the teams the other day to identify their main interleague rival, and some were obvious like the Cubs vs. Sox and Yankees vs. Mets, but by the time you get to the end of the list, it made me wonder if some teams simply don't have one they play each year.

Rivalries:

Yankees-Mets

White Sox-Cubs

Angels-Dodgers

Indians-Reds

Royals-Cardinals

Rangers-Astros

Twins-Brewers

Orioles-Nats

Rays-Marlins

A's-Giants

Not sures:

I think Red Sox-Phillies is now a rivalry (Colonial Cities Series?) after the Phillies lost the Orioles to the Nats.

Braves-Red Sox I think Red Sox-Braves was/is still billed as a rivalry but I'm not sure.

Rival-less teams:

Mariners

Padres

Rockies

Pirates

Tigers

Blue Jays

D-backs

Are these MLB officially recognized rivalries that play each other every year? How can the Red Sox have two rivals?

Do the "rival-less" teams play a regular series against one of the others each year or do they just rotate opponents within their group each year?

Yes. The rivalries listed above are usually guaranteed two series. Some of the series have a 'trophy' at stake and all have names. The Texas teams have a crystal boot and the Florida series has a crystal bowl with fake oranges at stake. (That bowl was just located a few days ago after going MIA for 9 years according to the Miami Herald.)

The Red Sox rival has changed a couple times. Which is why I put the Braves and Phillies. Whether (and which) of the series MLB recognizes I'm not so sure.

Also pretty sure the Padres and Mariners meet each other for two series.

The Reds and Indians have a trophy called the 'Ohio Cup'. If the Reds can take one in Cleveland this weekend they'll take it for this year. Not bad, everyone knew the Reds wouldn't be good this year, but nobody thought the Indians would be struggling like this.

I made a bet with a friend of mine from Cleveland that I knew I would win. Before the year began he said the Indians would win 110 games this season, which I scoffed at and that lead to the bet. I have $50 coming to me at the end of the season unless Cleveland can somehow win 110 games. People from Cleveland are rarely rational about the future of their sports teams.

[BBTV]

A match-up is not a "rivalry" just because the marketing department bills it as such. Rivalries evolve naturally, and can't really be manufactured.

So, in a sense, none of these match-ups are true rivalries... correct?

I'm not saying that - I don't know enough about each team or their fans to know if they really consider those matchups to be "rivalries."

I'd assume that the NY and Chi. matchups are rivalries, and that Pittsburgh and Cleveland would count (yeah, I know that Cleveland and Cincinnati were matched up, but Pitt. - Cle. could be a legit rivalry.) Geography can create a rivalry... but IMO cities being in close proximity to one another doesn't guarantee that there is a true rivalry there.

[tohasbo]

While this may be totally irrelevant...

Does anyone by any chance have a team-by-team; year-by-year record of the teams that they played? I have been trying to compile it myself but it is a total bitch and a pain in the ass to do it alone!

Any help is welcome!

[VandyDelphia Mike]

While this may be totally irrelevant...

Does anyone by any chance have a team-by-team; year-by-year record of the teams that they played? I have been trying to compile it myself but it is a total bitch and a pain in the ass to do it alone!

Any help is welcome!

Playing with the schedule information on retrosheet.org, it's compilable, and I used this source from 1997-2002. 2003-2007 I just looked at records by team for the Phils, as that's also accessible from retrosheet. 2008 is from memory.

Interleague Opponents of the Philadelphia Phillies, 1997-2008

1997: at Red Sox, at Orioles, at Tigers, vs. Yankees, vs. Blue Jays

1998: at Red Sox, at Yankees, at Blue Jays, vs. Orioles, vs. Red Sox, vs. Devil Rays

1999: at Orioles, at Red Sox, at Devil Rays, vs. Orioles, vs. Yankees, vs. Blue Jays

2000: at Orioles, at Yankees, at Blue Jays, vs. Orioles, vs. Red Sox, vs. Devil Rays

2001: at Orioles, at Red Sox, at Devil Rays, vs. Orioles, vs. Yankees, vs. Blue Jays

2002: at Orioles, at Indians, at Tigers, vs. Orioles, vs. White Sox, vs. Twins

2003: at Angels, at Orioles, vs. Red Sox, vs. Athletics, vs. Mariners

2004: at Red Sox, at White Sox, at Twins, vs. Orioles, vs. Tigers, vs. Royals

2005: at Orioles, at Athletics, at Mariners, vs. Red Sox, vs. Rangers

2006: at Orioles, at Red Sox, at Blue Jays, vs. Red Sox, vs. Yankees, vs. Devil Rays

2007: at Indians, at Royals, vs. White Sox, vs. Tigers, vs. Blue Jays

2008: at Athletics, at Rangers, vs. Red Sox, vs. Angels, vs. Blue Jays

Tidbits:

There is no AL team that the Phillies have played every year of interleague's existence.

There are 2 different AL teams that the Phillies have played a home-and-home of interleague in the same season (Orioles and Red Sox).

The Phillies have never played the Indians in regular season in Philadelphia.

The Indians have played preseason baseball in Citizens Bank Park. The Athletics, Mariners, and Twins have yet to visit Citizens Bank Park.

[jtthasportfreak]

At the very least this year, THE DODGERS SHOULD HAVE PLAYED AT YANKEE STADIUM

[apeman33]

Bud wanted the Brewers in the same division as the Cubs because he knew those games in Milwaukee would sell-out, the Pirates ended up in the Central because MLB wanted the Braves in the same division as the Mets back when the division was created in 1994.

I get the Brewers with the Cubs, but why put the Braves with the Mets back then? They had never been in the same division before. What was the rational?

It also sounds like the NL Central was going to have six teams no matter what. Why would it matter which division had the sixth team? The Braves and the Pirates could have been in the NL East. I've always wondered why it isn't that way.

[apeman33]

As long as I'm thinking about it, does every NL team play the same number of Interleague games every year. Or are there enough series so that each of the 14 teams get one series against another NL team during it?

[TBGKon]

Bud wanted the Brewers in the same division as the Cubs because he knew those games in Milwaukee would sell-out, the Pirates ended up in the Central because MLB wanted the Braves in the same division as the Mets back when the division was created in 1994.

I get the Brewers with the Cubs, but why put the Braves with the Mets back then? They had never been in the same division before. What was the rational?

It also sounds like the NL Central was going to have six teams no matter what. Why would it matter which division had the sixth team? The Braves and the Pirates could have been in the NL East. I've always wondered why it isn't that way.

Hmmm, good point, I never thought of it that way. It didn't really matter what division had 6, just as long as 1 NL division had 6.

[Gothamite]

Bud wanted the Brewers in the same division as the Cubs because he knew those games in Milwaukee would sell-out, the Pirates ended up in the Central because MLB wanted the Braves in the same division as the Mets back when the division was created in 1994.

What's really staggering is that the Royals turned down an opportunity to be in the same division as the Cardinals. From baseball's point of view, that was a no-brainer, and would have generated a lot of interest in Missouri. No wonder that was the first choice.

[fiasco!]

I'd like to personally thank the National League for allowing the Detroit Tigers to get back into the race. Kudos to you, NL!

[BBTV]

Bud wanted the Brewers in the same division as the Cubs because he knew those games in Milwaukee would sell-out, the Pirates ended up in the Central because MLB wanted the Braves in the same division as the Mets back when the division was created in 1994.

I get the Brewers with the Cubs, but why put the Braves with the Mets back then? They had never been in the same division before. What was the rational?

It also sounds like the NL Central was going to have six teams no matter what. Why would it matter which division had the sixth team? The Braves and the Pirates could have been in the NL East. I've always wondered why it isn't that way.

Hmmm, good point, I never thought of it that way. It didn't really matter what division had 6, just as long as 1 NL division had 6.

Could it maybe have been the Pirates' choice? If you're them, wouldn't you rather "compete" in a division against teams where there is a little less of a gap in market size / revenue (except the Cubs) instead of being in a division with Atlanta, New York, and Philadelphia? Granted, the Phillies and Mets haven't exactly been powerhouses since the realignment, but fact is that they're still big market clubs with big market revenue.

[apeman33]

Bud wanted the Brewers in the same division as the Cubs because he knew those games in Milwaukee would sell-out, the Pirates ended up in the Central because MLB wanted the Braves in the same division as the Mets back when the division was created in 1994.

I get the Brewers with the Cubs, but why put the Braves with the Mets back then? They had never been in the same division before. What was the rational?

It also sounds like the NL Central was going to have six teams no matter what. Why would it matter which division had the sixth team? The Braves and the Pirates could have been in the NL East. I've always wondered why it isn't that way.

Hmmm, good point, I never thought of it that way. It didn't really matter what division had 6, just as long as 1 NL division had 6.

Could it maybe have been the Pirates' choice? If you're them, wouldn't you rather "compete" in a division against teams where there is a little less of a gap in market size / revenue (except the Cubs) instead of being in a division with Atlanta, New York, and Philadelphia? Granted, the Phillies and Mets haven't exactly been powerhouses since the realignment, but fact is that they're still big market clubs with big market revenue.

Good point. However, my own little personal theory was that this was a big "F-you" to the Pirates from the Mets and Braves, who would have had to try and sell more games versus them that their fans wouldn't have been all that excited about.

[-kj]

I'd like to personally thank the National League for allowing the Detroit Tigers to get back into the race. Kudos to you, NL!

See also: Twins

[ZapRowsdower8]

Bud wanted the Brewers in the same division as the Cubs because he knew those games in Milwaukee would sell-out, the Pirates ended up in the Central because MLB wanted the Braves in the same division as the Mets back when the division was created in 1994.

I get the Brewers with the Cubs, but why put the Braves with the Mets back then? They had never been in the same division before. What was the rational?

It also sounds like the NL Central was going to have six teams no matter what. Why would it matter which division had the sixth team? The Braves and the Pirates could have been in the NL East. I've always wondered why it isn't that way.

Hmmm, good point, I never thought of it that way. It didn't really matter what division had 6, just as long as 1 NL division had 6.

Could it maybe have been the Pirates' choice? If you're them, wouldn't you rather "compete" in a division against teams where there is a little less of a gap in market size / revenue (except the Cubs) instead of being in a division with Atlanta, New York, and Philadelphia? Granted, the Phillies and Mets haven't exactly been powerhouses since the realignment, but fact is that they're still big market clubs with big market revenue.

Good point. However, my own little personal theory was that this was a big "F-you" to the Pirates from the Mets and Braves, who would have had to try and sell more games versus them that their fans wouldn't have been all that excited about.

I'm not so sure that might be the answer. The divisions realigned in 1994, only 2 seasons since the Pirates had won the East 3 years in a row. Granted, Bonds was gone, but a team with recent success shouldn't be too hard of a sell. I would love to know the answer, but I don't know if one really exists.

[STL_Ian]

Bud wanted the Brewers in the same division as the Cubs because he knew those games in Milwaukee would sell-out, the Pirates ended up in the Central because MLB wanted the Braves in the same division as the Mets back when the division was created in 1994.

What's really staggering is that the Royals turned down an opportunity to be in the same division as the Cardinals. From baseball's point of view, that was a no-brainer, and would have generated a lot of interest in Missouri. No wonder that was the first choice.

Yeah, I think the only games KC sells out are when the Cards are in town.

I've brought it up before, but you have to look no further than the fact that the Cardinals have played @ Detroit 3 straight years to know that interleague scheduling is a joke.