Should MLB change the pro baseball league structure?

Yes

1 of 5

by dhwinston

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

I vote YES here because I would like to see something done to not only reinvigorate Major League Baseball, but increase the quality of the game on the field. I'm NOT for radical realignment that swaps traditionally AL and NL teams just to create better regional rivalries(they already tried that once and it failed miserably, leading to the worst thing to happen to baseball since the Curt Flood ruling... why is there a 6 division team and a 4 division team in baseball?).

To solve the realignment conundrum I would turn to the NFL for a successful model. They got it completely right. More, smaller divisions, to create better rivalries between fewer teams (does anyone really care about the Yankees/Devil Rays rivalry anyway?). I liked the decision a few years ago, on the eve of wild card baseball, to weight each team's schedule more toward their own division (meaning teams play divisional opponents anywhere from 17 to 19 times a season while they play everyone else in their league 6 to 7 times), it's the first step toward creating regional hotbeds of baseball. Again, look no further than the NFL for proof that this works. Who would have ever thought that the AFC South, a newly created division culled from all the castoffs of the venerable divisions that couldn't be broken apart (Indianapolis Colts, Tennessee Titans, just out of expansion limbo Jacksonville Jaguars, and expansion babies Houston Texans), would become a highly competitive division with deep seeded rivalries, and smash mouth attitude? Because the system works the AFC South currently stands as the class of the NFL (for now... the NFL also benefits from increased parity, which the MLB sorely lacks).

Radical realignment would never work in the MLB. The sport is too steeped in history to handle teams jumping from AL to NL. Even the NFL only jumped one team from the AFC to the NFC when it realigned because it understood that the associations of teams with their leagues or conferences actually mean something to the fans. I would recommend adding two additional teams and realigning into eight divisions:

AL East - Yankees, Red Sox, Orioles, Blue Jays
AL North - Indians, Tigers, Twins, White Sox
AL South - Devil Rays, Royals, Rangers, and Expansion team
AL West - Angels, Mariners, As, and expansion team in Las Vegas (it's about time we had a professional sports team in Las Vegas and the MLB makes perfect sense)

NL East - Mets, Phillies, Nationals, Braves
NL North - Cubs, Brewers, Pirates, Rockies
NL South - Reds, Astros, Cardinals, Marlins
NL West - Diamondbacks, Padres, Dodgers, Giants

I admit it gets a little messier in the NL, which could require one or two teams to jump to the AL, but it works by spreading the teams out across more divisions and amping up inter divisional rivalries (I could really care less about regional rivalries, fans make match ups important by paying attention and rivalries will be borne out of fewer teams per division and better opportunities to make the playoffs).

The beauty of this system is that allowing only divisional winners to advance the number of playoff teams remains the same, but their winning means more to them (although I wouldn't write off wild card teams as celebrating a second place finish... many years we've seen that the wild card team may be the second best team in baseball... wild card is not a derogatory term to me, it's quite possibly what saved baseball and I'm all for the 8 team playoff lineup, it's perfect... it can never increase because it would add too many games the end of the year and it would devalue the playoffs by including half the league... hint, hint NBA that's why you suck).

Now for my secondary and/or alternate recommendations.

1. If the MLB was realigned as I mention above, with 8 divisions and only division winners making the playoffs, then the league should seriously consider moving back to a 154 game schedule. Do we really care if it's 162? Does that number really mean anything to us? No. Those 8 games are just another 10 million dollars for the owners (which is why it won't ever happen). 154 games would take a week off the schedule and allow the MLB to better implement suggestion #2.

2. Increase the divisional playoff round from a 5 game series to 7 games. It's just the right thing to do. Especially in baseball, that extra win really means something. It means that a team not only has to steal a win, but they have to legitimately put the other team away in the end (currently just stealing one opportunistic victory pretty much punches your ticket to the LCS... this would eliminate those teams fans and the press feel are undeserving by making every team play their hearts out to earn it in the divisional rounds.

3. Eliminate roster adjustments once the playoffs start. The makeup of baseball teams is so different from every other sport that it just doesn't seem to correlate, but the fact that a team can deactivate and activate specific players (and I'm talking mainly pitchers here) based on the opponent they face is insane. Likewise, that a team can add a completely different player to their roster due to an injury of a current player just seems wrong to me. Either increase the playoff roster by 3 players or make them suffer through injuries and rotational adjustments like big boys. Don't let them have it both ways.

4. Stop giving home field advantage to the league that wins the All Star game. I know the "This Time It Counts" slogan is a big seller come mid summer, but it's just blatantly unfair at its core. The Colorado Rockies had two players on this year's All Star roster and only one of them saw action (2 ABs and RF), while the Red Sox led the majors with 6 players on the roster with 5 seeing playing time (4 AB, 3.0 IP, 1B/3B/P). Now in the grand scheme of things those two extra ABs don't mean too much, but Boston was responsible for one third of the innings pitched (giving up no runs, 2 hits, racking up 4 SO and notching the win). The Rockies one pitcher saw no playing time and had zero affect on the outcome of the game and the great Rockies pitchers we've seen at the end of this season were no where to be found. Granted it wouldn't matter anyway since Boston has a better record and would gain home field advantage anyway if the MLB were to abolish the "It Matters" All Star format, but at least that gave the Rockies pitchers and the other players on the team some say in the awarding of home field advantage (and for all those naysayers out there who say it doesn't matter in baseball... it does matter... to the fans in each city... to the owners who get an extra game... to the people who work at the stadiums... home field matters even if it might not on the field).

Lastly, I would like to offer an alternative to the expansion and realignment recommendation that has been the crux of my entire article... Contraction. When this came up a couple of years ago regarding the Expos and Marlins, it was a great idea. Why should cities (and owners) who could care less about supporting a successful team or even fielding a semi-competitive team still be gifted with an MLB franchise? In lieu of expanding to 32 teams in 8 four team divisions, I suggest contracting to 24 teams in 6 four team divisions. Contract the Marlins, Devil Rays, Pirates, Royals, Rangers and Nationals and realign slightly to fill in the holes. The product presented to the fans would be better, the games and playoff races more competitive, and the national interest from casual fans more intense. Sure some purists out there might miss the Pirates and I admit I would feel a little sad for the loss of Roberto Clemente's team, but then I'd remember that the Pirates are a joke. The MLB would be better off without them and without the other five teams on my contraction list as well.

Learn more about this author, dhwinston.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.