Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
I know you’re a Braves fan. Your team didn’t win.
There’s practically no chance they’ll ever decrease to 90-100 games. They’re all about the money.
Sounds interesting to me as well.
A 95 loss team isn't going to contend for the post-season no matter how much it's expanded and diluted.
My father was involved in many of the “new” pro sports leagues (like ABA,WHA, WTT...) I always thought it was a matter of time before pro sports became more like pro wrestling and becoming entertainment and not a game. Even in the ABA they would “trade” (move) players around to get better attendance-especially if the player was from the local region.
Uh, yes. Jeter Downs had a 2 million dollar signing bonus. That’s not including his salary. Or future salary.
Of course you’re in favor. Allowing the Astros to pick their playoff team helps insure they play a team whose signs they already know.
That's pretty much what I said last night. Wait. Am I Sal Licata? I've never seen the two of us in the same room together.
That's why I'm glad Spring Training is officially here. The offseason is fun to an extent, but after a while it's just the same old back and forth. I'm ready to start watching a baseball game every night again.
I actually didn't see the part about teams picking. Just the expanded playoffs. It sounds like it might be gimmicky, but it could also be fun. I think it would be worth exploring. The fact the players and owners seem to be on board gives it some more gravitas.
I totally agree there is no chance they would ever do that but I think it would make the game better and bring fans back into the sport.
I would actually hate for them to shorten the season. I love that there is a game almost every night of the summer.
The vast majority of minor leaguers dont get large bonuses and play for less than minimum wage. Do some research.
Try to keep up. We're not talking about all minor league players. We're talking about the people involved in the trade.
I do too but people that actually like the nuances of the game are going away. Baseball is actually about the mental/physical grind of playing every day. It is a game that rewards perseverance. It is a game that is based on failure and how you come back from failing more often than succeeding. Unfortunately the game is also changing to be an all (homerun) or nothing (strikeout) event. Nobody cares about basehits and moving runners or playing defense. Throw 100 mph and hit 450' home runs. It is already ruining the game to some respect.
I understand what you're saying, but don't believe the ant-PR that baseball has been getting the last decade. While it's true that nationwide viewership is down for TV, local markets are booming and teams are doing very well. I'd hate to see them make drastic changes to the game in hopes of winning over the Twitter crowd. Luckily, MLB more than any other sport has consistently told the critics to go pound sand. It's almost like they know the threats of people boycotting or leaving the sport don't mean anything to them. They're like the cranky old man yelling at the kids to turn down their rap music.
Sounds awesome on paper. But I think it fall apart when you think that the game would be played in early November. Plus, if you move it to a neutral site, no home field advantage. And I don't think people would travel for it like the SB. It would seem like a slight to the home fan base.
Cole vs. Strasburg in Miami this past year for example.
I don't think it would work because of the home field advantage aspect. Part of the excitement of the game 7 is the home crowd. One team earned that advantage and wants to keep it. Ballpark nuances also play a factor. It's not like football where every playing field is the same. Each home field has it's advantages/disadvantages. Most teams somewhat build based on their home parks. Taking it to a neutral site would have some affect on this advantage as well.
The two leagues play mostly within their league and even play by different rules. HFA makes sense for all series up to the WS, where it doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Football killing other sports has nothing at all to do with having a neutral site for the Super Bowl. Football dominates other sports because there are minimal games bunched on basically one day where everyone can focus on the games that are much more meaningful than one game out of 162. Each game is an event. No other sport is like that due to the quantity of games played.
I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. I do it all the time. But in this case, I'm not wrong. This whole thing started when I said that Turner was an idiot for complaining about the trades falling through because it was ruining families. I said it was a bad look for millionaires to be complaining about having to sell one mansion on short notice to buy another. People said minor leaguers don't make millions. I said not all, but the ones in this trade do. Then we got off on a tangent about how a lot of minor leaguers don't make a lot of money. That was never the argument.
C’mon guys.
I'm a HUGE baseball fan, but if my team isn't in the playoffs, I might not watch a single game of the postseason. And I'm sure I'm in the majority with that statement.
A "few days" of build up is tough to plan ahead for. For the Super Bowl, fans of teams at least have two weeks to plan for airfare, travel, time off work, somebody to watch kids, etc. Airlines/airports put in place plans for extra flights to the host city.
