That is all.



Discuss.

i agree. it's pointless

There is nothing wrong with it. Attendance is higher in interleague games compared to intraleague games.

The same people who bitch about interleague games bitch about the Wild Card, the DH, and PJ's drummers. These arguments have been discussed over and over and nothing's going to change. Get used to it. It's going to be here for a while.

it was a little cooler in the beginning but it has gotten a little stale in recent years.

I like it for the pitching match ups that you would never get to see.

That's not true at all. I think the Wild Card is great, the DH I could take or leave, and I like all of pj's drummers. Interleague play is just exhibition games that count, and are designed entirely to boost attendence. However, only certain games actually do boost attendence. Nobody could give less of a shit when Milwaukee plays Kansas City or Texas, believe me.

The only thing worse is determining home-field advantage in the playoffs by the All-Star Game result. Whoever came up with that idea ought to thrown off a bridge.

wrong stereotype with that post. I like the wild card the DH and all of PJ's drummers. Next!

Interleague play is completely and utterly lame. The Wild card is fine though. And most especially, I applaud the change to the unbalanced schedule so you play the teams in your own division more often. The only thing that sucks about that, is interleague play. Teams end up playing some american league opponents just as much as some nation league opponents, which really sucks. Also, I think that by having the AL and NL play during the regular season, it only serves to devalue the world series when they finally play.

The NFC plays the AFC.
The East plays the West.
Why shouldn't the NL play the AL?
Baseball is this country's grand ole game and part of what makes it great is that it changes. For the most part, those changes have been good.

So what if Milwaukee plays KC. You say that like KC v Detroit is fantastic. As a Braves fan I'll take playing TB and Toronto as long as I get to play NYY and BOS.

The only exibition game MLB plays after the start of the season (not counting the HoF game) is the All-Star game. Comparing an Interleague game to exibition game is absolutely absurd.

Then why even bother having two leagues and then why bother having the world series where the AL plays the NL? Why not change it to the two best teams period play each other in the series? When you start merging the leagues, then you lose the idea of that dramatic time when the AL and NL fianlly meet at the end. It's not so exciting when they've already been playing each other during the regular season.




It's interesting you say that because for the most part, the actual game itself has changed very little in the last 100 years. The biggest change being the DH rule for the AL. Aside from that, the rules of the game have changed little, if at all. Game scheduling and players have changed some, as well as other outside influences. But the actual rules of the game itself remains largely unchanged, and THAT's what I like about baseball. Constant as the northern star.

A better statement I could not have made.

The only part of interleague play that i do not like is the fact that it does indeed devalue the World Series. However, there is nothing better or more intense than the 6 games that the Cubs and White Sox play every summer.

on a personal note, i got to see my twins play at pac bell. dream come true.

maybe they should decrease the amount of games. The Yankees play the Mutts 6 times/year now, it gets a little played out. But it is about attendance and $$$. The Yanks played in LA last year for the first time since (probably) the 1981 WS and I think I read that it was the highest attendance ever for a 3 game series in LA.

The whole all star thing is gay. Best record in baseball should get homefield advantage period.

And while I am at it, I hate the 3-2-3 format. I like 2-2-1-1-1

I dont think baseball wants their play-offs to last for 2 months like hockey's used to.

it is only 2 rounds then the WS. I just think that when you get homefield you almost need to sweep the first 2.

Does "interleague" play devalue the Superbowl? No.
Does "interleague" play devalue the NBA Finals? No.
Why would MLB Interleague play devalue the World Series?

Which sport has the most roster turnover of the 3 sports? Baseball.

How many MLB teams post-season line-ups, pitching staffs, and rosters are set in June / July? None. (This cannot be said in NBA or NFL)
So, the dynamic, line-up, pitching staff, roster, and INTENSITY between an interleague game and WS is vastly different and takes nothing away from the WS.
I feel interleague play takes less out of the WS than the NBA Finals or Superbowl.





I didn't say the rules, I said the game.

Gee lets see...
Interleague Play
Wild Card
DH
3 divisions
Small Ballparks
Height of pitching mound
Length of schedule
***Free Agency***

i have no problem w/ interleague play. i have season tickets to the dodgers and i would hate seeing the same teams(arizona,san fransico,san diego,colorado) all year. interleague play changes it up a bit

here are a few of the things that annoy me about baseball

You cant compare the other sports. The just dont match up at all. Football only plays 12 regular season games all year, and for basketball, half the damn teams make the playoffs. Baseball is different. It's more interesting to see what happens when the AL and NL dont face each other until the end. That doesnt mean it makes baseball suck, it just a little devalued come world series time. I can tell you personally, that I enjoyed it more when interleague play didnt exist. And by the other remarks in this thread, I see I'm not alone. If you enjoy it, more power to you, man.



Well sure, the intensity of any game that's not a playoff game or end of the season game where you're playing for a playoff spot isnt as intense as the world series. That doesnt mean it isnt taking away from it. We're talking degrees here. Lets say the AL and NL merged to sucha degree where they each played half of their games against each other. When the World Series came around, who would care that it was the AL and NL playing? You might as well just call it the same league at that point. So, we're not at that point obviously, but it's a degree to that direction. And it's just a means of devauing the whole reason to even have the AL and NL in the first place.




Well, usually when someone talks about a "game" you talk about the rules and how it's played. Maybe that's just a miscommunication. My bad if that's the case.

Another reason interleague sucks is that instead of playing other teams in your division which could help dictate if you make it into the playoffs, you end up playing teams in a whole different league that have no bearing at all on your division. To make it worse, it's a crapshoot as to who plays who. It sucks if your team has to play the yankees in interleague, but your division rival only has to play detroit. That's a lame way to possibly decide who will win their division.