Single table possiblility is discussed...... in baseball. Kinda OT, but I though it was hilarious after reading about it in these forums for years, that there is actually a sport in this country that would actually consider it, even though it is a longshot at this point. Here is the link http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=6651634
Re: Single table possiblility is discussed...... That's how it used to be in baseball. There were no division Top of each league's table would represent the league in the World Series. Personally I wish they would go back to that way with the top 4 teams making the play-offs.
Re: Single table possiblility is discussed...... Nice! I'm all for it, actually. I just hope the Padres stay in the NL.
Re: Single table possiblility is discussed...... Baseball is definitely the sport where single table makes most sense. the incredibly long season does a good job of 'balancing teams out' according to how they performed that year and the chances of making the playoffs differ widely based upon the division you happen to be in (the Blue Jays not only have to finish ahead of New York/Boston/Tampa, but also have to play each of them 18 times a year. oh, and the divisions don't even have equal amounts of teams in them.) it's also the sport with the 'worst' playoffs in terms of legitimacy - everyone calls them a crapshoot because they are. (NHL/NFL/NBA are all great and can be ordered according to personal preference. the MLS playoffs produce weird results sometimes, but if you win the Cup as a low seed it means you went and got wins on the road, a hard thing to do in this league. RSL/Colorado earned their glory. it's not hard in MLB.) 10 games against 14 opponents per league (assuming this would be done in conjunction with NL team switching, as that's the primary focus of the idea being tossed around by MLB now) = 140. that gives you either 2/3/2/3 series during the year (to keep home/away between teams even) or two 3s and a 4 (one year the Yankees/Redsox series would have the Yankees getting the two 3s and the next year they would get the 4) if you want to keep travel costs down. leaves you 22 interleague games. ...my status as a Blue Jays fan obviously has no bearing whatsoever on my stance here, of course. <_<
Re: Single table possiblility is discussed...... Luckily for MLB it's possible that there are more east coast teams in the playoffs than west coast which is what they want. From what I understand the top 5 teams from each league gets in the playoffs which means the Mets, Phillies, Braves, Cubs and Cardinals could all go in if they are the top 5 teams in the NL and the AL could have the Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox, Tigers and Indians could get in too (they seem to be the most popular teams on ESPN.)
Re: Single table possiblility is discussed...... im assuming baseball is not being trolled in the comments over there...
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=6651634 "According to a highly ranked executive, one consideration that has been raised in ownership committee meetings is eliminating the divisions altogether, so that 15 AL and 15 NL teams would vie for five playoff spots within each league." While it wouldn't be exactly the same structure as soccer leagues due to interleague play, unbalanced schedule, etc. it's interesting to see baseball consider a move in that direction. I remember Peter Gammons about a decade ago talking about some Baseball execs considering almost a promotion relegation set up between the large market teams and small market teams. Of course, that never got much traction.
At the end of 2009 ESPN radio made "bold predictions" for the upcoming decade and this was one of them. The idea is still out there.
I bet the AL East teams would be all for this. The Yankees and Red Sox would never have to worry about the Rays or an AL wildcard upstart cock-blocking their postseason, and the Orioles and Blue Jays would at least have a fighting chance of making the playoffs if they can string together the occasional 85-90 win season. With the odd number of teams per league, this sort of arrangement seems like it would require at least one interleague series running throughout the season though. I think this would be good for baseball, the extra playoff spot would keep more teams in it for longer. P.S. If MLS ever gets to 30 teams, this would be a great setup for the league.
Sort of like how MLB used to be two leagues each with a single table. The only flaw with the old format is no playoff system. It was essentially the winner of each league facing off in the World Series. For baseball I would love to see a single table for each league, top 6 in each league make the playoffs. Top two get byes, and there is no interleague play.
The only thing about MLB's structure that seems off is the fact that the NL has more teams than the AL. I say that houston should be moved over to the AL west to balance things out, but I'm not in an uproar about it. Otherwise change nothing.two leagues, 3 divisions, with all division winners making it tothe playoffs along with one wild card winner. Perfect. The best teams get in, and the last to team to get in is usally deserving off their place at the wild card. Thers nothing really to change, but they will anyway if they think it will make them more money.
That's actually the plan. In theory the Mets and Yankees could play against each other in September for a playoff spot. That would make the rivalry a little more "real" lol That's also the plan. There'd be two leagues with 15 clubs in each. Even if they don't realign next season they're expanding the playoffs to 10 teams. Without realignment there would be 4 wild card teams instead of just 2. But with the realignment, there'd be two 15 team leagues with single table and the top 5 get in. The team with the best record would be the NL/AL champion and would get a bye. For example, the NL could have the Phillies, Cubs, Mets, Braves, and Cardinals all go in if they were the teams with the top 5 best records. The media would go crazy for that since there'd be no west coast teams lol
Makes too much sense; won't happen. And I don't just say that as a (massively) lapsed Jays fan who understands the problems of the AL East. Also, where are the "but Americans don't understand single-table"ists? Sadly, the NFL has been more influential on MLS league design than America's ACTUAL most traditional form of pro league organization.
The biggest thing that baseball has going for it is tradition. This idea completely destroys that by introducing full season interleague play and continuing to blur the lines between the AL and NL. It's a bad move.
Reverting to a table for each league would be returning to the original format. Divisions were not introduced until the 1960's. And don't even get me started on interleague play! I loved it when baseball was literally two separate leagues.
on Foxsports radio, they said the proposal included moving Houston to the AL. If I'm an orioles/rays/blue jays fan I want this to happen pronto. The only way they are going to make the playoffs is to be god awful for 15 years to load up on top prospects to eventually compete with the monies of Boston/NY Attendance for inter-league games are on average higher than normal games.
Yeah but that's skewed by the attendance for rivalry games. Take those out of the equation and there is a negligible difference between interleague and intraleague play.
I wish they would they just get rid of the leagues. They're just glorified conferences by now anyway. When the leagues started playing each other in the middle of the season, when a team was actually moved from one "league" to the other, all the "tradition" of the two-league setup evaporated in my mind. And while they're fixing that, maybe they can do something about the 30+ year idiocy of pro baseball playing by two sets of rules. ------RM
having two seperate leagues with three divisions makes sense as long as you play teams from your own league and division more often than the others, which is how it is. If I recall correctly the Yankees , for example, play everybody else in the AL east 18 times, where as they play the rest of the 6-7 times. (correct me if I'm wrong) Having a division winner is fine since a majority of their games(72) are played against teams from that division. Single table is unessecary in MLB and in the NFL for that matter. The system makes it so that giving teams division titles means something since in both leagues teams will face one another more often than against other teams, unlike in the MLS where everybody faces off the same amount of times against everybody else and the playoffs can very well be one sided any how. Now the NFL has a more legitimate case for not having single player since there is no concievable way that all teams can face one another in one season. MLB has a different reason; rivalry's. Look at all the races that are spurrned at the end of the year for the right to be a part of the playoffs. Because of all the games two teams in the hunt have probably played against one another the stakes feel higher. If you notice divisional games are put in surplus at the end of the year, and this is to capitalize on what will more than likely be a back and forth between to teams fighting for 1st. Look at all thats happend in the AL east all these years, there have been great races between the Rays, Bosux, and Yanks that has lead to many great playoff match ups. But if the MLB had 15 teams vieing for 5 spots (how would that work exactly?) the intrigue is lost. as for the 30 years of idiocy because of a change in rules, well, i don't know if they want to change that or not, but it does add an interesting feeling of difference between leagues.