Major League Baseball officially revealed part of the proposal to the MLB Players Association on Thursday ahead of the expiration of the current collective bargaining agreement (CBA) this coming offseason. The league has done this multiple times over the years and this is just the latest. It includes some playoff propositions — including extending the Division series from a best-of-five to a best-of-seven — as the current season continues and on the minds of fans. MLB also proposed cut the season from 162 games to 154.
As for me, let me go through some of the pros and cons of running away from the domain and the league office. Here’s a warning: if you’re angry about opinions or “Bias,” you can probably read this. This is not reporting. This discussion is full of opinions.
MLB proposes 154-game regular season, heavy playoff schedule with twist in latest labor talks
Mike Axis
Pro (class): 154-game season
There is certainly a history-loving, Hall-of-Fame part of my vote that prefers to stick with 162 games. We’ve had so many seasons with 162, and I’ve used specific benchmarks with that specific number of games. It seems ridiculous to go back. Of course, anyone who knows history knows that the American League had a 154-game schedule from 1920-61, and the National League had a 154-game schedule from 1920-62. There’s plenty of precedent and we’ve historically adjusted just fine with our numbers. We can go back.
In addition, there are 162 more games. “More than.” It’s a card game that needs to be played in large numbers, so I’m quite strongly opposed if the goal was to knock this thing down to something like 80 or even 100 games. up to all 154, though? Yeah, there’s plenty. And guess what, we’ll get even after a few teams in the competition hanging on the schedule, and that’s a good thing.
Pros: Longer divisive streak
Again, Major League Baseball is a marathon game in which small samples can provide flashy results. The one-game wild card was never the best decider in which team to advance to the divisional round, but at least we could say, “Hey, if you don’t like it, win your division.” Now that there are three wild card teams in the league, we could end up with all kinds of crap in the Wild Card Series and I think three games is too short for this series. And really, seven games is still a small sample to definitively determine the best team.
Even though moving the division through five to seven games is good. The longer the streak, the more likely the better team will prevail, although there won’t be a hard and fast rule (and we don’t want a clear winner anyway, otherwise what’s the fun in it?).
In addition, I think a component of this is that the seven-game streak makes it much more difficult to close the coast with a limited number of starting pitchers. The vocal movement in recent years has been there to make the starting pitcher much more of an old-school character. And while you can bob-and-weave through the previous rounds and create a bunch with relievers, a seven-game series in the divisional round, LCS and World Series certainly requires two starters and a minimum of three.
Con: only one contingent deal
Also, they offer to the master only when the salary is cap. Via the MLBPA:
Unfortunately, the league has once again made it clear that all of its proposals are contingent on the players’ agreement to the salary cap, a system that guts players’ rights and compensation, as well as its other anti-player proposals.
If you read through what Major League Baseball released to the public on Monday, there was no mention of this.
Why not? It’s not too difficult to figure out.
Remember, the players are still engaged in the games right now – which really make the owners a ton of money, by the way. The owners know that this is not really a business until the World Series is over and the MLBPA can meet with all that is at hand, rather than with a few teams still fighting for their lives in the professional role.
Plus, owners know the salary cap is non-starter for players as things currently stand. So they can keep their role at the table and float a bunch of new ideas to keep the general public and baseball fandom entertained. And then it’s like: “Hey, the owners play ball, but they don’t give a damn about the greedy players!”
Con: Continuing to do this in public
And again, all this explanation on the part of the owner is in the public domain. Why? Because they paint the players as bad guys who don’t want to listen or act.
“Ah shucks! We’re the ones floating all these good ideas that the fans love and you guys just say nothing!”
Remember, the players need more money than the owners because the players’ careers have a predetermined deadline whenever Father Time inevitably takes over. Some of them don’t even last for a while. The most successful players can play for many decades, but still reach an end that in any other business would seem like an absurdly early retirement (Justin Verlander, age 43).
Players’ talent and high end talent is not replaceable. Replaceable owners. People pay to watch the world’s most talented players play baseball. They don’t give money to look in the ballpark and in the owner’s box. The ownership circles are absolutely filthy rich and not short of money. This is where people tell me the owners take all the “danger” away.
If you think there is, ask yourself why there aren’t more teams for sale. Arte Moreno just sold Angels for $4 billion. He bought them for $180 million in 2003. You can put whatever spin on it you want and you can’t escape what a fun return on investment that is.
Now some small market owners want to cry poor and that’s why there must be a salary cap. They can’t spend enough to put baseball teams on the winning field. There is an easy solution here and that is to publicize the finance team. The MLBPA line has long been that if the teams are really losing money and smaller market ballclubs can’t afford to spend more on player salaries and need a combination of more revenue sharing from the bigger clubs (hey, that’s totally fine with me!) and the salary cap, then show us your finances. If the Rangers really can’t afford more than $75 million in payroll, while the Dodgers can afford $400 million, OK, let’s get a little more. But we know that this is not true. Many owners are convinced that it is true, but we don’t know how much the difference is. They will not show us.
The only team that does is officially trade the Atlanta Braves, and their bottom line is strong.
Crying poor owners won’t show how much money they need from the big leagues and/or how much the big leagues’ salaries should be capping.
But these deceptive treaties will remain in the public domain.
Pros: A standard seven days apart
Leaving aside the negatives, there are some more positives in this business. Making one day a week a sign day off would be great for players. Monday works well. It could be a “holiday” series that runs Tuesday through Thursday, with Thursday’s games all before game day and then a “weekly” schedule that would be Friday-Sunday. Diehard fans who really can’t handle one day a week in the summer to do anything other than watch baseball (by the way, I don’t believe you can’t read a book with family or friends or watch a movie or watch TV one night a week) can just do extra time.
The guaranteed six days of games a week is a good thing, just one day off. Do we see a six man going on rotations with bottles once a week? Could they all have more gas in the tank by the end of the year and, as a bonus, maybe get them deeper into the games on a regular basis? Which I would prefer.
The daily position of the players would be updated by the end of the season as well.
Not ideal, but it can also be used off-season for makeup games later in the season. As we know all too well, when it’s raining today, people are frantically looking for a “community of the day” later in the season. All of them would be on this bill on Monday.
Pros: Don’t pick teams for playoff opponents
The league’s goal is to allow the higher seeded clubs in the Wild Card Series and Division Series to select their opponents. Overall, you probably won’t change the seeds too much. The main problem in the AL this year was that the Astros won their division at 81-81 while the three best records were all in the AL East. The Astros were the No. 3 seed and recently picked to play the sixth-seeded White Sox. Perhaps in the second round, the Rays wanted to play for the White Sox Yankees, but the Rays took the Yankees anyway.
Plus on the NL side, I think the Wild Card Series has stayed the same. Maybe the Brewers chose the Braves to play instead of the hot Padres in the NLDS, but they beat the Padres in four games.
Where this really moves the needle for me is the potential for greater lightness, both in clubs and fan bases.
The entertainment factor goes up exponentially with one of the team shouting, “You wanted us, you got us!” There would be an extra focus on getting into the playoffs where teams with better seeds, if given the choice, would pick. And more discussion means more attention. And it’s a fun discussion. They already want the whole “who the Rays prefer to play” thing, now they’ll have a choice when they earn that position.
It’s a joke.
Let’s do more fun stuff instead of arguing about money now, please.