View Full Version : Should MLB shorten its regular season?
Lone Wolf
10-29-2008, 10:03 PM
Gammons brought up the idea again of cutting the season from 162 to 148. I'm down for it the season is too long and now that the playoffs go on for a year it makes sense ... of course will owners give up the game revenue?
It would screw with the records, but I think we would get used to it. Nobody who isn't juicing is going to break 73 anyways.
No, there's nothing wrong with 162 games. If anything get rid of like 6 teams.
No. Period.
If the question was back to the classic 154, maybe, but 148 is just as arbitrary. The more games you play the more likely it is that the cream will rise to the top. Maybe do away with some spring training games to let the World Series get played a little early (to try and avert weather issues) but don't cut into 162.
comicfan
10-29-2008, 10:07 PM
I agree! A shortened season would be better. I have to admit I started to care less about baseball by the time September rolled around (though that might be more due to being a Jays fan than anything else :)
nuclearjew
10-29-2008, 10:08 PM
Go back to 154 or eliminate the wildcard. Baseball does not belong in November!
While I don't think the season is too long, I do not like how the World Series could be played in November next year.
I would like to see the Series end in late October at the latest, but I don't think I would jeopardize all the stats and history to lose 14 games.
nuclearjew
10-29-2008, 10:11 PM
No. Period.
If the question was back to the classic 154, maybe, but 148 is just as arbitrary. The more games you play the more likely it is that the cream will rise to the top. Maybe do away with some spring training games to let the World Series get played a little early (to try and avert weather issues) but don't cut into 162.
You can't go too much earlier, El Nino already fucked up some early games this past year (Cleveland/Seattle). Oops, that was last year...
Seriously, is there ANY reason for a MONTH of Spring Training games? We could easily play a week or two in March and shift back the whole season so that the World Series can fall on calmer weather.
You can't go too much earlier, El Nino already fucked up some early games this past year (Cleveland/Seattle). Oops, that was last year...
True, but a shift of a week in the regular season creates a shift of a week in the postseason which is gigantic.
Go back to 154 or eliminate the wildcard. Baseball does not belong in November!
How often does it go into November? Besides, Selig said it won't be a problem anymore. There are better ways to eliminate the length of the season. Cut spring training, cut the predetermined start dates for post season series, etc.
How often does it go into November? Besides, Selig said it won't be a problem anymore. There are better ways to eliminate the length of the season. Cut spring training, cut the predetermined start dates for post season series, etc.
Oooh, that's another good one. Why create heavy forced rest, just say the next series starts a day after you have both teams involved set or whatever.
How often does it go into November? Besides, Selig said it won't be a problem anymore. There are better ways to eliminate the length of the season. Cut spring training, cut the predetermined start dates for post season series, etc.
It's scheduled to be in November next season, starting on October 28th.
There's no reason a team should sit for longer than 3 days
It's scheduled to be in November next season.
Right, which was predetermined before the comments Selig made this month. How often does November games actually happen, and what is it 3 or 4 days? Big fucking deal.
nuclearjew
10-29-2008, 10:16 PM
How often does it go into November? Besides, Selig said it won't be a problem anymore. There are better ways to eliminate the length of the season. Cut spring training, cut the predetermined start dates for post season series, etc.
I think the only time it went into November was in 2001, I'm not sure, but anyways by the time my birthday rolls around (October 22) baseball should be done. That is my benchmark!
2001, they had to take some time off. You guys act like we're playing on Thanksgiving.
nuclearjew
10-29-2008, 10:18 PM
Hmmm, my Mets won the 1986 World Series on 10/27/86. Whoops!
For some reason I thought the World Series was always done before say 10/20.
Start the regular season the last week of March and here's a novel idea Bud, have the teams north of the Mason Dixon and east of the Mississippi start on the road, or build a force field over the stadium in Cinci since the stupid Reds have to open at home every year.
Here's a question, though probably a stupid one:
Would you support a neutral field World Series (a la Super Bowl).
Games that would be held at AT&T, PETCO, Arlington, etc...
No, because it's not 1 game. However, it should be the best team that gets to host game 7. Not the winner of an exhibition game.
No, because it's not 1 game. However, it should be the best team that gets to host game 7. Not the winner of an exhibition game.
To most, that would go without saying. We had Fay Vincent on one of our shows this week and he was saying the same thing.
nuclearjew
10-29-2008, 10:29 PM
Do you mean Fay Vincent?
The best record should get homefield, yes.
But also, to make that more accurate, get rid of or at least fix ungodly interleague play.
mongo
10-29-2008, 10:42 PM
it should never change. ever.
how about a good poll?
should the allstar game decide home field advantage? NO
mongo
10-29-2008, 10:43 PM
No, because it's not 1 game. However, it should be the best team that gets to host game 7. Not the winner of an exhibition game.
well fuck. now i feel like a fucktard.
read THEN post, mongo!
TheImpossibleMan
10-30-2008, 11:23 AM
Changes:
1.) Go back to 154 games.
2.) Contract the Mariners and the Padres, move the Brewers back to the AL.
3.) Cut the time in between innings from 2 minutes to 90 seconds (Bill James convinced me on this one)
Makes the season shorter, makes the games shorter.
goldsoundz
10-30-2008, 04:38 PM
keep 162, have teams play like 7 double headers throughout the course of the season. postseason starts a week earlier.
Justabot
10-30-2008, 04:44 PM
Good God, yes! But then don't listen to me I watch EPL.
s0bv1ou5lyd3sprt
10-30-2008, 04:49 PM
I don't mind the schedule how it is, but did I hear them say with next years schedule, that the world series will be played in November next year? That's a little out of control.
Smuckers
10-30-2008, 04:49 PM
I like it how it is now.
Draven X 23
10-30-2008, 04:59 PM
No change. Just remove a week from Spring Training. Add in a few double headers and remove interleague play.
Swurgen
10-30-2008, 05:00 PM
I said years ago that 154 game sched would get rid of that sticky Bonds situation with the juicy record and promote nostalgia towards old records and baseball loves nostalgia.
Less days off between games. Tough to tell teams to be ready the day after somebody else's series ends as they'd potentially have to be ready for a bunch of different days if a team is facing elimination and keeps winning. The predetermined start dates isn't the problem. All of those off days is the problem. All of those off days does not simulate the regular season at all and does not reward teams for having deep rotations. This isn't 1940. Modern air travel is a lot more convenient.
They should also make the first round series a best of 7 and penalize the wild card teams more by having a 5-2 home road split rather than 4-3 or something like that. Something has to be done to make it less likely for the wild card team which has usually been fighting up to the last game of the season and stays in that fighting mode in the post season as opposed to a division winner which has been coasting for weeks trying to turn it back on. Wild card winners should be bigger upsets and more infrequent than they are now. This would encourage division winners of shitty divisions with no close 2nd place competition to keep fighting to the end to get the top record and the easier first round.
Interleague play has to be adjusted. Division vs division should rotate so for example, Mets vs Yanks comes every 3 yrs instead of every year. Keep those games special and avoid competitive disadvantages of the 'rivalries' by having all teams in division play same teams.
Less games in your division. No reason for teams to play each other 19 times every year plus more (like Yanks - Sox did every year) in the post season. That can be trimmed so that teams like Toronto, Tampa Bay who are in division with perennial powerhouses don't have to defy such massive odds to win. Also less games in division lessens the penalty that teams have for being in a strong division when competing for wild card or best record.
mongo
10-30-2008, 05:01 PM
No change. Just remove a week from Spring Training. Add in a few double headers and remove interleague play.
interleague play should go.
Changes:
1.) Go back to 154 games.
2.) Contract the Mariners and the Padres, move the Brewers back to the AL.
3.) Cut the time in between innings from 2 minutes to 90 seconds (Bill James convinced me on this one)
Makes the season shorter, makes the games shorter.
wait, aren't those two of the more profitable teams in the mlb? huh?
Smuckers
10-30-2008, 05:02 PM
No change. Just remove a week from Spring Training. Add in a few double headers and remove interleague play.
Actually, that's a phenomenal idea.
Da Raider
10-30-2008, 05:06 PM
I'm of the opinion that the regular season needs to be drastically reduced. My reasoning is simply supply and demand. 162 games? really? We need that many to determine who is worthy of going to the post season? Sorry, but there are countless games with half empty stadiums with players going thru the motions, it's pathetic. You say it's a war of attrition; I say it's a waste of time.
The reason the playoffs are so exciting and intense is because so much is riding on every at bat. During the regular season you can get swept in a 3 game series and the attitude is "oh well, we'll get 'em next time". Lose 3 games in a row in football and the head coach is in the hot seat if not fired.
I'd like to see baseball trim the schedule down from 162 to 120 games. Fans will express more interest in each individual game and each game will have more meaning.
Resisting shortening of the season merely becuz it would alter records and statistics is foolish and only helps prove my point that baseball in its current marathon like season and pace is too boring. Hardcore fans need the additional activity like debating stats becuz the season is too long and boring. We live in an ADD generation. Shorten it up, make each game more meaningful.
mongo
10-30-2008, 05:09 PM
Resisting shortening of the season merely becuz it would alter records and statistics is foolish and only helps prove my point that baseball in its current marathon like season and pace is too boring. Hardcore fans need the additional activity like debating stats becuz the season is too long and boring. We live in an ADD generation. Shorten it up, make each game more meaningful.
it would also alter profits.
Da Raider
10-30-2008, 05:10 PM
PS - I know that Stax is reading my post and shaking his head...
Da Raider
10-30-2008, 05:11 PM
it would also alter profits.
With less games available, you can charge more. Cheap seats would go from $12 to $16.
There's a reason that baseball only stadiums only seat 40-45k. Too many damn games.
I said years ago that 154 game sched would get rid of that sticky Bonds situation with the juicy record and promote nostalgia towards old records and baseball loves nostalgia.
No it wouldn't. Maris hit 61 in 61 when they played 162. Records are already on a 162 game schedule.
Less days off between games. Tough to tell teams to be ready the day after somebody else's series ends as they'd potentially have to be ready for a bunch of different days if a team is facing elimination and keeps winning. The predetermined start dates isn't the problem. All of those off days is the problem. All of those off days does not simulate the regular season at all and does not reward teams for having deep rotations. This isn't 1940. Modern air travel is a lot more convenient.
I don't mind deeper rest in the playoffs to ensure GOOD games and not ones just dictated by stress. However, I do think doing away with predetermined start dates will help a bit as if (for example) both divisional rounds are a sweep why wait all those extra days to start the CS?
They should also make the first round series a best of 7 and penalize the wild card teams more by having a 5-2 home road split rather than 4-3 or something like that. Something has to be done to make it less likely for the wild card team which has usually been fighting up to the last game of the season and stays in that fighting mode in the post season as opposed to a division winner which has been coasting for weeks trying to turn it back on. Wild card winners should be bigger upsets and more infrequent than they are now. This would encourage division winners of shitty divisions with no close 2nd place competition to keep fighting to the end to get the top record and the easier first round.
No, they shouldn't. Teams already compete (if they have a real shot) for their division because the WC is already punished in facing the best team by record. The DS should be a best of 7, but a 5-2 home split is silly.
Interleague play has to be adjusted. Division vs division should rotate so for example, Mets vs Yanks comes every 3 yrs instead of every year. Keep those games special and avoid competitive disadvantages of the 'rivalries' by having all teams in division play same teams.
Yes. Either do away with it or go NFL style and just rotate each year (East vs. East one year, Central the next, West the next, repeat)
Less games in your division. No reason for teams to play each other 19 times every year plus more (like Yanks - Sox did every year) in the post season. That can be trimmed so that teams like Toronto, Tampa Bay who are in division with perennial powerhouses don't have to defy such massive odds to win. Also less games in division lessens the penalty that teams have for being in a strong division when competing for wild card or best record.
No. You are wrong. The entire point of divisional play is that they are your rivals in division who you play repeatedly. Without this they are just arbitrary constructions of 3 playoff spots that have no meaning.
PS - I know that Stax is reading my post and shaking his head...
Lulz, I was replying to Swurgen's but now I'll go through yours.
I'm of the opinion that the regular season needs to be drastically reduced. My reasoning is simply supply and demand. 162 games? really? We need that many to determine who is worthy of going to the post season? Sorry, but there are countless games with half empty stadiums with players going thru the motions, it's pathetic. You say it's a war of attrition; I say it's a waste of time.
That's fine but you are wrong. The worst team can beat the best team on any given day because the margin of greatness is so small in baseball. The difference between 162 and 154 would not really be huge enough to matter all that much, but a drastic reduction would lessen the accuracy of the playoff picture.
The reason the playoffs are so exciting and intense is because so much is riding on every at bat. During the regular season you can get swept in a 3 game series and the attitude is "oh well, we'll get 'em next time". Lose 3 games in a row in football and the head coach is in the hot seat if not fired.
It might seem that way, but that's the point. Barry Bonds can go on an 0-25 streak, does that mean that should sink his team's chances? Again, what a drastic schedule shortening fails to deal with is the inherant small margin of difference in baseball. Just 10% separates the barely serviceable hitter (.200) from some of the better hitters (.300) or the league average sluggers (.400) from the home run hitters (.500). In 2007 there was no team with a winning %age below .400 or above .600 (this year there were 1 or 2, but still). Less games = Less accuracy = Less good.
I'd like to see baseball trim the schedule down from 162 to 120 games. Fans will express more interest in each individual game and each game will have more meaning.
They really won't, it's just the 'playoff push' month will be late July/August and not September. April and May games will be just as meaningless to those fans.
Resisting shortening of the season merely becuz it would alter records and statistics is foolish and only helps prove my point that baseball in its current marathon like season and pace is too boring. Hardcore fans need the additional activity like debating stats becuz the season is too long and boring. We live in an ADD generation. Shorten it up, make each game more meaningful.
The argument isn't based on records, it's based on getting the best product at the end of the year possible. Last years WS was the best AL team vs. one of the best NL teams, this year was one of the two best AL teams vs. one of the best NL teams, these are good results. The goal of the long season is the avoid the 2006 Cardinals of the world, to avoid rewarding championships where they likely should not go.
And BTW, arguing for a change because we are an ADD generation is a lot sillier than because of records
Genius
10-30-2008, 05:21 PM
Scheduling double-headers is a great idea. That, along with eliminating a week of spring training to move games up (is there really that much of a difference in Cleveland's weather when comparing the last week of March and the first week of April?) and scheduling playoff games that the East Coast can see the end of, and you have a nice package. The rotating interleague schedule is a good idea. Contraction will never happen, if the Expos weren't eliminated. Get rid of the DH and we have a significant improvement!
mongo
10-30-2008, 05:22 PM
i'd kiss stax if i could.
Genius
10-30-2008, 05:24 PM
i'd kiss stax if i could.
What's holding you back?
mongo
10-30-2008, 05:25 PM
What's holding you back?
acne.
Swurgen
10-30-2008, 05:34 PM
PS - I know that Stax is reading my post and shaking his head...
120? He wasn't the only one.
Rover
10-30-2008, 05:44 PM
No. Period.
If the question was back to the classic 154, maybe, but 148 is just as arbitrary. The more games you play the more likely it is that the cream will rise to the top. Maybe do away with some spring training games to let the World Series get played a little early (to try and avert weather issues) but don't cut into 162.Can't start the season any earlier. I'm tired of going to home openers with the threat of snow/actual snow/wearing a parka.
Sure cold weather teams can open on the road, but starting 2-3 weeks on the road every year isn't fair to all the teams.
Seriously, is there ANY reason for a MONTH of Spring Training games? We could easily play a week or two in March and shift back the whole season so that the World Series can fall on calmer weather.Because in cold weather cities, the weather is cold in the beginning of March.
There's no reason a team should sit for longer than 3 daysYeah, but then you run into potential problems with the World Series. A team that sweeps all it's series could sit around for 2 weeks waiting for a team that needs 7 games in every series.
Changes:
1.) Go back to 154 games.
2.) Contract the Mariners and the Padres, move the Brewers back to the AL.
3.) Cut the time in between innings from 2 minutes to 90 seconds (Bill James convinced me on this one)
Makes the season shorter, makes the games shorter.Good thing the taxpayers in Seattle didnt' just raise their taxes to pay for a ballpark. And I doubt changing the time between innings will affect the length of the season. Although, it will affect advertisment revenue.
PS - I know that Stax is reading my post and shaking his head...Your post even made my head explode. 120 games is crazy. Baseball is supposed to be a marathon.
keep 162, have teams play like 7 double headers throughout the course of the season. postseason starts a week earlier.
Scheduling double-headers is a great idea. That, along with eliminating a week of spring training to move games up (is there really that much of a difference in Cleveland's weather when comparing the last week of March and the first week of April?) and scheduling playoff games that the East Coast can see the end of, and you have a nice package. The rotating interleague schedule is a good idea. Contraction will never happen, if the Expos weren't eliminated. Get rid of the DH and we have a significant improvement!A week of doubleheaders is the correct answer. Maybe even 2 weeks. There is no reason not to have day/night double headers on Saturdays/Sundays.
It solves the problem of the season lasting into the end of October/November. And playing 19 games against your division opponents is too many, but that doesn't solve the length of the season.
mongo
10-30-2008, 05:49 PM
i'm sure if double headers were proposed, it would take teams all of 3 seconds to state that that interferes w/ pitcher rest time. i love the idea of "let's play two", but i doubt owners, with massive contracts and aspirations of the post-season, would sign off on it w/out some sort of incentive for themselves.
Swurgen
10-30-2008, 06:05 PM
No it wouldn't. Maris hit 61 in 61 when they played 162. Records are already on a 162 game schedule.
ON THE 154 GAME SCHED, MARIS DOESN'T MATTER ANY MORE. BONDS DOES. MY POINT IS THAT BONDS WOULD BE OUT - NOT THAT ROGER WOULD BE IN.
I don't mind deeper rest in the playoffs to ensure GOOD games and not ones just dictated by stress. However, I do think doing away with predetermined start dates will help a bit as if (for example) both divisional rounds are a sweep why wait all those extra days to start the CS?
A FEW GAMES HERE AND THERE AREN'T GOING TO TIRE OUT THE BASEBALL PLAYERS. IT JUST PROVIDES UNNATURAL REST PERIODS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REST OF THE BASEBALL SEASON. DEEPER BULLPENS / ROTATIONS WOULD REWARD TEAMS THAT ARE MORE COMPLETE.
No, they shouldn't. Teams already compete (if they have a real shot) for their division because the WC is already punished in facing the best team by record. The DS should be a best of 7, but a 5-2 home split is silly.
Yes. Either do away with it or go NFL style and just rotate each year (East vs. East one year, Central the next, West the next, repeat)
No. You are wrong. The entire point of divisional play is that they are your rivals in division who you play repeatedly. Without this they are just arbitrary constructions of 3 playoff spots that have no meaning.
NO YOUUUU ARE WRONG. YOU CAN PLAY REPEATEDLY WITHOUT PLAYING QUITE AS REPEATEDLY. ENOUGHS ENOUGH AFTER A WHILE. THE GAMES LOSE THEIR SPECIALNESS.
The worst team can beat the best team on any given day because the margin of greatness is so small in baseball.
That's why I want more penalty against the WC. Make it a true long shot. In today's day and age, a hot team that storms into the post season with a strong late season push isn't much of an underdog against a division winner that has been complacently sitting on its ass for weeks. Especially if their team is built around 2 good starters like last year's Cleveland team (I know they weren't WC but as an example). Boston and NY aren't nearly as dominant as they were a few years ago.
Hanover Fist
10-30-2008, 06:14 PM
I think they should keep the season at 162 games, but they should do like high school baseball and play 81 doubleheaders. Then on rainouts they could play a quadruple header the next day like a marathon 24 hour softball tournament.
Draven X 23
10-30-2008, 08:02 PM
I hate interleague play. I also hate the uneven schedule.
Interleague has no place in baseball. Having an AL team help determine the NL races is no good. Look back and see if the Mets or Twins or whoever didn't make the playoffs due to losing an interleague game.
And the uneven schedule makes no sense with the wild card. Also its no fun when in the AL 10 of the 14 Wild Card winners came from the AL East. Even it out. The 30 times ESPN can air a NY vs Bos game has been done to death. Especially for the millions of fans who can't give two shits about either team.
Also throw in the fact after sometime in June a lot of teams never play each other again even though they are both in the wildcard race is disappointing.
keep 162, have teams play like 7 double headers throughout the course of the season. postseason starts a week earlier.
This is such a sexy idea I almost came my pants. I'd probably have teams play 10 double headers a year.
heelsguy
10-30-2008, 09:55 PM
my biggest problem with baseball is all of the time wasted by batters getting into the batter's box, then their rituals (nomar's queer batting glove bit for example) and then the pitchers stepping off the mound, etc.
this is not 1954. we have places to go and things to do. get situated, get the sign, throw the fucking ball..REPEAT.
my biggest problem with baseball is all of the time wasted by batters getting into the batter's box, then their rituals (nomar's queer batting glove bit for example) and then the pitchers stepping off the mound, etc.
this is not 1954. we have places to go and things to do. get situated, get the sign, throw the fucking ball..REPEAT.
I don't get why people care so much about that. It's not that big a deal.
Part of baseball is a mind game. If you've faced a certain pitcher in the past, you get to know what pitches they throw in certain situations so you take a second and think about it.
acne.
It's getting better! Lulz
Can't start the season any earlier. I'm tired of going to home openers with the threat of snow/actual snow/wearing a parka.
But this is what people are talking about already. In the cities where weather is bad, end of March is the same as start of April. Just do what you can to keep those teams on the road early on.
Because in cold weather cities, the weather is cold in the beginning of March.
No one is saying beginning of March, they are saying maybe one week.
ON THE 154 GAME SCHED, MARIS DOESN'T MATTER ANY MORE. BONDS DOES. MY POINT IS THAT BONDS WOULD BE OUT - NOT THAT ROGER WOULD BE IN.
But it wouldn't 'promote nostalgia' as you say, it would just add a further unnecessary wrinkle to things (making this quirky 162-game era in baseball history to adjust for)
A FEW GAMES HERE AND THERE AREN'T GOING TO TIRE OUT THE BASEBALL PLAYERS. IT JUST PROVIDES UNNATURAL REST PERIODS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REST OF THE BASEBALL SEASON. DEEPER BULLPENS / ROTATIONS WOULD REWARD TEAMS THAT ARE MORE COMPLETE.
I'm agreeing with you that unnaturally long rest is dumb.
NO YOUUUU ARE WRONG. YOU CAN PLAY REPEATEDLY WITHOUT PLAYING QUITE AS REPEATEDLY. ENOUGHS ENOUGH AFTER A WHILE. THE GAMES LOSE THEIR SPECIALNESS.
How? The less you play your division the less your division matters. How can you be both for punishing the WC (saying the division winners should be MORE important, essentially) and for weakening the division by playing it less?
mongo
10-31-2008, 12:48 AM
my biggest problem with baseball.
people that have a problem w/ baseball should either grow up or gtfo.
people that have a problem w/ baseball should either grow up or gtfo.
Quoted for truth.
Supersized because it looks cooler.
mongo
10-31-2008, 01:01 AM
Quoted for truth.
Supersized because it looks cooler.
would have looked cooler if it was super bold!
TheImpossibleMan
10-31-2008, 09:15 AM
my biggest problem with baseball is all of the time wasted by batters getting into the batter's box, then their rituals (nomar's queer batting glove bit for example) and then the pitchers stepping off the mound, etc.
this is not 1954. we have places to go and things to do. get situated, get the sign, throw the fucking ball..REPEAT.
Bill James talked about this at length. He suggested:
1.) Cut time between innings from 2 minutes to 90 seconds
2.) Pitchers get two unsuccessful throws to first; on the third, it counts as a ball.
3.) Once batters step into the batters box, time will not be granted by the umpires.
4.) Teams get one free mid-inning relief pitching change through the entire game. After that, they can only remove the pitcher on the mound (starter or reliever) in the middle of the inning when he has given up at least one run in the inning.
He said these changes would cut something like fifteen minutes out of each game's length. I disagree with #3 (anyone who has watched Clemens pitch knows how he ices the hitters; if a pitcher wants to hold the ball for 30 seconds the batter should be allowed to step out) but otherwise these seem to make sense.
I used to think about that throw-to-first rule, my issue with it is a good baserunner can draw a throw when he knows he can beat it so that rule would let good baserunners run rampant. Plus any sane pitcher could just step off (or even throw to 2nd) to stop the steal anyways (and waste just as much time)
And rule #4 is just insane.
Jackcraver
10-31-2008, 09:31 AM
What if they just shorten the season by 12 games to 150? Then we would be starting the playoffs at the end of September and finishing the world series in the middle of October instead of near November?
Hell if they do that the Mets might be able to hold onto a division lead.
The only way the season would ever be shortened in # of games is back to 154, and that's unlikely. The idea of starting a little earlier + A couple more doubleheaders is far more likely.
Hoser
10-31-2008, 09:38 AM
There's no reason a team should sit for longer than 3 days
It is baseball, there is no reasons they should get more then a day off (Pitchers excluded).
The only argument I can see for the set start dates is a situation where one league is all sweeps and the other is tough series. If both the DS and CS go quickly in one league (with the CS already starting earlier in that league because the DS went faster) the team that was arguably 'better' (they won faster) has to sit for a crazy amount of time (because even if you do away with set start dates you need an opponent).