I really dislike the NHL’s overtime rules.
Anyway, the issue isn’t changing rules, it’s which ones to change, and MLB is just so, so weird about this.
what other pro sport has 2 sets of rules at the same level ? (not counting minor leagues)
None, but that’s a feature of MLB, not a bug. Every new foootball league that tries to exist alongside the NFL has different rules, and those aren’t “minor leagues” technically, but they never last long. Japanese pro baseball has the same arrangement but I assume you meant North America.
The distinction between American and National League is part of the MLB tradition. There would be significant benefits to getting rid of it, especially if you rearranged the league into western and eastern leagues or conferences, but it’s a sport in which tradition honestly does matter to the fans, way more so than in other sports. Moderate baseball fans know the names of baseball players, and elements of baseball history, that happened before some of all of the other major leagues even EXISTED. Think about how in the 2003 ALCS Yankee fans were taunting Red Sox fans with pictures of Babe Ruth, thereby citing an event that happened before the NFL or NBA were founded, and when the NHL was so much in its infancy that most of the teams it calls the “Original Six” did not exist.
because a sport has been around a long time that makes it better than other sports? And with interleague play now that was a big change to tradition. also the umpires are now the same for both AL and NL. Seems like the DH is the only difference now and of course that “tradition” only goes back to the 70s.
The 3 batter rule seems fair only if there is a corresponding inability for the hitting team to pinch hit and game the lefty/righty thing. It doesn’t make sense that I can bring in a lefty pitcher to face a lefty hitter and now I am stuck with that pitcher for three batters while the hitting team can freely pinch hit right handers.
That doesn’t make it better, and I never suggested that, so what an odd thing for you to get out of that.
It makes it different; it makes it one of the things the fans of that sport enjoy.
You wanted to shorten games. Bringing in a new pitcher takes far longer than sending a pinch-hitter to the plate.
Like Church, but with Statistics.
And how is it going my son?
I’m batting .500 on the commandments Father. I’m looking at bringing a designated sinner for coveting my neighbor’‘s wife’'s ass though.
Good:
Universal DH, same rules for interleague play, NL no longer requires a near-automatic out every 3 innings from a non-hitter clogging up the lineup.
One free step-out per AB for a hitter. One. Stand in there and take your cuts. If you’re out of the box when the pitch is coming, stee-rike!
Pitching coaches: Get it through your guys’ heads that they’re MORE effective if they work fast. It keeps the batters from getting comfortable AND keeps your fielders alert so they can make more plays. No clock, though - time has no place in the game.
Max 12 pitchers on a roster - already too many, but it would slow the parade of one-out guys and their endless warmups.
Meh:
Reducing mound visits. Won’t make a difference.
Bad:
Starting extra innings with a baserunner. Too softballish.
Three batter rule. There’s a place for a LOOGY sometime, but not all the time.
Those people are wrong, and should suck it up, because they’re making baseball wrong.
If I’m going to propose changes, the first one will be to eliminate the Designated Hitter.
The second one will be to eliminate regular season interleague play.
The third one will be to mandate that each team have TWO scheduled double headers each season.
I think you can only push envelopes too far. If you try to stretch them they rip.
The fourth one would be to get the Astros back in the NL where they belong.
The fifth one would be to tear down those god-awful lights in Wrigley field. I might be willing to compromise on that one, with the proviso that at least one MLB ball park only be available for daytime games, all season long. Isn’t that why we now have Daylight Saving time extend into November?
you can’t propose things that will bring in less money , they won’t fly. Such as doubleheaders unless they double the ticket prices. Interleague also brings in more money for a lot of games, but not all .
I would think with TV revenues being what they are, the actual ticket sales for a game or two would be a rounding error for most teams. The problem with double headers is people (mistakenly) think the games are too long and don’t want to sit through two of them in a row. (also, the teams would have to be a bit frugal with their pitching changes to get through two games in one day).
I have no beef with interleague play. One strange thing about it though is that literally everyone I have ever heard discuss it suggests that the visiting team’s DH rule should apply so that Seattle fans could see NL rules a few times a year and Philly fans could see the AL rules. Despite universal requests, MLB seems deaf to this suggestion.
No need. The entire *civilized *world already knows that making pitchers bat is silly.
It’s charming how so many people want the game to be exactly the same as it was in George Will’s boyhood, it really is, but they do all still need a smack upside the head.
I grew up an AL fan and didn’t see the problem with the DH. Then I moved to a NL town, and found I enjoyed not having the DH. It was nothing to do with tradition for me.
It’s not watching the pitcher try to hit that I enjoy, it’s the DH himself that pisses me off. Some guy who’s too fat, old, or uncoordinated to play the field detracts from the game for me. Retire gracefully before you reach that point.
If people can’t stand watching a pitcher hit, I’d prefer a rule change that skips the pitcher in the batting order and goes with eight hitters.
I suspect that it’s down to “it might bring in a bit more money for a handful of games” these days, mostly cross-league rivalry games (e.g., Cubs / White Sox, Yankees / Mets, etc.).
When they first introduced interleague play, it was a small number of games per season, and they did try to focus it on setting up with matchups between two teams that didn’t normally get to play each other, but had some sort of potential rivalry. At the time, it was novel, it was interesting, and it was still limited enough that it was, at some level, “special.”
Now, with the current league set-up (15 in each), interleague play is a necessary evil throughout the season (otherwise, you’d have one idle team in each league every day). The specialness and the novelty of it are completely gone.
I’ve been pushing this envelope around my desk all morning, but no paradigms have shifted. One more staple of business jargon goes the way of the buggy whip.
Did you try thinking outside the box?