Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 15 of 165

Thread: MLB Reportedly Pursuing “Radical Restructuring” Of Lower Minors

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,496

    Re: MLB Reportedly Pursuing “Radical Restructuring” Of Lower Minors

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    Great post. I wanted to focus on this, because I think it touches on why life without the MLB affiliation might be good for a lot of these mom-and-pop operations. MLB is corporate and the development process means good players usually don't spend a full season with any one club. Billy Hamilton in 2011 and Tyler Mahle in 2015 are probably fond memories for Dayton fans, but those are rarities.

    Summer collegiate leagues have teams filled with local players. And the player-fan bond on indy teams seems (to my viewing) a lot stronger than at minor league affiliates. The notion that this is "our" team is much more palpable. So, if baseball dries up in the places the get dropped by this MiLB cull, that would be a shame. Yet if a more local and organic version of baseball takes hold in those places, I think people will like it better. The sport of baseball might be better off if MLB pulls back its tendrils and lets something more independent find its footing.
    I think there's a cool possibility here for the organic, more fan-driven franchises. I also think it's unlikely. Try to think of a strong and stable professional minor league in America. The ABA and CBA did basketball for quite a while until the NBA alternatively bought one league and stepped in and developed its own minor league. American football has failed spectacularly in developing a sub-NFL professional league. Even the AFL has a foot in the grave. I can't comment confidently on soccer or hockey, but I think both have semi-affiliated status.

    Were the cull to happen and the new hometown teams organize (which seems tough given the new operations expenses), the MLB would see these leagues as competition, and I would imagine treat them predominately as a threat. If they did want these teams to thrive, sending them out into the wilderness is sure a strange expression of their support.

    In the end, I get the whole MLB effort. But make no bones about it, this is corporate business decision and not one geared toward baseball populism (or evening the playing field or any other BS they pitch). Given the financial health of ownership, it seems unnecessary and frankly cruel, but as Reds fans know well enough, the packaging of professional baseball is myth and sentiment but the contents are about the bottom line.

  2. Likes:

    *BaseClogger* (11-18-2019),cumberlandreds (11-20-2019),M2 (11-18-2019)


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

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.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | Gallen5862 | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | The Operator