MLB thread: I say interleague play blows. Can you dissuade me?

[Commendatori]

I'd be for it if the schedules were equitable, but they're often lopsided. In 1997, when it began, I remember the Yankees having to play the Mets and Phillies (both sucked) as East opponents while the Orioles (then a contender) played the Braves (won division) and the Marlins (won it all that year). The O's aren't my team, but when I saw that schedule my attitude towards interleague play soured for good.

It hasn't been as bad since 1997, but it's not equitable - and when divisions are commonly won by two or three games, to me it isn't acceptable. I know the Yanks / Mets, Cubs / ChiSox and Dodgers / A's have their rivalries, but having them meet for a handful of games isn't enough of a payoff to jerk around the whole schedule.

Can anyone explain to me why this is a good idea?

[bif]

1. Strictly a marketing gimmic

I don't like it either.

[Catshrink]

2. I don't like it either.

I agree, it's marketing.

[Loonman]

3. As lame as the All-Star circle-jerk

Completely unnecessary games.

[XNASA]

4. Not I. I think it sucks too.

So does the DH.

Oh, and there's too many teams. I'd say that 24, 12 in each league is a nice number to shoot for.

I live in Chicago and couldn't care less if the Cubs and Sox played each other during the regular season.

[Commendatori]

11. Glad to hear that

What you said about Chicago is what I hear a lot from New Yorkers, and remember how much interest the Subway Series generated outside of the state?

Twelve teams in each league, no DH sounds great to me. I'd rather see a .270 hitter that can field than a .340 hitter that couldn't field .340 at first.

[MattPinNC]

5. not only does it suck ...

it dilutes league play on both sides. On a deeper note, (not to steer the topic away from IL play) MLB NEEDS a real Commisioner. The sooner Selig is gone and replaced the better. What a flaming jackass. A TIE IN THE ALL-STAR GAME ? Once he's gone, this IL play should be recinded, and reduce the total teams to 24-28.

I could blather on and on, but will restrain myself.

-vvv

[MaineDem]

6. I agree with everything previously posted

Interleague sucks! I've been saying that for years now.

And so does the DH for that matter.

[jakefrep]

7. Interleague is great...

...My Indians haven't fared too badly. Plus we get 6 games a year against the Reds. The purists can all go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

[Commendatori]

10. Your decision is based on your team?

All the more reason why interleague blows. No offense, but when the league caters to particular cities, it sucks. Wow, let's stick Seattle fans with Brewers games just so that the Indians and Reds can play.

Based on your post, it looks like you'd be less enthusiastic if the Indians were getting killed by NL teams, but this has nothing to do with purism anyway - it has to do with equitable schedules. Screwing five or six teams to give hometown matchups to one or two is absurd.

Sorry, but this was not anything close to the "dissuade me" I was looking for - "my team's doing okay, and we get to play rivals, so it's cool?"

[kodi]

8. hell, i still consider the DH to be a tool of the devil

and mark the the beginning of the decline in western civilization to its implimentation.

[NoPasaran]

9. It totally sucks

I refuse to watch interleague games during the regular season.

[GOPisEvil]

12. Well...aside from certain geographical series, it blows.

I like seeing Cubs/Sox, A's/Giants, Yankees/Mets, Dodgers/A's, Cardinals/Royals, etc. Also, it's nice for fans of the other league to be able to see players who have played exclusively in one league (Bonds, for instance).

But, overall, it's more bad than good.

Now...can we get rid of the DH while we're at it?

[mac56]

13. I hate it.

I've hated it from the beginning. It's another example of dumbing down the game, and of sports in general. The DH too. And the wild card. May as well turn it into the NHL, where everybody makes the playoffs.

[dr.strangelove]

14. I LOVE INTERLEAGUE PLAY

I love these games. I'll grant you the games are primarily a profit tool, but who cares, baseball is first a business. If the owners and players did not make these extreme sums of money, there would not be baseball.

Anyway, I love the games for two reasons:
1. With the interleague games I get to see teams I ordinarily wouldn't see live. I got to see San Diego and Colorado play the yankees this year. I can't wait for the Dodgers to come to Yankee stadium in three years. Although its not live, I'm going to be glued ot my set watching the yankees in LA this weekend.

2. I love to watch the two styles of baseball compete. NL style v. AL style. NL micromanaging runs against AL power and big ball. I love to watch Torre sweat throgh making the double switch and watching Pedro try to swing the bat.

Anyway. I go to 10 or so ballgames a year, mostly during the interleague games. I've been to 4 in the last 2 weeks and will catch 4 more around the break.

[TSIAS]

15. I'm not against the concept

I do think there's too many Interleague games. I would favor maybe two series a year. It's great to see matchups like Cubs/Sox and Mets/Yankees.

I agree with your main points. The pennant races should be decided by playing teams within your division or league. In the NL East, the Marlins have 6 games against Tampa Bay. In a division that is very close, that could be what pushes Florida over the top.

From my perspective, I'm not rushing out to Pro Player Stadium to watch the Kansas City Royals or Texas Rangers. The novelty is over, and it's just like any other game.

[leftofthedial]

16. I TOTALLY agree

it is an abomination.

[SaveElmer]

17. Ok as a novelty

It is kinda fun to be able to see teams in person you may never get to see...but it should not expand anymore...too much intermingling would destroy the character of each league. It would be like the NFL...I mean who really cares whether a team is AFC or NFC...

[drone0101]

18. I love interleague

it is great to watch american leaggue pitchers bat.