• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

"Selig, committee considering radical realignment plan" in MLB

pyonir

Lifer
Could you imagine if this happened? How ridiculous. Sure it's nothing about a "concept" but you never know nowadays...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/tom_verducci/03/09/floating-realignment/index.html

When baseball commissioner Bud Selig named a 14-person "special committee for on-field matters" four months ago, he promised that all topics would be in play and "there are no sacred cows." The committee already has made good on Selig's promise by discussing a radical form of "floating" realignment in which teams would not be fixed to a division, but free to change divisions from year-to-year based on geography, payroll and their plans to contend or not.

The concept gained strong support among committee members, many of whom believe there are non-economic avenues that should be explored to improve competitive balance, similar to the NFL's former use of scheduling to help parity (in which weaker teams were awarded a weaker schedule the next season).

As with most issues of competitive balance, floating realignment involves finding a work-around to the Boston-New York axis of power in the AL East. In the 15 seasons during which the wild-card system has been in use, the Red Sox and Yankees have accounted for 38 percent of all AL postseason berths. The league has never conducted playoffs without the Red Sox or Yankees since that format began -- and in eight of those 15 years both teams made the playoffs. Since 2003 the Sox and Yankees have won at least 95 games 11 times in 14 combined seasons.

One example of floating realignment, according to one insider, would work this way: Cleveland, which is rebuilding with a reduced payroll, could opt to leave the AL Central to play in the AL East. The Indians would benefit from an unbalanced schedule that would give them a total of 18 lucrative home dates against the Yankees and Red Sox instead of their current eight. A small or mid-market contender, such as Tampa Bay or Baltimore, could move to the AL Central to get a better crack at postseason play instead of continually fighting against the mega-payrolls of New York and Boston.

Divisions still would loosely follow geographic lines; no team would join a division more than two time zones outside its own, largely to protect local television rights (i.e., start times of games) and travel costs.

Floating realignment also could mean changing the number of teams in a division, teams changing leagues and interleague games throughout the season, according to several sources familiar with the committee's discussions. It is important to remember that the committee's talks are very preliminary and non-binding.

"But if there is something that comes up we feel should be addressed during the season, we can make a recommendation then," said committee co-chair and Braves president John Schuerholz, referring to less complicated issues such as pace-of-game directives. "This is all about any ideas that help make the game better."

The floating realignment idea is nothing more than a concept at this point, part of the brainstorming sessions that have occurred in the committee's one in-person meeting and occasional conference calls. (Selig is pushing for another in-person meeting, such as at the All-Star Game. The committee includes current managers and executives, making in-person meetings logistically difficult.) The mechanics of the system are far from nailed down. But what is important is that the committee is making good on its mission to look at absolutely any on-field idea that could make the game better. Blowing up fixed divisions as we know them -- and even leagues -- certainly qualifies as radical thinking.
 
While the "wussification of America" is a myth, the wussification of American business is not a myth.

Not good enought to compete? Let's make it easier for you. Softer schedule, easier division.

Many low revenue teams are competitive and do well year after year. Like Minnesota and Oakland. And many teams with low revenue do poorly year after year like Milwaukee.

Fix your teams, owners. Don't look for a MLB bailout plan.
 
Last edited:
Anything to make baseball more interesting... I'm tired of MLB revolving around the Yankees and Red Sox. The alternative is to institute a HARD salary cap/basement with no loop holes.

Fluid realignment is probably too radical to work practically but it makes sense. I'd rather see a hard salary cap though... make the Yankees give up their all-star roster and make their GM actually work for a living. Same thing with the Sox.
 
Anything to make baseball more interesting... I'm tired of MLB revolving around the Yankees and Red Sox. The alternative is to institute a HARD salary cap/basement with no loop holes.

Fluid realignment is probably too radical to work practically but it makes sense. I'd rather see a hard salary cap though... make the Yankees give up their all-star roster and make their GM actually work for a living. Same thing with the Sox.

Step away from the crack pipe....
 
Milwaukee fan?

Technically a Mariners fan... but really if baseball fell off the earth tomorrow I wouldn't notice except for the lack of Yankees/Red Sox babble on ESPN.

So... Yankees fan then. I can see why a salary cap would terrify you. Must be frustrating to be left behind by teams like the Diamondbacks and Rays... lol
 
Or they could, you know, just impose a salary cap & minimum salary so that all teams are spending roughly the same amount of money on players. But no, not like that worked in making the NFL ridiculously popular or anything.
 
what about AL West teams? you going to make them come all the way across the country for all of those games?
My initials are MLB, just wanted to point that out. The thread may now continue.
 
Or they could, you know, just impose a salary cap & minimum salary so that all teams are spending roughly the same amount of money on players. But no, not like that worked in making the NFL ridiculously popular or anything.

:thumbsup::thumbsup: Then maybe the pirates could win more than 5 games in a season :awe:

I think their entire roster costs less than some of the highest paid individuals out there.
 
Sounds like it would create more problems than help...everyone ditching divisions the yanks and sox are in.

I vote to send the teams with the lowest payrolls down to the minor league divisions.
 
Anything to make baseball more interesting... I'm tired of MLB revolving around the Yankees and Red Sox. The alternative is to institute a HARD salary cap/basement with no loop holes.

Fluid realignment is probably too radical to work practically but it makes sense. I'd rather see a hard salary cap though... make the Yankees give up their all-star roster and make their GM actually work for a living. Same thing with the Sox.

Agreed. MLB needs a salary cap.
 
While the "wussification of America" is a myth, the wussification of American business is not a myth.

Not good enought to compete? Let's make it easier for you. Softer schedule, easier division.

The NFL does this now and it is a good idea. If you finish last in your division, you get a last place schedule. If you finish first, you get a first place schedule. I understand it isn't practical in MLB unless they radically alter the schedule.

Fix your teams, owners. Don't look for a MLB bailout plan.

They need a salary cap. That should be the MLB bailout plan.
 
Step away from the crack pipe....

Except, of course, he is absolutely right. MLB is the only major sports league without a salary cap (you can argue the NBA's salary cap is a joke, but at least they tried). There is a reason the NFL is by far the richest and most popular sports league on the planet, and one of the chief reasons was the implementation of a salary cap. I saw a stat a few years ago (I think) that there were 21 franchises on the planet worth over $1 billion, and 18 of them were in the NFL. Since then, I think 5 or 6 more NFL teams have crossed that number.
 
Last edited:
European market style system >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> American monopolistic cartel system

In Europe, if your team sucks & finishes last in the league, then your team gets kicked down to the lower level league. Conversely, the best teams in the lower leagues get a chance to move up to the higher league. This means that if you're a bad owner and your team consistently sucks, you're team will go out of business. It also makes it easier for new teams to be created, grow & enter the elite. In Europe, there is no such thing as a detroit lions, or a Milwaukee Brewers perpetual suckfest. Both would have been relegated to the minors long ago & better teams would have replaced them.

It's weird how socialist Europe has the more open, entrepreneurial style sports set-up, while free-market America has a shitty government-sanctioned monopoly sports clusterfuck 🙁
 
European market style system >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> American monopolistic cartel system

In Europe, if your team sucks & finishes last in the league, then your team gets kicked down to the lower level league. Conversely, the best teams in the lower leagues get a chance to move up to the higher league. This means that if you're a bad owner and your team consistently sucks, you're team will go out of business. It also makes it easier for new teams to be created, grow & enter the elite. In Europe, there is no such thing as a detroit lions, or a Milwaukee Brewers perpetual suckfest. Both would have been relegated to the minors long ago & better teams would have replaced them.

It's weird how socialist Europe has the more open, entrepreneurial style sports set-up, while free-market America has a shitty government-sanctioned monopoly sports clusterfuck 🙁

Funny you should mention that -- I was thinking something like that might work in baseball here, but it is probably too radical. One big problem is that minor league ballparks aren't up to major league specs.

A salary cap, though, would help sucktastic teams compete with the elite teams in terms of going after talent.

Also, while monopolistic in practice, nothing prevents competitors from opening up other leagues to compete with the established ones.
 
Last edited:
Stop it with the ridiculous MLB needs a hard salary cap nonsense.
The Yankees paid 201 million last year, the Marlins about 37 million.

Where do you put the cap? Say 81 million which is the middle of the 30 teams? So there would still be 15 teams under the cap. Oh, wait, the lowest salaried teams would no longer get revenue sharing.
So, the Marlins would not only have half the money for salary, they would probably pay less since they would lose, iirc, the 30 million they get in revenue sharing. In fact, the Marlins would probably pay every player the major league minimum.

And would the cost of going to a game come down? No. Why would any team take less money than they can get for their seats? Does Comcast charge less than they can? No. Does Apple price its dumb IFad based on how much it costs to make? No. Do teams lower the price of a hot dog and beer if the suppliers lower their price? No.
 
The NFL does this now and it is a good idea. If you finish last in your division, you get a last place schedule. If you finish first, you get a first place schedule. I understand it isn't practical in MLB unless they radically alter the schedule.

doesn't that affect 2 games total?

that'd be 20 games in baseball. not bad.

problem is, if you're rebuilding you want to play the yankees and red sox because those teams are guaranteed draws. you don't want to play the royals and sell 5000 tickets.


they need to move a team from the NL to the AL. one has 16 teams and the other has 14. of course, for a long time the NL had 12 teams and the AL had 14.




and you'd have to be socialist to set up a relegation system. that's the only way you'd get owners to agree to possibly having their team knocked down to AAA.
 
Back
Top