This was written by Mike Schmidt: The Hall Of Famer also wants to end interleague play.
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/2...|text|Sports|s
Mike Schmidt says in this article he'd eliminate the Central Division and have two 8 team divisions in the NL, The East and The West with the Reds moving to the East Division. What do you think about the Reds playing in the East?
Last edited by Ron Madden; 06-26-2011 at 02:27 AM.
Terrible idea, the 70's and 80's are gone Mike.
I also find it amusing he complains about travel days then suggests a plan where teams are in divisions with 5 teams two time zones away.
Last edited by KronoRed; 06-26-2011 at 02:50 AM.
Go Gators!
Schmidt seems to be angling for the "HOF curmudgeon" position that Bob Feller used to hold.
"I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful
I totally agree with Mike. He's saying what I've been saying for years.
I actually like this idea. And with the top 4 teams in each division making the postseason, it wouldn't be impossible being in a division with the Phillies and Braves (or Mets, if they ever shape that organization up).
I am telling you anything that does away with the Central is to allow more opportunities for the big markets to monopolize the playoffs and leave the fans in cities like Minnesota and Cincinnati out in the cold.
Originally Posted by teamselig
The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change, the realist adjusts the sails.
William Arthur Ward
I'm afraid that's what will happen if the Central is eliminated.
I like the plan. It's the plan I've proposed several times over the years. 2 divisions in each league. First place in the East plays #2 in the West, and vice versa. Winners play for the right to represent the league in the WS.
Scrap interleague and get rid of this nonsense that awards home field advantage in the WS to the league that wins the mid-summer exhibition game, and things will really be on the right track!
I disagree. Simply because this plan makes for one monumental change...8 teams from each league makes the playoffs. EIGHT. The way I look at it, if you can't manage to be at least one of the best 4 teams in your division...you don't deserve to be in the playoffs...small market or not.
For me, the biggest things that need to be addressed is getting back to a balanced schedule and eliminating interleague play. These go hand in hand because it's not really possible to have balanced schedules IF you have interleague play.
I favor the eliminate-the divisions-idea and playing a balanced schedule (and I'd be fine with cutting out interleague play too while we're at it). Just let the teams with the best records into the playoffs. If the teams in the midwest aren't in the playoffs as often, so be it. God forbid that the best teams should actually make the playoffs.
Stick to your guns.
In the past 3 years (before 2009)...
14 of 24 spots were top 10 spenders of the year.
5 of 24 spots were in the 11-20 spenders of the year.
5 of 24 spots were in the bottom 1/3.
2010 Payroll:
Yankees 1st
Phillies 4th
Giants 10th
Twins 11th
Braves 15th
Reds 19th
Rays 21st
Rangers 27th and got bailout from MLB to keep em afloat.
Eliminating the Central all but assures Boston and New York a guarentee ticket to post season.
The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change, the realist adjusts the sails.
William Arthur Ward
If they're among the best four teams in the AL every year (or best 5 or best 6 if Selig expands the playoffs) then I have no problem with that.
I'm all for competitive balance, but I'd rather address competitive balance with revenue sharing and salary caps than by pretending the team that wins the AL West deserves to make the postseason.
Also, Boston and New York (Yanks) are pretty much making the postseason every year anyway (the latter all but one year for the past 15 or so)
Stick to your guns.
There were a couple years that the NL Central was the butt of the jokes too. Good thing they had a chance to prove it on the field eh.
The reason baseball gets its butt kicked by the NFL when theyre up head to head is because the smallest of small markets Green Bay can not only compete year in a year out, but actually WIN championships. Eliminating the divisions just lessens the chances of someone from the pack rising up. 1/2 the league in a given year knows they have no shot.
You eliminate the opportunity of a Cleveland catching fire like they have by going to two divisions. Football has done it right and I thought baseball was catching up but there still seems to be reverting to "tradition". You continue to push the fan base to the coasts as thats the only ones that are going to matter. I am telling you that this will STIFFLE baseball outside of the major cities not make it more competitive.
The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change, the realist adjusts the sails.
William Arthur Ward
We're already in a division with a big market (Chicago), make that a mega market. We're just fortunate that the Cubs are fools and don't come close to maximizing their economic power.
If the Cubs were as well run as the Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies and Braves, we'd be fighting for second every year and clammoring to get out of the central.
How long can we expect the Cubs to trip over themselves?
Over 100 years and still going strong
Go Gators!
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote