MLB Structure/Scheduling Ideas

[Sammys Boombox]

though I haven't sat down and tried it, I'm going to guess that sustaining one interleague series at all times (re: 15 teams per league) is logistically impossible

 

There are a few systems where it works. There must be 1, 3, 5, etc. going on at once. The Bob Costas' system is one in which it does work. It is the major hurdle in the 15/15 system.

 

It works, and it's not that hard.

 

It's a hurdle because other scheduling compromises would have to occur that the owners probably won't accept. Not because it's hard to figure out a 15/15 system.

[Sammys Boombox]

though I haven't sat down and tried it, I'm going to guess that sustaining one interleague series at all times (re: 15 teams per league) is logistically impossible

 

There are a few systems where it works. There must be 1, 3, 5, etc. going on at once. The Bob Costas' system is one in which it does work. It is the major hurdle in the 15/15 system.

 

It works, and it's not that hard.

 

how many interleague series does each team have to play to do it?

 

There are 26 weeks in the season so that's 52 series if you take the average of two series per week, excluding the random but rare 2-2-3 weeks where a team faces three different opponents. Subtract one for the All-Star Break and there would be at least 51 total series if you played one each time. They'd probably raise it to 60 which would mean each team would play 4 or 75 in which each team would play 5.

 

It's certainly not impossible.

 

If you figure there are 51 total series to be played at once, which I think is right, then you can't have 60 series. You have to have an odd number of interleague series for it to work. 75 would work though. And it would probably be easier to schedule as well.

[Guest]

51 is the minimum number that have to happen unless you give a couple teams a three-day break.

 

If you want each team to play the same number of series, it has to be a multiple of 15 since that's the number of teams that would be in each league. The smallest multiple of 15 that's bigger than 51 is 60, which would mean each team would play 4 interleague series.

 

1 series/team = 15 total series = 3 interleague games per team

2 series/team = 30 total series = 6 interleague games per team

3 series/team = 45 total series = 9 interleague games per team

4 series/team = 60 total series = 12 interleague games per team

5 series/team = 75 total series = 15 interleague games per team

6 series/team = 90 total series = 18 interleague games per team

And so on

 

The first three don't work because there wouldn't be enough to fill the schedule without giving a few teams extended breaks at some point in the season. Then it becomes how many interleague games you want each team to play.

[Sammys Boombox]

51 is the minimum number that have to happen unless you give a couple teams a three-day break.

 

If you want each team to play the same number of series, it has to be a multiple of 15 since that's the number of teams that would be in each league. The smallest multiple of 15 that's bigger than 51 is 60, which would mean each team would play 4 interleague series.

 

1 series/team = 15 total series = 3 interleague games per team

2 series/team = 30 total series = 6 interleague games per team

3 series/team = 45 total series = 9 interleague games per team

4 series/team = 60 total series = 12 interleague games per team

5 series/team = 75 total series = 15 interleague games per team

6 series/team = 90 total series = 18 interleague games per team

And so on

 

The first three don't work because there wouldn't be enough to fill the schedule without giving a few teams extended breaks at some point in the season. Then it becomes how many interleague games you want each team to play.

 

But you also can't have an even number of total interleague series without giving teams extended breaks. Each set of series must have an odd number of interleague series going on at the same time (1,3,5, etc.). If there are 2 interleague series going on, then one team from each league would not be playing (2 interleague, 12 intraleague, and 1 sitting). Since there will be 51 sets of series (an odd number), there must also be an odd number of total interleague series.

 

This is because an odd number times an odd number is always odd. 60, 90, 120 total series do not work. 75, 105, 135 do work. Which actually means we just found a flaw in Bob Costas' system! Cool.

[Guest]

I see what you're saying now. So yeah, either 15 or 21 games for each team, which would mean 75 or 105 total interleague series, would be the most likely scenarios.

[Sammys Boombox]

I see what you're saying now. So yeah, either 15 or 21 games for each team, which would mean 75 or 105 total interleague series, would be the most likely scenarios.

 

I really do wish we could see something like this at some point. If they wanted to start the season three days earlier on a Friday, then they could go the route of 60 or 90 total interleague series. This would just mean three more off-days built into the season for each team.

[chasinf5s]

I still say expand by two teams (once economy recovers) and go with four divisions of four teams each.

 

3 teams in division (14) = 42 games

4 teams in three other divisions (9 x 3) = 108 games

1 division in other league per year (4 x 3) = 12 games

 

is 162 games

 

Best team in each division makes the playoffs. Yes, I recognize benefit to the economics of the game with the wildcard. I just don't like it. Four division winners ought to keep enough cities interested in the progress of their team.

 

i dont really agree at all with this, id rather kill a few teams, esp with exceptionally low fan bases

 

Toronto

Florida

Tampa Bay

Washington (eventhough that wont happen with the new stadium)

St Louis

 

im joking about St Louis

[Sammys Boombox]

I still say expand by two teams (once economy recovers) and go with four divisions of four teams each.

 

3 teams in division (14) = 42 games

4 teams in three other divisions (9 x 3) = 108 games

1 division in other league per year (4 x 3) = 12 games

 

is 162 games

 

Best team in each division makes the playoffs. Yes, I recognize benefit to the economics of the game with the wildcard. I just don't like it. Four division winners ought to keep enough cities interested in the progress of their team.

 

i dont really agree at all with this, id rather kill a few teams, esp with exceptionally low fan bases

 

Toronto

Florida

Tampa Bay

Washington (eventhough that wont happen with the new stadium)

St Louis

 

im joking about St Louis

 

I wish they would just impose a $40 million salary cap on St. Louis. Then have this schedule where the Cubs play the Cardinals 25 times a year as their "intraleague rival." Then balance the rest of the schedule out.

[Fred Hornkohl]

51 is the minimum number that have to happen unless you give a couple teams a three-day break.

 

If you want each team to play the same number of series, it has to be a multiple of 15 since that's the number of teams that would be in each league. The smallest multiple of 15 that's bigger than 51 is 60, which would mean each team would play 4 interleague series.

 

1 series/team = 15 total series = 3 interleague games per team

2 series/team = 30 total series = 6 interleague games per team

3 series/team = 45 total series = 9 interleague games per team

4 series/team = 60 total series = 12 interleague games per team

5 series/team = 75 total series = 15 interleague games per team

6 series/team = 90 total series = 18 interleague games per team

And so on

 

The first three don't work because there wouldn't be enough to fill the schedule without giving a few teams extended breaks at some point in the season. Then it becomes how many interleague games you want each team to play.

 

But you also can't have an even number of total interleague series without giving teams extended breaks. Each set of series must have an odd number of interleague series going on at the same time (1,3,5, etc.). If there are 2 interleague series going on, then one team from each league would not be playing (2 interleague, 12 intraleague, and 1 sitting). Since there will be 51 sets of series (an odd number), there must also be an odd number of total interleague series.

 

This is because an odd number times an odd number is always odd. 60, 90, 120 total series do not work. 75, 105, 135 do work. Which actually means we just found a flaw in Bob Costas' system! Cool.

 

You are correct as far as you've taken it. But right now, there are 52 series played by each team each season, not 51. That's 26 weeks times 2 series per week minus 1 series lost during the all star break plus one series gained during the once a year 2 consecutive 2 games series. (Each team plays one 2 game series at home and one on the road). This is the mechanism that the schedulers currently use to keep the home/road series/games equal for each team. These 2 game series will not work so well with interleague play, but doing away with them and replacing them with 1 series creates a whole other set of problems. I think it can be worked out, but it's not going to be the "no-brainer" that some people seem to think it is.

[Sammys Boombox]

51 is the minimum number that have to happen unless you give a couple teams a three-day break.

 

If you want each team to play the same number of series, it has to be a multiple of 15 since that's the number of teams that would be in each league. The smallest multiple of 15 that's bigger than 51 is 60, which would mean each team would play 4 interleague series.

 

1 series/team = 15 total series = 3 interleague games per team

2 series/team = 30 total series = 6 interleague games per team

3 series/team = 45 total series = 9 interleague games per team

4 series/team = 60 total series = 12 interleague games per team

5 series/team = 75 total series = 15 interleague games per team

6 series/team = 90 total series = 18 interleague games per team

And so on

 

The first three don't work because there wouldn't be enough to fill the schedule without giving a few teams extended breaks at some point in the season. Then it becomes how many interleague games you want each team to play.

 

But you also can't have an even number of total interleague series without giving teams extended breaks. Each set of series must have an odd number of interleague series going on at the same time (1,3,5, etc.). If there are 2 interleague series going on, then one team from each league would not be playing (2 interleague, 12 intraleague, and 1 sitting). Since there will be 51 sets of series (an odd number), there must also be an odd number of total interleague series.

 

This is because an odd number times an odd number is always odd. 60, 90, 120 total series do not work. 75, 105, 135 do work. Which actually means we just found a flaw in Bob Costas' system! Cool.

 

You are correct as far as you've taken it. But right now, there are 52 series played by each team each season, not 51. That's 26 weeks times 2 series per week minus 1 series lost during the all star break plus one series gained during the once a year 2 consecutive 2 games series. (Each team plays one 2 game series at home and one on the road). This is the mechanism that the schedulers currently use to keep the home/road series/games equal for each team. These 2 game series will not work so well with interleague play, but doing away with them and replacing them with 1 series creates a whole other set of problems. I think it can be worked out, but it's not going to be the "no-brainer" that some people seem to think it is.

 

Agreed, but you can still look at the season as a set of 51 series. It's just that one of those series is actually 2 sets of 2-game series, if that makes sense. While some teams are playing the 2-and-2 series, other teams can be playing a regular 3-game interleague series. Not everybody has to play the 2-and-2 series at the same time. Bob Costas' system has each team playing 8 4-game series and 8 2-game series. All 4-game and 2-game series are played inside the division in his system.

[UMFan83]

If I could change only 2 things about scheduling and rules in the MLB, here are my choices:

 

1. Only 1 series a year against interleague rivals. First of all it helps reduce the schedule inequalities from within the division (i.e. no 6 Cards-Royals games while we play the Sox). Also, it will definitely increase interest, 6 games is way too much and completely takes the novelty factor away from it. Finally, it will guarantee bragging rights for one side. How stupid is it to hype up this battle for Chicago, and then it ends 3-3 half the years (which is likely with each team taking 2 of 3 at home and 1 of 3 on the road). I know the MLB would argue against this because its a guaranteed sellout for many of these cities that might not normally get sellouts, but still there's gotta be a better way.

 

2. Division series' will be 7 games. I think a lot about how different 2007 and 2008 would be if LDS series were 7 games instead of 5. I feel like a lot of the reason we got swept was the pressure of a short series. We lost game 1 and all the sudden we acted like our backs were to the wall. A 7 game series makes each game slightly less important, allowing teams to relax and play baseball. Plus I think it definitely reduces the crapshoot factor of the playoffs. People always say that the playoffs are a crapshoot, IMO that's incorrect. THE FIRST ROUND is the crapshoot. Sure there are counter examples of a team getting hot and coasting into the World Series, but those happen in every sport (Arizona Cardinals, Warriors, etc). Most of the time, once you get to the 7 game LCS, the better team tends to win more often. To prove my point, look no further than the Cubs the last 2 seasons. In 2007, they faced a rather crummy DBacks team that had an extremely lucky season (proven by their Pythagorean record). They went out and shellshocked the Cubs in 3 games, and then went to the LCS and got smoked by the Rockies in 4 games. Then the next year the Cubs faced the 83 win Dodgers and choked again in 3 games. Next they went to the LCS and faced the Phillies, and not even Manny Ramirez could help them as they lost in 5 games. I'm not saying this because I feel like it hurt the Cubs the last couple of years (heck we semi benefited from it in 2003). It just makes more sense all around. I realize that adding 2 more games to the first round might mess up the schedule a bit, but I'm sure theres a way to get it done and not play November baseball. Get it done.

[J.R.]

Not sure why "November baseball" is such a vice. The weather is no worse than what is seen in early April.

[bukie]

Agreed, but you can still look at the season as a set of 51 series. It's just that one of those series is actually 2 sets of 2-game series, if that makes sense. While some teams are playing the 2-and-2 series, other teams can be playing a regular 3-game interleague series. Not everybody has to play the 2-and-2 series at the same time. Bob Costas' system has each team playing 8 4-game series and 8 2-game series. All 4-game and 2-game series are played inside the division in his system.

 

162 games in a season / 3 games in an average series = 54 "series" in a year. The season is not a set of 51 series, and in no way must there be an odd number of series in a year.

[Sammys Boombox]

Agreed, but you can still look at the season as a set of 51 series. It's just that one of those series is actually 2 sets of 2-game series, if that makes sense. While some teams are playing the 2-and-2 series, other teams can be playing a regular 3-game interleague series. Not everybody has to play the 2-and-2 series at the same time. Bob Costas' system has each team playing 8 4-game series and 8 2-game series. All 4-game and 2-game series are played inside the division in his system.

 

162 games in a season / 3 games in an average series = 54 "series" in a year. The season is not a set of 51 series, and in no way must there be an odd number of series in a year.

 

I don't think you're following the conversation very well.

[Sammys Boombox]

For what it's worth, the new MLBPA Union Chief says the players would prefer a 7-game LDS.

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/baseball/mlb/12/02/weiner.union.ap/index.html

[J.R.]

That would be fantastic. Just don't resume the idiocy of playing postseason games simultaneously.

[jersey cubs fan]

That would be fantastic. Just don't resume the idiocy of playing postseason games simultaneously.

 

What is idiotic about that?

[J.R.]

That would be fantastic. Just don't resume the idiocy of playing postseason games simultaneously.

 

What is idiotic about that?

 

Oh, there's this quaint notion I adhere to, it's called watching the games.

[jersey cubs fan]

That would be fantastic. Just don't resume the idiocy of playing postseason games simultaneously.

 

What is idiotic about that?

 

Oh, there's this quaint notion I adhere to, it's called watching the games.

 

You can play them simultaneously and still have them on television and the viewer flip back and forth and enjoy both. It's not simultaneous that's the problem, it's breaking them up by region and making one game unavailable that is the problem.

[J.R.]

That would be fantastic. Just don't resume the idiocy of playing postseason games simultaneously.

 

What is idiotic about that?

 

Oh, there's this quaint notion I adhere to, it's called watching the games.

 

You can play them simultaneously and still have them on television and the viewer flip back and forth and enjoy both. It's not simultaneous that's the problem, it's breaking them up by region and making one game unavailable that is the problem.

 

That's a pretty poor arrangement for the sport's biggest games. Forcing people to flip back and forth is bush league.

 

I say this as someone who takes time off work to watch the postseason. The first round, with big games going all day long, is fantastic.

[jersey cubs fan]

That's a pretty poor arrangement for the sport's biggest games. Forcing people to flip back and forth is bush league.

 

I say this as someone who takes time off work to watch the postseason. The first round, with big games going all day long, is fantastic.

 

It's not poor at all. Baseball is the easiest game around to flip back and forth and still follow. And they aren't even the biggest games, the championship series are much bigger. Plus there would barely be a need to have 2 games on at a time.

[J.R.]

That's a pretty poor arrangement for the sport's biggest games. Forcing people to flip back and forth is bush league.

 

I say this as someone who takes time off work to watch the postseason. The first round, with big games going all day long, is fantastic.

 

It's not poor at all. Baseball is the easiest game around to flip back and forth and still follow. And they aren't even the biggest games, the championship series are much bigger. Plus there would barely be a need to have 2 games on at a time.

 

In recent years the CS games were the only ones aired simultaneously.

 

What can I say, I like to see every pitch.

[XZero771679666304]

That's a pretty poor arrangement for the sport's biggest games. Forcing people to flip back and forth is bush league.

 

I say this as someone who takes time off work to watch the postseason. The first round, with big games going all day long, is fantastic.

 

It's not poor at all. Baseball is the easiest game around to flip back and forth and still follow. And they aren't even the biggest games, the championship series are much bigger. Plus there would barely be a need to have 2 games on at a time.

 

In recent years the CS games were the only ones aired simultaneously.

 

What can I say, I like to see every pitch.

 

I'm actually with you on this one. If two games start at the same time and both come down to the wire, who wants to have to flip back and forth to keep track of the drama?

 

I just don't think it would be that hard to stagger the games a bit.

[Cubfanintheknow]

That would be fantastic. Just don't resume the idiocy of playing postseason games simultaneously.

 

What is idiotic about that?

 

Oh, there's this quaint notion I adhere to, it's called watching the games.

 

You can play them simultaneously and still have them on television and the viewer flip back and forth and enjoy both. It's not simultaneous that's the problem, it's breaking them up by region and making one game unavailable that is the problem.

 

That whole flipping back-and-forth thing? Advertisers hate that.

 

All this talk has me longing for the good, old days with 24 teams, 12 in each league. 18 games against teams in your division, 12 against teams in the other division. No interleague. And in September you only played against teams in your division. Balanced and very entertaining.

[Sammys Boombox]

I wouldn't mind seeing them stagger the games where each start time was about 2:15 after the last start time. Most people would get to see the end of every game. This way games would rarely be ending at the same time.

 

Start the games at 2:00 EST if you have four games in one day:

 

2:00 ET/11:00 PT

4:15 ET/1:15 PT

6:30 ET/3:30 PT

8:45 ET/5:30 PT

 

Worst case scenario: 4 teams from the NL/AL East or 4 teams from the NL/AL West. Schedule could be tweaked for those though. You could even shorten the stagger to 1:45 or 2:00. It would be rare to see two games in innings 6-9 at the same time. Of course extra innings could always change things, but that's what makes baseball beautiful.

 

With 1:45 between game start times:

3:30 ET/12:30 PT

5:15 ET/2:15 PT

7:00 ET/4:00 PT

8:45 ET/5:45 PT

 

People out west could most likely watch the end of 3 games after 5:00. People back east could watch the end of 3 games between 5:00 and 10:00. Most baseball fans who are not fans of the teams playing only watch the last half of the playoff games anyway. I'm pretty sure baseball could set it up where this only happens once during the playoffs anyway without having a lot of off days.