A MLB Balanced Schedule, how does it look?

Question

First, in order to get a balanced schedule, we need 15 teams in each league. Let's move Milwaukee back to the AL West. OK, each team would play 4 games(2 2-game series) against each of the opposing league.(60 games) Then, each team would play the teams in the league, but not in their division 6 times. (2 3-game series).(60 games). Finally, each team would play 10 games against their division(2 3-game series and 2 2 2-game series)(40 games) For a total of 160 games, teams would only lose 1 home game a year, the schedule would be balance every thing would make since, now what do you think?

Answer 1

Biggest problem with you plan is the moving of Milwaukee. While that will work fine during your 60 interleague games I'm not sure you can balance that out with the 100 games in the league and create a schedule that actaully works and is completed in the normal season time.

Also I don't think it makes sense to increase the inter league games.

I am in favor of 1 series of interleague games against a division of opponents . Ex. All NL Central teams play all AL West teams 1 series of 3 or 4 games half the series at home and half away (approx. 15-20 games) and then one home and home interleague against a "natural" rival. (Reds-Indians,Mets-Yankees, Cards-Royals, Rangers-Astros, Oak- San Fran - etc)(Another 6 games)

Then play ~16 games each of your division opponents (more in smaller division and less in larger) and the remaining in your league.

Keep the 162 number.

Answer 2

How is that balanced?

I thought a balanced schedule meant that eact team played every other team an equal number of times.

Personally, I think it is better for teams to play their division rivals more often. It makes for better rivalries.

Answer 3

You have way too much time on your hands.

Answer 4

Waaaaaaayyyyyy too much time...

Answer 5

I think i'd re-do the entire thing as follows:

#1: first of all, make each division in each league have the same number of teams - a nice round 5, putting Milwaukee back in the AL West, as was earlier said, along with other possible shifts as needed. Then each team would play other teams in five-game series throughout the season except as indicated below, with each starting pitcher of the five man rotation being only allowed to pitch one game in each series;

#2: each starting pitcher on each team in each division would have to pitch against each starting pitcher in the same division (25 games against each team, for a total of 125 games within the same division), so that, for example, the Giants' Russ Ortiz would have to pitch against ALL of the Dodgers' starting pitchers each year, etc., and except for injury, NO exceptions - no way to weasel out of a contest no matter how ugly it becomes if mismatched. This way you could actually see how good each pitcher was against each pitcher. If a team permanently pulls a starter and replaces him, (his required 25 games against a certain team can not be completed by him that year,) the original pulled starting pitcher CAN NOT play in the playoffs or in the World Series. This does not mean that I'd expect each 5-game series of Russ Ortiz versus the Dodgers to be played back-to-back, which of course is ludicrous - just that it must be done over the entire season. If any matchup game cannot be made up in a timely manner before the playoffs, the team whose pitcher was at "fault" must play with a substitute starter who must stay in THE REST OF THE SEASON, except "meaningless" make-up games will not occur (team "A" , which has won 60 and lost 101 will not have to make up that last game unless it affects the team that has also played one less game);

#3: in addition THE SAME LINEUP would have to start for each 5-game series of each team against the other with the same two opposing pitchers, so that if Ortiz pitches against St. Louis's pitcher "A", the entire lineup for both teams for all 5 games of
Ortiz vs pitcher "A" of St. Louis must be IDENTICAL; If injuries prevent the exact same lineup from being possible, there must be a re-match later that year unless the injury is season/career-ending, in which case "doctors' note excuses" would have to have both teams' ok to prevent a team pulling someone who is just lousy and not actually injured;

#4: each team would only play teams in its division - Boston would never play Seattle, just NY, Tampa, etc. - until the playoffs, (with no interleague play whatsoever, except as pre-season publicity with stats not counting whatsoever during that time); this playing only in the same division would cut down on travel time, avoid certain two-day-off scheduling concerns, as well as allowing the leagues to discontinue prescribing benzedrine for players who say that they have jet lag - yes they still can prescribe it - just look at some like (allegedly) Sheffield with his stereotypical grinding teeth batting posture and way too many nervous practice swings;

#5: each best team in the three divisions of each league would then have to play the other two divisional winners' in its league in rotation a MAXIMUM of 25 times (25 of AL Central versus AL West, 25 of AL West and East, and 25 of AL East versus Central, etc.), stopping if any team has won 4 of the five separate 5-game series against another divisional leader, with the clear standout winner of all three divisions in each league going to the World Series, or an additional playoff series as necessary with the manager deciding on who pitches but no pitcher can start more than ONCE in any matchup series; if extra games needed beyond 161, so be it, as is already the case in one- (or more) game playoffs. This means that a clincher-type team gets to coast at the end of the season while a struggler "wild-card" type has to stay in until something gets proven one way or the other. And of course if any division had a tie before going to the three-round-robin league elimination, the tied division would have a 5-game tie-breaking series with manager's pitching/roster choice as is the case now, with the series stopping whenever either of the teams in the tie-breaking series had won 3 of 5;

#6: The league that got to the World Series in the LEAST number of games would have home field advantage, regardless of whether a game was played in the regular season or in the playoffs, except that any games not having to be made up by a victor due to a "bad-record" team not having to make up a posponed game will count as if the victor had played it; but in case of a series clinched against another division leader before the maximum number of games are played only the actual games played will count; in case of a tie in the number of games both leagues took to get to the series, the best two out of three coin flips would determine home field advantage, the caller of the toss being the team whose league lost the last year's World Series. This coin toss being called by the loser of last year's game would prevent the "incumbent re-election" advantage, so that the All-Star Game would be allowed to remain the publicity stunt BS event that it has become, with no impact on the game other than to let some ignorant people pretend know something about the sport when the subject came up in the office the next day;

#7: and finally, NO PLAYER traded within the same division during the regular season or traded across divisions or across the leagues after the playoffs started is eligible to play IN ANY GAME the rest of the season; replacements for injured players would come out of the team rosters only, resorting to the minors only if absolutely necessary, with every attempt to keep the 40-man (but not necessarily the 25-man) roster the same all throughout the season; so that if they had to go so deep to get to #41 (a minor-leaguer) to continue their season, a team would have to drop someone from the 25-man roster into the minors for the rest of the season and not be able to call that person back up at all that season to avoid any possible playoff roster shenanigans based on "injury".