PDA

View Full Version : 4 Team Vs 6 Team Division



kaldaniels
08-07-2010, 11:00 PM
I've taken flak on here before by some, not all, when I've griped that the Reds are at a competitive disadvantage by being in the 6 team NL Central. One look at the standings today will help me express my point...just look at the AL West...Texas has about the same record as Cincy, but has an 8.5 game lead. Now being in a 4 team division isn't the only reason for that, but it certainly helps Texas in that they don't have as many teams that they must fight off.

I know the wildcard is still out there, but over time, being in the 6 team NL Central is awful for the Reds (Spare the easy Pittsburgh joke here ;))

BuckeyeRedleg
08-07-2010, 11:02 PM
I never have been able to figure out why Houston is not in the AL West.

Brutus
08-07-2010, 11:03 PM
I've taken flak on here before by some, not all, when I've griped that the Reds are at a competitive disadvantage by being in the 6 team NL Central. One look at the standings today will help me express my point...just look at the AL West...Texas has about the same record as Cincy, but has an 8.5 game lead. Now being in a 4 team division isn't the only reason for that, but it certainly helps Texas in that they don't have as many teams that they must fight off.

I know the wildcard is still out there, but over time, being in the 6 team NL Central is awful for the Reds (Spare the easy Pittsburgh joke here ;))

In a year like this one, it benefits the Reds. Playing the Astros, Cubs, Pirates and Brewers a lot more often is helping--not hurting--the Reds.

kaldaniels
08-07-2010, 11:05 PM
In a year like this one, it benefits the Reds. Playing the Astros, Cubs, Pirates and Brewers a lot more often is helping--not hurting--the Reds.

But the flip side is that 6th team, the one you didn't mention, has us in a dogfight for the Central title.

Satire alert: We don't want to do this Brutus.

KronoRed
08-07-2010, 11:08 PM
I never have been able to figure out why Houston is not in the AL West.

A ridiculous notion that interleague play every day will cause harm to the game, it won't, it's 30 teams now, not 16 in 11 cities in competing leagues, even up the divisions, schedule a cross league game every day, nobody will collapse in a puddle.

While they are at it, move Tampa to the NL East and Washington to the AL East.

Brutus
08-07-2010, 11:14 PM
But the flip side is that 6th team, the one you didn't mention, has us in a dogfight for the Central title.

Satire alert: We don't want to do this Brutus.

:D

mth123
08-08-2010, 01:02 AM
I never have been able to figure out why Houston is not in the AL West.

Houston is in the Central time zome. Same as St. Louis, Chicago and Milwaukee. West seems completely imapproprate for them.

KronoRed
08-08-2010, 01:53 AM
Houston is in the Central time zome. Same as St. Louis, Chicago and Milwaukee. West seems completely imapproprate for them.

You can say the same thing about Texas, at least if Houston moved to the AL west each each have 18 games a year vs someone in the same time zone

Blitz Dorsey
08-08-2010, 03:06 AM
Put me in the camp that thinks the Astros should go to the AL West to balance everything out. Makes no sense to have four divisions with five teams, one division with four teams and one division with six teams. They should all have five teams.

Is it hurting the Reds this year? Hellz no. Could it be a lot worse and we could be in the AL East? Hell yes. But it's just absurd to have a total of 30 teams split into six divisions, and not have five-team divisions all across the board.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-08-2010, 06:52 AM
Houston is in the Central time zome. Same as St. Louis, Chicago and Milwaukee. West seems completely imapproprate for them.

I really don't think time zone matters when it comes to these things.

Heck, before realignment the Reds and Braves were in the National League West and the Cards were in the East.

Back then, even Houston was in the West (with SD, LA, and SF). Why can't they be in the West again - just in a different league? IMO of all the teams in the NL Central, Houston is the one with the least amount of tradition and history. So it wouldn't hurt them as bad as the others to move over. Plus, it would give them a nice rivalry with Texas.

It just makes too much sense.

Also, in the NFL, to make everything even (4 team divisions) and to maintain traditional rivalries, you have St. Louis in the NFC West and Dallas in the NFC East. Indianapolis in the AFC South. KC in the AFC West.

macro
08-08-2010, 09:56 AM
A ridiculous notion that interleague play every day will cause harm to the game, it won't, it's 30 teams now, not 16 in 11 cities in competing leagues, even up the divisions, schedule a cross league game every day, nobody will collapse in a puddle.


I've been shouting this for years. Why the insistence on "interleague week"?


While they are at it, move Tampa to the NL East and Washington to the AL East.

Why?


I really don't think time zone matters when it comes to these things.

Heck, before realignment the Reds and Braves were in the National League West and the Cards were in the East.

Back then, even Houston was in the West (with SD, LA, and SF). Why can't they be in the West again - just in a different league? IMO of all the teams in the NL Central, Houston is the one with the least amount of tradition and history. So it wouldn't hurt them as bad as the others to move over. Plus, it would give them a nice rivalry with Texas.

It just makes too much sense.

Also, in the NFL, to make everything even (4 team divisions) and to maintain traditional rivalries, you have St. Louis in the NFC West and Dallas in the NFC East. Indianapolis in the AFC South. KC in the AFC West.

While I agree with your comments as a whole, someone could counter that the NFL alignment means one game a year in those other cities, while in baseball it means 18. While the NFL comparison is valid from a "common sense / geographic" standpoint, it's not the same with regard to travel.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-08-2010, 11:17 AM
While I agree with your comments as a whole, someone could counter that the NFL alignment means one game a year in those other cities, while in baseball it means 18. While the NFL comparison is valid from a "common sense / geographic" standpoint, it's not the same with regard to travel.

I think the whole travel argument is pretty much splitting hairs. They have to fly anyway. And it didn't seem to matter when the Reds were in the West for all those years.

Distance in miles from Houston to:

STL = 678 miles
CIN = 895 miles
CHI = 940 miles
MIL = 1006 miles
PIT = 1139 miles

Average distance: 931 miles

TEX = 225 miles
LA = 1373 miles
OAK = 1633 miles
SEA = 1889 miles

Average distance: 1280 miles

Spitball
08-08-2010, 12:10 PM
Heck, before realignment the Reds and Braves were in the National League West and the Cards were in the East.


I remember when the two leagues decided on divisional play after two expansion teams were added to each league in 1969. The American League seemed to handle it well, but the NL seemed to have some reservations.

The original divisional alignment based on geography would have had Cincinnati in the Eastern division. The problem was they had only the fourth best record in the NL in 1968 and some worried there would be an uneven distribution of quality. So, they moved the Cards and Cubs to the east and the Reds and Braves to the west.

Chip R
08-08-2010, 02:20 PM
The original divisional alignment based on geography would have had Cincinnati in the Eastern division. The problem was they had only the fourth best record in the NL in 1968 and some worried there would be an uneven distribution of quality. So, they moved the Cards and Cubs to the east and the Reds and Braves to the west.

They weren't worried about competitive balance. It was more about keeping the Cubs from having a lot of west coast games that would preempt their news. The Cubs and the Cardinals were/are huge rivals and the Cards went over to the East with CHI leaving ATL and the Reds in the west since neither team had the pull the Cubs did.

KronoRed
08-08-2010, 04:47 PM
Why?



A bit of regional realignment, Washington and Baltimore should be in the same division, as should Atlanta, Tamapa and Florida.

Rojo
08-08-2010, 07:19 PM
A bit of regional realignment, Washington and Baltimore should be in the same division,

Washington and Baltimore are practically the same media market. You split a market between the AL and NL, just like NYC, LA, Chicago and the Bay Area.

I'd suggest moving the Royals to the AL West and moving the Brewers back to the AL Central where they belong.

KronoRed
08-09-2010, 01:49 AM
Washington and Baltimore are practically the same media market. You split a market between the AL and NL, just like NYC, LA, Chicago and the Bay Area.

I'd suggest moving the Royals to the AL West and moving the Brewers back to the AL Central where they belong.

In the grand scheme of things AL/NL markets don't really mean much anymore, this isn't like the 40's when you had AL and NL teams competing to drive the other guys out of town, if you had a schedule where teams played interleague games everyday they would mean even less.

It's MLB now, AL and NL mean as much as the eastern and western conferences in hockey, just a divide for the world series oh and the silly DH. :D

oregonred
08-09-2010, 01:57 AM
Splitting the top 4 markets between the leagues has always made sense. Although the NL has always had three of the strongest four siblings in those markets from a mediashare and fanbase perspective (Dodgers, Cubs, Giants).

The Rays and Marlins should be in the same league. Two completely different markets with no natural rival other than the NY local transplant games.

Rojo
08-09-2010, 02:42 PM
In the grand scheme of things AL/NL markets don't really mean much anymore, this isn't like the 40's when you had AL and NL teams competing to drive the other guys out of town, if you had a schedule where teams played interleague games everyday they would mean even less.

It's MLB now, AL and NL mean as much as the eastern and western conferences in hockey, just a divide for the world series oh and the silly DH. :D

Completely disagree. If the A's were to go to the NL that means the Yanks and RedSox come to the Bay Area once every three years or less. For a huge metro that's unacceptable. You get big enough, you get a team in each league.

IslandRed
08-09-2010, 03:38 PM
Time zone doesn't mean everything, but it does matter. If you're Houston and three of your four would-be division rivals are on the west coast, that means a bunch of 9:05 or 9:35 local start times. Not good for TV ratings and thus not good for local TV revenue. Of course, as some have pointed out, that wouldn't be the first time they've had west coast division games, but I doubt they prefer it that way.

KronoRed
08-09-2010, 05:14 PM
Completely disagree. If the A's were to go to the NL that means the Yanks and RedSox come to the Bay Area once every three years or less. For a huge metro that's unacceptable. You get big enough, you get a team in each league.

I'm not for moving the A's (although they will likely be moving on their own) Mets or Cubs, but a small bit of regional rivalries can be good, if Portland had a team they should be in the same Division as the Mariners, Washington and Baltimore aren't that close.

Of course it will never happen, just like it took 24 years for the Reds to get out of the NL West.

Rojo
08-09-2010, 05:38 PM
if Portland had a team they should be in the same Division as the Mariners, Washington and Baltimore aren't that close.

Baltimore and Washington are 34 miles from each other, Portland and Seattle are 150 miles apart.


I'm not for moving the A's (although they will likely be moving on their own) Mets or Cubs,

Neither am I, not sure where you're getting that. Actually I think a team should be moved to Conn that would cut into the fan base of both the Yankees and the Red Sox.

Sea Ray
08-09-2010, 05:50 PM
Teams rarely agree to switch leagues because of the DH. They're set up throughout the organization for one type of rules. Milwaukee with Bud Selig's connection was the exception to this rule

KronoRed
08-09-2010, 05:53 PM
Baltimore and Washington are 34 miles from each other, Portland and Seattle are 150 miles apart.


I wasn't comparing their distances but 34 miles is still pretty large, I'm with you on a 3rd team in the North East corridor.

Anyway it's just an idea to build some regional rivalries that play more then 3 times a year.

KronoRed
08-09-2010, 05:54 PM
Teams rarely agree to switch leagues because of the DH. They're set up throughout the organization for one type of rules. Milwaukee with Bud Selig's connection was the exception to this rule

We should start with abolishing that :D

Sea Ray
08-09-2010, 06:13 PM
We should start with abolishing that :D

:thumbup: