Idea for MLB re-realignment...

[wdm1219inpenna]

I just did a post about potential divisions for 1956.

I have been working on another notion about the current MLB set up, and possible re-alignment. It's a bit unique however, and I anticipate some positive and some negative feedback alike.

When interleague play first began back in 1997, I was not at all in favor of it. It has however grown on me some in recent years. One of the things I like is that they are finally rotating it around, so the Yankees don't just play NL East teams every year.

What does bother me is that the AL West has just 4 teams, and the NL Central has 6. Here is my proposal, with input by my cousin.

I would move the Colorado Rockies from the NL West over to the AL West. Since Coors Field has an enormous amount of runs scored to begin with, it would seem to favor being an American League park.

Next, I would move the Houston Astros from the NL Central to the NL West. Maybe I'm old fashioned, or perhaps it's because the Texas Rangers are in the AL West, but to me, a team from the state of Texas should be in the Western Division.

So by doing this, the AL East and AL Central remain unchanged, as does the NL East.

The AL West would be Oakland, Seattle, Texas, Anaheim and Colorado.

The NL Central would be the same minus Houston.

The NL West would be Los Angeles, San Diego, Arizona, San Francisco and Houston.

Since interleague play is going on now, by having 15 teams in each league, this would always require there to be a minimum of 1 interleague matchup going on at any given time. I would propose a total of 54 three game series to be played each season, keeping the season total at 162.

Using the Cardinals for an example, they would play the Reds, Pirates, Brewers and Cubs 21 times each per season, for a total of 84 games.

The Cardinals would play 18 interleague games per year (9 home, 9 away), as would ALL the teams. The Cards would play all 5 teams from one of the 3 AL divisions each year, and this would rotate, so they'd be guaranteed to play all 15 AL teams once every 3 years, and to host all 15 AL teams at least once every six seasons, allowing for fans to see the Yankees come to town, or the Red Sox, or the Royals, etc. The Cards would play 2 three game series versus 1 interleague opponent (3 home, 3 road) and play 1 three game series vs the other 4 interleague rivals. To determine which team they play 6 times instead of 3, would be based upon how the teams finished in the previous season. Say the Cardinals finished in 4th place, and they were playing teams from the AL West. Say the Mariners finished 4th in the AL West. The Cardinals would then play the Mariners 6 times the following season.

84 divisional games plus 18 interleague games totals 102 games.

The other 60 games would be league games, vs the other 10 league opponents, 3 games at home, 3 games on the road.

1 interleague series would be played 36 times, and 3 interleague series would be played 18 times, for a total of 90 interleague series being played per year, 6 by each of the 30 teams.

By doing this, this would create more interleague "natural" rivals.

Yankees....Mets (New York)

Red Sox....Braves (Since the Braves used to be in Boston)

Orioles....Phillies (I-95)

Blue Jays...Expos (Canada)

Devil Rays....Marlins (Florida)

Tigers.....Pirates (Process of elimination)

Indians....Reds (Ohio)

Royals....Cardinals (Missouri)

White Sox...Cubs (Chicago)

Twins...Brewers (Sort of near one another)

Angels....Dodgers (Southern Cal)

Athletics...Giants (San Fran Bay area)

Rockies...Diamondbacks (Somewhat aligned geographically)

Rangers...Astros (Texas)

Padres....Mariners (Process of elimination)

Long I realize, perhaps confusing too, but I am very interested in feedback.

Regards,

Bill McD.

[STL FANATIC]

Again, pretty good, but now you really do have me remembering this old xlr8dr character...

He used to commonly post MLB 2025 threads, but various leagues and years.

Don't worry, these are intriguing threads, I'm just gonna beg you not to overdue it, lol.

[jkrdevil]

There is a reason why there is an unequal amount of teams in each league. When MLB expanded to 30 teams the ideal situation would be 15 teams in each league. But with the way MLB does scheduling with mini series that would leave 1 team with 3 to 4 days off in a row in each league. Even worse there would be a team not playing on the weekend, that would hurt the team's ticket sales as the weekend series draws more people than a series during the week. So MLB moved 1 AL team to the NL to make each league have an even number of teams so every team plays on the weekend.

[STL FANATIC]

There is a reason why there is an unequal amount of teams in each league. When MLB expanded to 30 teams the ideal situation would be 15 teams in each league. But with the way MLB does scheduling with mini series that would leave 1 team with 3 to 4 days off in a row in each league. Even worse there would be a team not playing on the weekend, that would hurt the team's ticket sales as the weekend series draws more people than a series during the week. So MLB moved 1 AL team to the NL to make each league have an even number of teams so every team plays on the weekend.

That actually make sense, but the smartest thing would have been to not expand.

I really hate how the NL Central has six (this year very good) teams, and the AL Central has four.

[IronChefShark]

MLB does not need to realign its fine as is

this is a wasted thread that should not have been started

[MilTownMVP]

MLB does not need to realign its fine as is

this is a wasted thread that should not have been started

Yes they do...

Put the Brewers back in the AL Central where they belong, and put the Devil Rays in the NL East so a battle of Florida can jump off.

At least this way, the Brewers and Cubs could start sharing each others markets again.

BTW, Milwaukee vs Minnesota could be "The OTHER Battle of I-94" (that's what the Brewers-Cubs rivalry is called now).

[TCRagnar]

The easiest thing to do would be to contract the Expos and the Brewers. My apologies to the 38 fans that would alienate.

[habsfannova]

Even I wouldn't mind contraction.....The Expos suck now.

[Pat]

expos and d'rays

then move the brewers back

[wdm1219inpenna]

Interesting notion Pat. I'll try not to overdo (or overdue) it though w/these posts as I enjoy this site most of all.

So with Montreal & Tampa Bay contracted (which I felt should have been done)....

AL East

Yankees

Red Sox

Orioles

Blue Jays

Tigers (Since they were there before from 1994-1997)

AL Central

Royals

White Sox

Twins

Indians

Brewers (Back from NL)

AL West

Rangers

A's

Mariners

Angels

NL East

Phillies

Mets

Marlins

Braves

Pirates (from NL Central)

NL Central

Reds

Cards

Cubs

Astros (though I still say they belong out west!)

NL West

Rockies

D'Backs

Dodgers

Giants

Padres

Is that what you'd propose Pat? Just curious. Or would you leave Pittsburgh in the NL Central and have just 4 NL East teams?

Regards,

Bill McD.

[Pat]

hmm let me see

AL

east:NYY BOS TOR BLT DET

central: MIL MIN CWS CLE KC

west: TEX SEA ANA OAK

NL

east:ATL NYM PHI PIT FLA

central:HOU STL CHC CIN COL

west:ARZ SF LA SD

i think thatd work. but i think since every other geographic or staet neighbour seems to be in different leagues that maybe pittsubrgh and philly should be. but too much tradition and such so ill switch the brewers back to where they were

[Notch Novelty]

You would really want to keep Texas and Houston away from Pacific coast teams because of the time change. Which is good reason MLB wants Texas out of AL West. Thus making sense Houston is in the Central.

[RyanB06]

Which is why if Portland, OR ever gets the Expos (I know, fat chance of that), they should move to the AL West.

To wit:

AL West: Oakland, Seattle, Anaheim, Portland

AL Central: Texas, Minnesota, Kansas City, Detroit, Chicago WS

AL East: Cleveland, Baltimore, Boston, New York, Toronto

Move Tampa to the NL East to fill the Expos' void.

It's all moot, though, since it's a fait accompli the 'Spos are off to DC...

[MilTownMVP]

The easiest thing to do would be to contract the Expos and the Brewers. My apologies to the 38 fans that would alienate.

And didn't your team just barely crack 1,000,000 for the season a few years ago?

I say we follow the George Carlin method of contraction. Any team that needs to name itself after a state gets yanked.

[jrh31584]

I've done a number of hypothetical examples assuming either that no teams moved or all proposed but never consummated moves actually did occur, in MLB and other leagues.

[clyon81]

I actually would prefer that the Brewers stay in the NL. I think realignment would be tough until the expos move. The easiest way, IMO, would be, if the Expos moved to portland, move them to the AL West, move pittsburgh to the NL East, and now you have 6 divisions, of 5 teams. I kind of like how interleague play is all kind of done at the same time, but if it would be easier for the schedule makers to have one matchup a week or something, to even out the matchups, so be it.

[xyzzyva]

I know this sounds somewhat revolutionary, but why does baseball need divisions nowadays? For example, why cant the AL simply have a 14 team league table with the top 4 making the playoffs? Thats the way I'd do it, with each team playing 12 games against each other, and 6 interleague games. Nice, clean setup, and no worrying about arbitrary geographical divisions. Also, it doesnt create situations like how the AL Central gets a playoff team, as bad as it has been lately, while at least one deserving AL West team gets left out. (and im a royals fan by the way, and i dont mind the twinkies too much, but its just not fair the way it is)

[yh]

I know this sounds somewhat revolutionary, but why does baseball need divisions nowadays? For example, why cant the AL simply have a 14 team league table with the top 4 making the playoffs? Thats the way I'd do it, with each team playing 12 games against each other, and 6 interleague games. Nice, clean setup, and no worrying about arbitrary geographical divisions. Also, it doesnt create situations like how the AL Central gets a playoff team, as bad as it has been lately, while at least one deserving AL West team gets left out. (and im a royals fan by the way, and i dont mind the twinkies too much, but its just not fair the way it is)

Common sense would tell you that this is the way it should be done. However, the geographic divisions have been established to ensure that there is a better chance of a wider demographic distribution of the post-season TV market. Without the virtual guarantee that at least one team from the Pacific Coast, Midwest and East Cost will be represented in the playoffs every season, it gets harder and harder to sell national TV advertising.

[jkrdevil]

Also, I think there are divisions for scheduling reasons. East coast teams don't have to go to the west as often and vice-versa. Plus, there are more rivalry games and thus more fans in the seats.

BTW, I'm I the only one sick of inter-league play. It isn't exciting any more and becuase of it the leagues aren't leagues there just conferences named leagues.

I don't know maybe because I felt the reason for inter-league play was for the City's with 2 teams could play each othe (Chicago and New York). And when the 2000 World Series happened and I saw a real subway series, interleague play lost all excitement.