royallypwned Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Today I got into a random discussion with a friend about interleague play. I used to be a fan of it and thought it was cool to play a few teams you rarely get to see. But the last couple years, I have grown more and more against it. Really, all it does is just give each team a chance to play their cross-league "rivals" if they have one, but then you play random other teams. The whole year is a marathon between divisional teams. If you're going to play interleague, just play every team in the other league, otherwise one team from the AL will play team A from the NL, while another will play team B, for example. Interleague allows the schedules to be different. I think they should just go back to 162 games against your own league. I'm sorry, but as much fun as it is to see the Rangers beat up on the Astros every year, it means nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 I'm a traditionalist when it comes to baseball. So I voted no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 I think it should just be regional games. Seeing the O's and Nats play each other is pretty cool, since its very unlikely we see them against each other in a WS. But I could care less about the O's playing the Reds for example. That means nothing to me. But seeing Yankees/Mets, Dodgers/Angels, Red Sox/Phillies. Those are good series to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Take it or leave it. I will say one of the biggest thrills was seeing Barry Bonds at Oriole Park a few years ago. http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/BAL/BAL200406121.shtml That was a banner day for steroids in baseball. Bonds hit #675 and Rafael Palmeiro hit 2 homers to tie and pass Mickey Mantle. Larry Bigbie, who was named in the Mitchell Report IIRC, also homered. Even though I hate Bonds, seeing him that day was great. There was a buzz in the crowd during his at bats like I've never seen for any athlete before. I can see why people like it...I can see why people don't. I don't really care either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 I'm for interleague play. But im TOTALLY against giving homefield in the WS to the winner of the all star game. The most assinine thing in sports. And its not even close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Its dumb to have interleague during certain points of the season.. Just let everyone play each other at any time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 *****, of course interleague play should stay. Now I'm in the middle of watching Arrested Development but when the episode ends I'll come back and elaborate. But anyone against interleague play is crazy. EOS Edit: I accidentally pressed S3E2 of Arrested Development instead of S1E2 so I'm back , anyways interleague is fine as is and every year the teams get a chance to play another league division, it's the great thing about regular season baseball and it shouldn't go away. In fact it could be argued that interleague play and the wild card were the two best things Selig ever did. I wasn't aware people disliked interleague play. It's great fun and good for baseball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCranon21 Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Before the Nats came to town, I liked to watch the NL teams play, when they came to Camden Yards. I like what interleague has done for the league. But then, part of me is a baseball traditionalist and the only time they should meet up is the World Series. So I'm actually torn on this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royallypwned Posted July 25, 2009 Author Share Posted July 25, 2009 Mainly my gripe is due to the fact that interleague play causes the schedules to be different between divisional teams. For instance, take the Rangers and Angels: those two teams will play pretty much the same exact schedule in American League competition. It makes it as fair as possible with regards to how the division stacks up at the end of the season. But not all the same teams from the NL are played between the Angels and Rangers. I just think if there is going to be interleague play, you need to play every single team from the other league to even things out. Otherwise, it's pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Mainly my gripe is due to the fact that interleague play causes the schedules to be different between divisional teams. For instance, take the Rangers and Angels: those two teams will play pretty much the same exact schedule in American League competition. It makes it as fair as possible with regards to how the division stacks up at the end of the season. But not all the same teams from the NL are played between the Angels and Rangers. I just think if there is going to be interleague play, you need to play every single team from the other league to even things out. Otherwise, it's pointless. The current system is fine. Every year the AL East plays a different NL division for good times. I think your solution incorporates too much interleague play. The only bad thing about interleague is having an exhibition game decide World Series home field advantage. Even if the same dominant, better league has dominated the event over the minor league which still uses pitchers as batters. Speaking of which it's not 1900 anymore. Why is the pitcher still grabbing a batting helmet and hitting .200 or below lmao :hysterical: I guess something has to differentiate the leagues though, but pitchers hitting is just foolish. They're pitchers. They pitch. EOS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royallypwned Posted July 25, 2009 Author Share Posted July 25, 2009 The current system is fine. Every year the AL East plays a different NL division for good times. I think your solution incorporates too much interleague play. The only bad thing about interleague is having an exhibition game decide World Series home field advantage. Even if the same dominant, better league has dominated the event over the minor league which still uses pitchers as batters. Speaking of which it's not 1900 anymore. Why is the pitcher still grabbing a batting helmet and hitting .200 or below lmao :hysterical: I guess something has to differentiate the leagues though, but pitchers hitting is just foolish. They're pitchers. They pitch. EOS My solution is to do away with interleague play altogether, so it's just the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 My solution is to do away with interleague play altogether, so it's just the opposite. No interleague play = no regional rivalries = bad idea :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royallypwned Posted July 25, 2009 Author Share Posted July 25, 2009 No interleague play = no regional rivalries = bad idea:mad: Some teams don't have regional "rivalries" though. The Braves don't, so they played the Red Sox SIX times this season. The Mariners? Nope. And there are others. The whole beauty of a pennant race is seeing AL teams compete against AL teams and NL teams compete against NL teams. Let the Yankees and Mets or Cubs and White Sox play each other in a exhibition series before the season starts or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Mainly my gripe is due to the fact that interleague play causes the schedules to be different between divisional teams. For instance, take the Rangers and Angels: those two teams will play pretty much the same exact schedule in American League competition. It makes it as fair as possible with regards to how the division stacks up at the end of the season. But not all the same teams from the NL are played between the Angels and Rangers. I just think if there is going to be interleague play, you need to play every single team from the other league to even things out. Otherwise, it's pointless. Its the same way in the NFL. We don't play the same teams as the Cowboys, Eagles, and Giants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted July 26, 2009 Share Posted July 26, 2009 I was really for inter-league when it first showed up in 97-98 or whenever, but now its....meh.... Sure it allows for the famed "subway series", which are great for cities with more than one team but the rest of it just doesn't excite that much. The only inter-league worth watching for anything other than sentimentality reasons is the World Series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 The current system is fine. Every year the AL East plays a different NL division for good times. I think your solution incorporates too much interleague play. The only bad thing about interleague is having an exhibition game decide World Series home field advantage. Even if the same dominant, better league has dominated the event over the minor league which still uses pitchers as batters. Speaking of which it's not 1900 anymore. Why is the pitcher still grabbing a batting helmet and hitting .200 or below lmao :hysterical: I guess something has to differentiate the leagues though, but pitchers hitting is just foolish. They're pitchers. They pitch. EOS Actually, the DH is the problem, not pitchers hitting. They should totally do away with the stupid DH. You should have to play the field in order to hit. Alot more strategy with the pitcher hitting. NL is alot more fun to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailGreen28 Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Actually, the DH is the problem, not pitchers hitting. They should totally do away with the stupid DH. You should have to play the field in order to hit. Alot more strategy with the pitcher hitting. NL is a lot more fun to watch.Agreed. And there's something to be said for making baseball players go both ways, offense and defense. It should reward complete players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDoyler23 Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Actually, the DH is the problem, not pitchers hitting. They should totally do away with the stupid DH. You should have to play the field in order to hit. Alot more strategy with the pitcher hitting. NL is alot more fun to watch. Strategy is a code word for deficiency. I think the problem is the fact that pitchers, as a whole, can't hit. The DH is an improvement to the game. Traditional? No, but an improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Strategy is a code word for deficiency. I think the problem is the fact that pitchers, as a whole, can't hit. The DH is an improvement to the game. Traditional? No, but an improvement. Sorry, but I don't see how it improves the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissU28 Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Mainly my gripe is due to the fact that interleague play causes the schedules to be different between divisional teams. For instance, take the Rangers and Angels: those two teams will play pretty much the same exact schedule in American League competition. It makes it as fair as possible with regards to how the division stacks up at the end of the season. But not all the same teams from the NL are played between the Angels and Rangers. I just think if there is going to be interleague play, you need to play every single team from the other league to even things out. Otherwise, it's pointless. But isn't that what the NFL does in regards to NFC vs. AFC? Do you dislike how the NFC plays certain divisions and only certain AFC teams? Do you think we should do away with NFC teams playing AFC teams until the superbowl? I really like interleague play....I get to see tons of teams I wouldn't get to see otherwise, and lots of different stars. I don't care if the game is a great rivalry or not, but I like to see different teams. Edit: I do agree with the person who said that he doesn't get why there is a certain "time frame" for interleague play....I think that's stupid. They should play teams whenever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissU28 Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Its the same way in the NFL. We don't play the same teams as the Cowboys, Eagles, and Giants. yeah we do.......we play the exact same teams they do within a season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royallypwned Posted July 27, 2009 Author Share Posted July 27, 2009 But isn't that what the NFL does in regards to NFC vs. AFC? Do you dislike how the NFC plays certain divisions and only certain AFC teams? Do you think we should do away with NFC teams playing AFC teams until the superbowl?I really like interleague play....I get to see tons of teams I wouldn't get to see otherwise, and lots of different stars. I don't care if the game is a great rivalry or not, but I like to see different teams. Edit: I do agree with the person who said that he doesn't get why there is a certain "time frame" for interleague play....I think that's stupid. They should play teams whenever. No, because each team in the NFCE plays the same teams from the AFC. The difference in the NFL comes from the two different teams played from the same conference. But interconference play has been around the NFL for ages. It's only been around MLB for a little over 10 years. I'm more of the baseball purist that likes the teams to only play other teams from their own league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
royallypwned Posted July 27, 2009 Author Share Posted July 27, 2009 yeah we do.......we play the exact same teams they do within a season Except for two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Actually, the DH is the problem, not pitchers hitting. They should totally do away with the stupid DH. You should have to play the field in order to hit. Alot more strategy with the pitcher hitting. NL is alot more fun to watch. Agree 100%. If I had to pick one to do away with between interleague play and the DH it would be the DH. And having different rules for the two leagues is really effin stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissU28 Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 I just like having the opportunity to go and watch different teams play. It would be really cool to have the Orioles come out here to play the Padres. I'd also like to see the Yankees play the Pads. Just mixes it up a little bit, and I like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.