I like interleague play. Gives baseball a little something new every season. Sure some matchups are gonna be bad, but hell, like any AL team Vs. Detroit was that exciting last year. You're gonna have your bad series, but then you're gonna get ones that end up being really good. Keep it.
Originally posted by spf2119So if we get rid of interleague play then instead of getting jacked up for this weekend's Cubs vs. Sox war, I'll get another couple games against the Tigers and the Indians?! Oh, I do so swoon at the thought.
Watch behind you, if the Indians have a good series, you might go into the Cubs series in 3rd place. Dropping interleague play would not mean more than the 19 division games. Instead, it would mean 3 (9-10 games)series with all the other teams in the AL, instead of 2 series with some and 3 series with others. Wouldn't it be nice for the White Sox fans not to be done with the Yankees in April, or are those scintillating games against the Expos something that needs to be savored. And, lose the division by 1 or the wild card by 1, and you wonder what could have been if Konerko and Thomas and the whole offense was in the line-up for the 9 no DH NL games.
The Expos games are not exciting no. But then neither am I all that ramped up for another round of 3 against the Rangers or the Orioles.
And yeah, it would suck to lose the division by 1, but then it'll suck to lose the division by 1 because of the Twins getting the win in the game a few days ago with the home run screwup. Or to lose the wild card by 1 because someone is lucky enough to be playing a team who decided to give a bunch of AA players some time in the last week of the season. Or how great would it be if we won because the Twins gagged last week vs. the Brewers, helping us keep from losing too much ground during the Florida series. The point is those little things happen, and over the long run of 162 game seasons, they should even out. So if i have to choose between giving up the most electrifying 6 games of the season for my team, or worrying about ghosts and possibilities....I know where my choice is going.
I'm not sold on the idea that it screws with the Wild Card slot. Each team plays 162 games, patsies and non-patsies. If you can't put up a good record over those 162 games, then tough cookies, Martha.
How can you determine which team is a patsie every year? Going into last year, the Marlins looked like scrubs... going into this year, the Rangers looked like scrubs. Look at the Devil Rays the past two weeks. Expos were in the race in 2002. That's why I discount this "waaaah, the Yankees get to play the Expos.. but the Red Sox get the Astros" stuff. To me, this is about as valid as detailing which starter a team gets to face in any series. "Waaahh..the Yankees got the 3-4-5 starters...and the Red Sox got 1-2-3". These things balance out over a schedule of 162 games. If the schedule was shorter, then I could see it bothering me. That's the funny thing about baseball-- you can always blame past stats, but it's tough to get a handle on present stats.
On a personal/greedy note, I like it because the next closest ML town to Denver is roughly 500 miles away (Kansas City). And I'm sure some of the hitters visiting Denver get a little bit excited. Pitchers not so...but that's the environment here.
The one thing I think gets overlooked in interleague is that crappy matchups happen in the same league anyway. Think Giants fans are any more hyped up about seeing the Expos than Royals fans? Probably not, and unless you're a Giants or Royals fan, you weren't going to watch the game anyway. ESPN wouldn't show either game.
Not all 14 interleague matchups are going to be exciting, but not all 15 regular matchups are nailbiters. *shrugs* Hey, it happens. As a lot of people have already said, it balances out. And honestly - without interleague, think we would've seen the D-Rays win 11 in a row? Exciting stuff can happen even when you don't expect it.
I was just thinking that it might be kinda cool to move the Brewers back to the AL (AL West though). This way, you have 15 and 15, and instead of bunching all of your interleague games up, you spread them over the entire season, always having one going on somewehere. It could be interesting to see two teams that meet in the World Series having just met in the last weekend of the season. Then again, since no one gives a tin shit about Detroit in September anyway, then who would give said tin shit about Detroit playing a weekend in Pittsburgh? Of course, if there is a three-team race in the NL Central between SL, Houston, and Chicago, you probably don't want to see the Cards @ Houston while the Cubs host Baltimore....but they could be just as well hosting Boston....or Colorado....as estragand posted, you never know who will be what with most teams.
(Doesn't have to be the Brewers, of course. I just picked them since they aren't too far removed from the AL anyway.)
"I'm very sorry the government taxes their tips, that's fucked up. That ain't my fault. It would seem to me that waitresses are one of the many groups the government fucks in the ass on a regular basis. Look, if you ask me to sign something that says the government shouldn't do that, I'll sign it, put it to a vote, I'll vote for it, but what I won't do is play ball. And as for this non-college bullshit I got two words for that: learn to fuckin' type, 'cause if you're expecting me to help out with the rent you're in for a big fuckin' surprise."
I remember reading way (WAY) back during the radical realignment stage of things, just rearranging to keep the Brewers in the AL (although you could look at a possible move of the 'Stros to the AL West, giving them that natural Texas rivalry, but I digress). The author in question posed the same thing you did.
I like inter-league play a lot. I like everything about it, I think it spices up the season. I'm kind of a ballpark junkie (sometimes I find ballparks to be the most interesting part of the game) so I like seeing my home team traveling to other yards. I like the rotation of one year playing in the NL East, next year the Central, the year after that West and back to East after that.... So inter-league play is one of the few times that I have nothing wrong with the current situation of things.
Sure no one wants to see the homely step-sister's of the other league... But like the once great TV show once sung, You take the good, you take the bad You take em both and there you have The facts of life, the facts of life (If I could only remember the name of that show)
(edited by Net Hack Slasher on 24.6.04 0418) smark/net attack wienerville advisory stays at BLUE alert - Guarded (With Benoit & Eddie being World & WWE champions you'd expect all's be right but JBL PPV main event causes a threat)- 5/6
I hat interleague play because it pollutes the integrity of the pennant race. The World series is played between the AL and NL Champions, the best teams in each league that have defeated all challengers.
With interleague play, maybe one AL team drops three games in a row while their close division rival wins three. At the end of the year they finish close enough so that those games matter in the outcome. That may seem like small potatoes to some people because, sure, they could have lost just as badly to an AL team, but I think it's important that the only time the leagues face off is the World Series. That is the point of the World Series. Letting AL and NL teams play each other midseason sullies the standings.
"Are you- are you sad?"
"But your- your songs are sad."
-My songs are of time and distance. The sadness is in you. Watch my arms. There is only the dance. These things you treasure are shells.
Amaro is gone... (espn.go.com) It's easy to vilify the guy. He did a lot of dumb things. But I would never want to deal with the pressure and expectations of being GM of a team immediately after a World Series win.