Sammys Boombox

Whoa, easy, just an admittedly fantasy land idea posted for discussion. Nowhere near perfect. For what it's worth if you assume we keep the current format of 30 teams I would still rather have only 4 playoff teams from each league, next I would prefer the 6-team playoffs and last I would prefer the 5-team. I don't think that's insane at all. Also, a 5-team playoff isn't so bad if it's a best-of-three and all three are played in the higher seed's park. As I mentioned in the post expansion teams were chosen based on what division they fit into more than anything and I didn't put much thought into them. Still, I don't see why Nashville is such a terrible choice. I'm not going to say it's the best. I will admit it's unlikely, but that's not the point of this post at all. It's not that convoluted. It's really no different than NCAA basketball except you are assigning a certain number of selections from each league and they are decided by record instead of a selection committee. The Braves vs. Phillies/Mets are historical rivals. The White Sox vs. Indians/Tigers are historical rivals. This purposefully does not take those into account because after a few seasons of teams extremely close to each other duking it out for playoff positioning new (and better, imho) rivals will take shape. How many Braves fans do Mets and Phillies fans actually know? Except for the Rays I would argue those cesspool teams would still get the same number of attractive matchups. Sure, the ones that were in the AL now get half as many home games against teams like the Red Sox and Yankees, but now they also get games against the Cubs, Cardinals, etc. that they didn't before. On the other hand, the NL teams now trade in games against Cubs and Cardinals for games against Yankees and Red Sox. I also think it would generate more interest in each of those series because they would only come to those cities once every other year instead of once a year. So, you basically get the same number of premium game opponents, they're just not the same ones you historically had. For instance, Cleveland would be within 4 hours of their entire division. The only team I see getting hurt in attendance would be Tampa Bay and like I said, I'd rather move them anyway.

I am ignoring the possibilities of something like this happening. This is just "if it were up to me."

This is a crazy fantasy land idea I came up with. Frankly, I'm surprised how much I like this considering I don't really like interleague play, want the NL to keep the DH and hate the new second wild card. Here's my fantasy 32-team MLB (although if i was really going crazy I would also move Oakland and Tampa Bay to some other cities. The expansion cities were chosen because the proximity to a division that needed a team. And, yes, I know the Mets and Yankees would never go for a Brooklyn team. Atlantic League Division A Phillies Nationals Orioles Blue Jas Division B Mets Brooklyn Yankees Red Sox East League Division A Reds Indians Tigers Pirates Division B Rays Marlins Nashville Braves Midwest League Division A Cardinals Royals Astros Rangers Division B Cubs White Sox Brewers Twins West League Division A Mariners Rockies Giants A’s Division B Diamondbacks Angels Dodgers Padres 12 playoff teams. 3 playoff teams from each league (1 league winner, 1 division winner, 1 wild card winner). Each league winner gets a bye and home-field advantage for a best-of-five Division Series. Each division winner hosts all three games of a best-of-three Wild Card Series against a wild card winner. Teams are seeded like this: 4 league winners: 1-4 based on overall record 4 division winners: 5-8 based on overall record 4 wild card winners: 9-12 based on overall record No matter what division/league you come from 5 plays 12, 6 plays 11, 7 plays 10, 8 plays 9 in the wild card round. Like the NFL, teams are realigned based on seeding after each round. This way ANY two teams could play in the World Series even if they’re from the same division. This still allows for a crosstown World Series even though the teams are in the same division. Championship Series and World Series are best-of-seven. DH in all leagues because it’s coming anyway, and a schedule where you play every team outside your league 3 games, every team in the other division in your league 12 games and every team in your division 14 games. 24x3=72 4x12=48 3x14=42 72+48+42=162 Each league is really a mega-division so don't get bent out of shape because the Cubs/Cardinals are in different divisions. It just means two less game per year. The main prize will still be getting the league championship because it comes with a bye. Winning your league will be much bigger than winning your division. So how crazy am I?

I was surprised how many players I recognized in that video considering I was only 7 at the time.

I believe it was the same series in early '04. Think the Cubs were up in the 9th inning and Dusty let Wood pitch the 9th, promptly gave up the lead after questionable calls, and then boom-goes Dusty and Wood. The day before. Eric Cooper. http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=240417116 wtf... i remember everyone being pissed at cb bucknor Different games in the same series. Dusty got ejected because he double switched and then they called Ramon Martinez out after he doubled for batting out of order, and that was C.B. Bucknor. That was also the game referenced earlier where Sosa and Alou went back to back in the 9th. That was the Friday game. The Saturday game when Wood got ejected for arguing balls and strikes with Eric Cooper. This is all coming back to me. What an exciting/aggravating series for mid-April.

I believe it was the same series in early '04. Think the Cubs were up in the 9th inning and Dusty let Wood pitch the 9th, promptly gave up the lead after questionable calls, and then boom-goes Dusty and Wood. The day before. Eric Cooper. http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=240417116

Do you mean the game in like April of 04 when Dusty went absolutely nuts? Yes. I think I was actually wrong because I'm pretty sure they lost that game now that I think about it. Oh, I didn't realize you meant ejected. I just saw the April 04 and assumed you remembered something about the game I had not seen.

Do you mean the game in like April of 04 when Dusty went absolutely nuts? Yes.

This reminds me of a game against the Reds 03 or 04? I got off the school bus at a friend's house and went into his living room and turned the game on. Cubs were down (11-10 I think) in the bottom of the 9th. As soon as we turned it on Sosa homered, and then Alou homered to win it. My friend's mom looked at me like I was a nut job when she saw my reaction. Edit: 11-10 was the final. http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=240416116 Edit 2: McRae's appearance reminded me of this game, which I recently discussed in KC with McRae and he acted like he didn't remember it. How do you not remember hitting a grand slam at the front end of a back-to-back-to-back? 9 HR total in this game... http://m.bbref.com/m?p=XXboxesXXCHNXXCHN199604190.shtml

Randall Delgado going to the DBacks in the trade.

When I first read that I thought Rahm was being a complete jerk, and I still do. "I told those rich guys, no, no, no, no." Meanwhile, he completely ignores the significant tax revenue that is generated by that private enterprise. At the very least it could have been worded with a lot more tact. Even if you agree with Rahm's decision (which there are a lot of good reasons to agree with him), you have to admit the delivery was not very good. Chalk one up for political posturing.

Looks like NSBB has some pretty good seat locations. Not bad.

If a lefty moves to first and doesn't throw it's a balk. I'm sure it's going to be the same way. If the pitcher moves to third he has to throw it to third and then the third baseman can do whatever he wants with the ball based on what the runner at first does.

I don't have any tolerance for domestic abuse, but I still feel bad for the guy. He obviously has problems and who knows the source of those problems. Not an excuse, but it seems to be harder for him than most other people.

I would definitely go just for the fun of it. No pressure at all.

Anybody else catch the irony of the team from the state of Washington playing at the home field of the Washington Redskins, which is located in the state of Maryland, not the city or state of Washington? Also, both playoff games yesterday were played in Maryland.

I don't think she's Tebowing. She's kneeling, but she's not doing the fist to forehead pose. I don't know. It's not obvious that she's Tebowing, but it's close enough to make you wonder. Her hand is up by her forehead.

HOU def CIN IND def BAL GB def MIN WAS def SEA NE def HOU DEN def IND GB def SF WAS def ATL DEN def NE GB def WAS GB def DEN Our family is split DEN/GB. My father's parents lived in GB. My mother grew up in DEN. It's time for some Super Bowl XXXII payback.

Beat SF at home and it's meaningless. Replacement officials made that game a farce as well. It just wasn't one-sided. Either way, I hate when people say stuff like that. Well, I hate when people whine about the officials when there was a pretty simple way for their team to make anything the refs do meaningless, so touche. Yeah, because I'm sure you wouldn't be upset if your team of choice missed out on something important because of a long series of ridiculous decisions by unworthy officials. Is it the only reason? Obviously not. There were four other games they could have won. The 18-point lead in the second half of the Colts game for instance (of course there was that bogus helmet-to-helmet that negated the turnover on the Colts 9-yard line, but I guess they should have overcome that, too), or the Giants game where they didn't even show up, or the 49ers game, or today's game when they inexplicably couldn't stop Ponder on third and long many times when AP wasn't even on the field. Or, I could lament the large string of injuries to key players on both sides of the ball. But, no, I'm going to choose to be pissed about the replacement officials because three of the biggest games of the season when it came to seeding for the Packers were in weeks 1-3 and they were all officiated by replacement officials. This included bogus roughing the passer and PI calls in the Packers favor in the Bears game and a really bad call in their favor on a return in the 49ers game. However, in light of how everything ended and all of the help the Seahawks got in their game against the Packers, I am going to "whine" about not getting a bye and not getting a week to rest players that need it, because they overcame every bit of adversity to earn that spot EXCEPT the debacle in Seattle. "Yeah, the officials spotted the opponents 7 points in a 14-12 game that cost your team a 2 seed and a bye, but don't complain about it because you could have won this other game over here."

Beat SF at home and it's meaningless. Replacement officials made that game a farce as well. It just wasn't one-sided. Either way, I hate when people say stuff like that.

Seahawks/Packers debacle costs them the 2 seed. Goodell can find a big cliff and jump off it.

The Vikings have historically found new and interesting ways to rip their fans' hearts out. And as I say that, the freaking GB secondary decided not to cover someone. I'll give you that, but most of them seem to just be, "The Cubs haven't won in 100 years so let's say every team that is currently having some sort of issue and hasn't won in the last 15 years is the NFL Cubs." Bears/Vikings make more sense than the other three I've heard and those all came from the sports media, so, I'm not surprised.

Terrible defensive play call. Nevermind, a good player making a bad play.

I've heard at least 5 teams referred to as the NFL Cubs this season: Chiefs, Browns, Bears, Vikings, Jets. None of the analogies seem to match.