Interleague play?

[jkrdevil]

Just read this article on espn.com by Joe Morgan. I agree, Interleague play has grown tiredsome. It's not excting anymore. Especially where I live after the 2000 World Series.

MLB needs interleague hiatus

Do you think interleague has grown stale???

[NJTank]

It has grown very stale.

A few matchups are intrsting but for the most part its not worth it at all.

There are great rivalaries liek Pirates and Phillies getting shiortchanged since they only play eachotehr 6 times.

[paynomind]

No. Absolutely not.

The opponants of interleague play are old, fat, bitter men who just want everything, including their wives, back like it was in the 50's.

Interleague play is great, it is here to stay, and should be rotated so all teams play all the other league teams over 5-8 years.

[DEAD!]

I agree. I compare it to the NFL where you cycle match ups teams from the other divisions/conferences. If anything I think they should lose the "natural rivalries" portion of interleague. I read a suggestion that they should let the DH in the NL parks and let the pitcher hit in the AL parks.

[STL FANATIC]

No. Absolutely not.

The opponants of interleague play are old, fat, bitter men who just want everything, including their wives, back like it was in the 50's.

Interleague play is great, it is here to stay, and should be rotated so all teams play all the other league teams over 5-8 years.

I'm 16, 115 lbs., cheerful, and single.

Interleague play sucks. There was a mystique to the game about the one time these matchups would occur being in the World Series. That's gone. Now you have potential World Series previews. It was better when they met with no prior meetings.

Not only is interleague play now stale (though, at least they are finally rotating it), it always has been stale.

[CC97]

I love interleague play... when else would i have been able to see Randy Johnson pitch again? Seeing Barry Bonds was incredible, I never thought I'd see him hit a home run in person.

I'll gladly host the Pirates for three to get the opportunity to see the Cubbies.

***

But to spice things up I think we should switch the rules for these games... I would like to see a game played with NL rules without having to drive to another country.

[habsfannova]

I personally hate it. I think that what was special about baseball was two leagues, two styles of play, and ONE meeting at the end. Interleague ruined that.

[sc49erfan15]

I'm 16, 115 lbs.

Sweet Jeebus.

Anyway, I don't get why Interleague play is bad. Different teams play different teams, why wouldn't you want to see your favorite team against new opponents? I know I liked seeing my favorite team (Braves) and one of my favorite teams (Tigers) playing against each other, it just doesn't make sense to me.

[Waffles]

Just when I think Interleague play is boring, I get to watch the comedic goldmine that is a Jose Contreras at bat last night.

It's nice to get a little variety in, but not when it makes the schedule lopsided...the Yankees play the Mets as much as they do some teams in their own league, which is fine from an entertainment standpoint - the Subway Series are always incredibly popular and competitive - but from the standpoint of maintaining a balanced intraleague schedule, it doesn't make sense to play a team in another league more than teams in your own league.

[MilTownMVP]

Interleague play sucks. What set baseball apart from the rest of the sports is that it actually mattered what league you were in. Now they act more like conferences... something I could see in the NFL.

Barry Bonds vs Pedro Martinez is what the All Star Game was for... now the Home Run Derby is more meaningful.

Besides, Interleague was Bud Selig's idea... how good of an idea could it be?

[slapshot]

Part of the backlash against interleague play has to do with the unbalanced schedules. Even teams in the same division don't have play the same teams. The Boston Globe had an article about this, comparing the interleague games of the Red Sox to the Yankees. Last year, the Red Sox' NL opponents had a lower combined winning percentage than the Yankees' opponents. It is the reverse this year. I think both NY and Boston play San Diego, LA, San Fran and Colorado.

But the rivalry games are the big difference. Boston plays Philly and Atlanta, to very strong NL East teams. NY plays the Mets, I don't know who else. So you can see how in theory, the Yankees have an easier schedule. It may just be these "rivalry" games that unbalance the schedule. Boston will play Atlanta at least once every year, the Yankees will play the Mets. While it's fun for the fans, the teams don't like it.

I like it. It's nice to see different teams every now and then. It does not diminish the special feel of AL/NL games in the World Series. It might even add fuel to the fire, especially if the same interleague matchup happens in the World Series...Piazza with a broken bat, anyone?

[lucky]

You know what's getting stale? The Red Sox playing the Blue Jays, Orioles and Rays 19 FREAKING TIMES A YEAR. Thank god for interleague play to break up the monotony. And I know its never a good idea to compare sports, but 3 years ago the Pats and Rams played in the regular season and you know what...i think it made the Super Bowl even more intriguing.

Now if we can just go back to having the Marlins as our "natural" rival...

[Ez Street]

If it were not for Interleague Play, we'd never get to see that much anticipated Royals vs. Expos series!

I love interleague simply because you get to see new/different teams. Cardinals vs. Royals always sells out, and i'd love to see the Royals play the Cubbies and Rockies more often. I think they should go with more regional match-ups for now on.

[jkrdevil]

To answer your question JP, the Yankees don't play another NL east team they play 6 games against the Mets. (3 at Yankee, 3 at Shea).

I liked interleague play when it first started because it was new. But it has gotten old now. And I agree with what miltown said, the unique thing about baseball was that there were 2 seperate leagues that meet once in the world series. But because of inter-league play and the sharing of umpires there more like conferences called leagues.

I don't think that interleague play has taken away from the World Series, but I think the World Series has taken away from interleague play.

[IronChefShark]

there is nothing wrong with interleague play the way it is now.

it would have gotten stale if they left it as the "opposite division" format (meaning, the giants would only play the As, angels, mariners, and rangers every year)

I mean, without it I wouldnt be able to go razz CC's blue jays this week . There is also much anticipation for when the Red Sox come into town tomorrow night as well. we miss the yankees this year but thats okay because the dbacks and dodgers get them so they can lose to the yankees

Im assuming next year we will get to play Cleveland, I dont know if it will be here or there.

but as long as they keep the NFL style rotating divison format, natural rivalries should ALWAYS be in place. The Giants and A's should always play each other every year, same goes for the Dodgers-Angels, Mets-Yankees, Cubs-White Sox, Royals-Cardinals, Rangers-Astros, Indians-Reds....cetra cetra

[jkrdevil]

I don't think the rotating divisions helps. I as a Yankee fan don't care about playing the Rockies, Padres, D-backs, and even the Dodgers and the Giants (even though there is history with the last two). And I'm tired of watching Yankees-Mets, that's not exciting anymore (mainly due to the fact that their was a real subway series, not a little interleague one.)

It's gotten to no big deal, and I would wish baseball would go back to the way it was.

[IronChefShark]

well there was also a real "Bay Bridge Series" but that hasnt gotten stale at all over here.

besides, the A's NEED interleague play just for that sole reason. they cant fill thier park unless the Giants or Yankees are the opponent (with approx. 40 percent of the fans at the latter rooting for the opponent )

[yh]

I've come to accept interleague play as an interesting diversion in an otherwise routine MLB schedule. The key is balancing rotation and rivalry games. Clearly the Cards and Royals should play each other every year, and I'd love to see the Yankees worked into a more frequent rotation with the Redbirds aas well (I'm already excited about seeing the Yanks at Busch, and it's not even until next year!). It certainly interesting to see some of the other AL teams occasionally, but a lockstep annual rotation of divisions without some adjustment for interesting and/or more appealing matchups does pose the potential for boredom.

[OnWis97]

I think interleague play would be allright if there was an NFL type of structure with rotating divisions. That way an AL team would play each NL team every three years (and every six years at home). If you are an AL fan, you'd get every NL team at your park every six years. Each match up would be special (and a Royals-Expos matchup is no worse than a Pirates-Expos matchup).

Right now there is little rhyme or reason to the scheduling, except for the "rivalrys". That has to go. If the Yanks/Mets and Cubs/ChiSox only played every three years, it would be exciting when they did. Now

Do it like the NFL and you have a product. Of course that would affect big-market ticket sales...

[KCScout76]

I'm 16, 115 lbs., cheerful, and single.

I'm 43, 230#, Cheerful and married

(but that's a good thing, at least the Married part is.)

I like interleague- brings all kinds of new teams to KC, got to see the Mets here in the 'fountain town'. I love the KC/STL rivary going on, and then we get the CUBS down here too.

They should cut back some of the games, too many interleague games. But I like them. I agree with OnWis97

I think interleague play would be allright if there was an NFL type of structure with rotating divisions

- something to think about Bud S. - listen to the fans.