Baseball Expansion discussion, 2025 edition

[Tiger337]

7 hours ago, casimir said:

 I’m against 1st half and 2nd half.  A season is a season.

And I want playoff teams based on best record, not fortunate geography.

I don't like the idea of a split season because it goes against tradition.  However, If they expand the playoffs to 16 teams which I am pretty sure they will, then the regular season becomes almost meaningless.  So, I wouldn't be upset if they did the half season thing.  Seeing a team win a half season is more exciting than watching teams battle for 16th place.  It's not like they are having two distinct halves with playoffs at mid-season.  I also think the team that wins the first half probably would be one of the top 16 teams at the end anyway.  

Edited yesterday at 01:25 AM by Tiger337

[chasfh]

12 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I don't like the idea of a split season because it goes against tradition.  However, If they expand the playoffs to 16 teams which I am pretty sure they will, then the regular season becomes almost meaningless.  So, I wouldn't be upset if they did the half season thing.  Seeing a team win a half season is more exciting than watching teams battle for 16th place.  It's not like they are having two distinct halves with playoffs at mid-season.  I also think the team that wins the first half probably would be one of the top 16 teams at the end anyway.  

I think of the NBA and the NHL, the other more-or-less everyday leagues, and it strikes me how little those regular season games mean to me, and how I almost never look at the standings during the season. Those whole races are about getting into the playoffs, so those sports really only mean anything April through June. And I speak as a casual at best fan. I suppose I might feel different if i were a diehard fan of the Red Wings, a team that’s been more or less assured of missing the playoffs for going on ten years. 

[Hongbit]

27 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I think of the NBA and the NHL, the other more-or-less everyday leagues, and it strikes me how little those regular season games mean to me, and how I almost never look at the standings during the season. Those whole races are about getting into the playoffs, so those sports really only mean anything April through June. And I speak as a casual at best fan. I suppose I might feel different if i were a diehard fan of the Red Wings, a team that’s been more or less assured of missing the playoffs for going on ten years. 

This is why pro sports are so open to take all that money from DraftKings and FanDuel.   

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, Hongbit said:

This is why pro sports are so open to take all that money from DraftKings and FanDuel.   

I guess I don't pay any kind of attention to things at ESPN, I basically just use the site for real time scores - but I assume they must now also be bedded down with some big gambling interest also as I see now that betting info is front and center in front of and above any actual game data.

Edited 15 hours ago by gehringer_2

[Hongbit]

40 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I guess I don't pay any kind of attention to things at ESPN, I basically just use the site for real time scores - but I assume they must now also be bedded down with some big gambling interest also as I see now that betting info is front and center in front of and above any actual game data.

Penn Gaming is one of the big national companies and since they don’t have clever gambling sounding corporate name they need a brand to partner.  They started with Barstool and then pivoted to ESPN.    

Penn are paying ESPN $150M for 10 years plus company stock options for the right to plaster gambling over their entire platform 

[gehringer_2]

3 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

Penn Gaming is one of the big national companies and since they don’t have clever gambling sounding corporate name they need a brand to partner.  They started with Barstool and then pivoted to ESPN.    

Penn are paying ESPN $150M for 10 years plus company stock options for the right to plaster gambling over their entire platform 

Pretty much what I was guessing. Well, thanks anyway for a bit of info I would have been happy to live  without ever having to hear about.

[Hongbit]

ESPN has $1.5B reasons to make sure you will be hearing all about it for the next 10 years . 

[gehringer_2]

9 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

ESPN has $1.5B reasons to make sure you will be hearing all about it for the next 10 years . 

🤮

[tiger2022]

Espn was on the verge of folding since no one watches 90% of the garbage shows they put on there 

[gehringer_2]

9 minutes ago, tiger2022 said:

Espn was on the verge of folding since no one watches 90% of the garbage shows they put on there 

They also lost a ton of income from collapsing cable fees. 

[casimir]

5 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

They also lost a ton of income from collapsing cable fees. 

Local cable just removed ESPN and FanDuel Detroit from its offerings.

[casimir]

23 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I don't like the idea of a split season because it goes against tradition.  However, If they expand the playoffs to 16 teams which I am pretty sure they will, then the regular season becomes almost meaningless.  So, I wouldn't be upset if they did the half season thing.  Seeing a team win a half season is more exciting than watching teams battle for 16th place.  It's not like they are having two distinct halves with playoffs at mid-season.  I also think the team that wins the first half probably would be one of the top 16 teams at the end anyway.  

I guess I don't look at the split season as a shot against tradition.  Maybe subconsciously I do kind of parallel them together.  I just look at the season as a whole measuring stick of teams.  Teams will have ebbs and flows through the year.  I don't want to see a team that goes 92-70 miss the playoffs in lieu of a team that goes 86-76 because they latter had a better half than the former.  That should never happen.

Its just like splitting up into too many divisions with too few teams.  At some point a team with a losing record wins a weak division and makes the playoffs.  Its happened in the NFL.  It was going to happen in MLB before the strike in 1994 shut down the rest of the regular season and the postseason.  A losing record should never make the playoffs over a winning record in a professional league.

[Tiger337]

2 minutes ago, casimir said:

I guess I don't look at the split season as a shot against tradition.  Maybe subconsciously I do kind of parallel them together.  I just look at the season as a whole measuring stick of teams.  Teams will have ebbs and flows through the year.  I don't want to see a team that goes 92-70 miss the playoffs in lieu of a team that goes 86-76 because they latter had a better half than the former.  That should never happen.

Its just like splitting up into too many divisions with too few teams.  At some point a team with a losing record wins a weak division and makes the playoffs.  Its happened in the NFL.  It was going to happen in MLB before the strike in 1994 shut down the rest of the regular season and the postseason.  A losing record should never make the playoffs over a winning record in a professional league.

With 16 teams making the playoffs and 4 team divisions, I think sub-.500 making the playoffs will be a faily common occurrence.  

[casimir]

2 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

With 16 teams making the playoffs and 4 team divisions, I think sub-.500 making the playoffs will be a faily common occurrence.  

Unfortunately, you're probably right.  It'll be garbage to see it occur.