Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MLB should change to 16 Game Season like NFL?

F

Frisco

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Sep 24, 2002
2,475
69
Utopia
I think this would be a good idea:

1) It will create more urgency. Now it like: win, lose, win, lose, who cares, etc.

2) Make the games 6 innings like it is in Little League. By time the 5th inning comes around I am half a sleep anyway.

3) Less injuries. And pitchers won't wear out their shoulders as much.

4) Sometimes less is more and I think this would do MLB a great service.

Opinions/Thoughts?
 
Ok, I can see cutting the season back some, but cutting it to 16 games is just absurd. I say cut it back to 140 games, shorten the season by a month.
 
A few things, no

The players union would never allow any cut in games.
The owners would never allow it. 81 home games means ticket sales.

If they want to cut 10 games fine, but baseball is a summer sport.
 
Frisco said:
I think this would be a good idea:

1) It will create more urgency. Now it like: win, lose, win, lose, who cares, etc.

2) Make the games 6 innings like it is in Little League. By time the 5th inning comes around I am half a sleep anyway.

3) Less injuries. And pitchers won't wear out their shoulders as much.

4) Sometimes less is more and I think this would do MLB a great service.

Opinions/Thoughts?
Click to expand...

My opinion (since you asked for it) is that you sound less like someone who wants to improve baseball and more like someone who dislikes it altogether.
 
Tomorrow said:
My opinion (since you asked for it) is that you sound less like someone who wants to improve baseball and more like someone who dislikes it altogether.
Click to expand...
Plus I would like to see more NFL games. 16 is too few. It should be an 18 game season.
 
I don't think it will happen.

As has been stated, the players union and owners would not agree and the fans would go nuts.
 
Reminds me of george carlin,

"You know how you speed up baseball? Everybody gets one swing. That's it one swing ******* you, you're out sit down!"
 
MacNut said:
Plus I would like to see more NFL games. 16 is too few. It should be an 18 game season.
Click to expand...

Okay maybe 16 games is too short, but 162 is way too many. I don't know how the players do it.

18 Games in the NFL is too many. It would only create more injuries and even more lawsuits from head injuries. It's just too physically demanding of a sport.

The NFL should cut the preseason schedule. No one really watches those--or do they?
 
The best thing baseball could do is make it so that the average fan can afford to attend several games a season and have decent seats.
 
16 games is way too many. It should be one game. Not one game per team, mind you. One game in which all teams play all other teams simultaneously. I don't have all the logistics down yet, but I'm pretty sure it won't be boring.
 
AustinIllini said:
100 baseball games. That's the MOST extreme I would go. 162 is way too many
Click to expand...

i personally agree that there are too many games, and the games are too long and often boring, but any radical change would also nullify all the historical statistical part of the game, which is a core part of its appeal to the fans, so i don't see it happens and it would alienate the most the core fans (although it might bring in new ones).

if they were to cut it, the reasonable way would be to go to 82 (plus playoffs) like for basketball, the structure of the leagues is similar and it accounts for a logical subdivision of the games.

same things with the number of innings.
the 'show' would probably benefit, but it is too much of a change for what is usually a very conservative (not in the political sense) crowd.
if they were open to really radical changes (which again it is not a realistic option) i would favor a 6-innings game, with 4 outs (instead of 3). you'd get roughly the same number of minimum at-bats (24 vs 27), but a shorter, more dynamic and higher-scoring game

for football, the opposite is true, they should increase the number of games, possibly to a point where every team plays everyone else. no massive differences in schedules, which i always found very weird.
 
Ray Brady said:
16 games is way too many. It should be one game. Not one game per team, mind you. One game in which all teams play all other teams simultaneously. I don't have all the logistics down yet, but I'm pretty sure it won't be boring.
Click to expand...

What? :rolleyes:
 
Plutonius said:
An average nine inning pro baseball game is shorter then an average pro football game. One exception is when the Red Sox plays the Yankees. Those are almost always long games.
Click to expand...

Maybe baseball just seems longer because no one is moving 99% of the time.
 
Frisco said:
Maybe baseball just seems longer because no one is moving 99% of the time.
Click to expand...
There is probably more game action in a 5 minute span of a baseball game then there is in an NFL game. No stoping to move the chains, or check a replay, or a commercial.

Don't forget that a NFL game is 1 hour, yet it takes 3 to play.
 
Frisco said:
The NFL should cut the preseason schedule. No one really watches those--or do they?
Click to expand...

No way. Preseason is when they evaluate borderline talent in a game environment. It should be cut back to 3 games, since the final preseason game is basically a warm up game for the starters.

As for baseball, I wouldn't mind if they cut the season down to zero games. Baseball is one of the games--like golf and soccer--that's fun to play, but boring to watch. At least with soccer we have Oscar worthy actors doing their own stunts.:D

Frisco said:
16 games is way too many. It should be one game. Not one game per team, mind you. One game in which all teams play all other teams simultaneously.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a Vince McMahon plan.:eek: A battle royal. Teams that gets scored on, leaves the field until there are only 2 teams left. Then it's playoff overtime rules football.:cool: It would be interesting to see a team field both their offense and defensive unit at the same time.:D
 
Last edited:
MacNut said:
There is probably more game action in a 5 minute span of a baseball game then there is in an NFL game. No stoping to move the chains, or check a replay, or a commercial.

Don't forget that a NFL game is 1 hour, yet it takes 3 to play.
Click to expand...

umm IDK… THere is more downtime in between plays for the NFL than MLB, but at the end of a game, there is more running, moving etc in an NFL game than a baseball game.

----------------------

If we are just trowing crazy ideas, then how about baseball moves to a time frame game instead of an innings only game to make it more interesting.

Lets say, keep the 9 innings, but limit the game up to a proper time limit for the game to be officially completed or just 9 innings whoever it finishes first (this way old stats would prob still work). Basically add an end clock to the game, but if tied and the game has to be decided then one small overtime or ONE extra inning and if nothing then we go to home run derby for decision lol :D
 
By WSJ calculations, a baseball fan will see 17 minutes and 58 seconds of action over the course of a three-hour game.
Click to expand...

According to a Wall Street Journal study of four recent broadcasts, and similar estimates by researchers, the average amount of time the ball is in play on the field during an NFL game is about 11 minutes.
Click to expand...

baseball has a bit more but not by much..

I prefer hockey which always has at least 60 minutes of action. :D
 
Carlanga said:
umm IDK… THere is more downtime in between plays for the NFL than MLB, but at the end of a game, there is more running, moving etc in an NFL game than a baseball game.

----------------------

If we are just trowing crazy ideas, then how about baseball moves to a time frame game instead of an innings only game to make it more interesting.

Lets say, keep the 9 innings, but limit the game up to a proper time limit for the game to be officially completed or just 9 innings whoever it finishes first (this way old stats would prob still work). Basically add an end clock to the game, but if tied and the game has to be decided then one small overtime or ONE extra inning and if nothing then we go to home run derby for decision lol :D
Click to expand...
There are also more players on the field for a NFL game. How many minutes does each player see on the field? All 9 fielders are on the field in a baseball game for the whole game. Ok 8 if a pitcher doesn't go a full 9.

The great thing about baseball is that there is no clock. A game could go 2 hours or 4.
 
MacNut said:
There are also more players on the field for a NFL game. How many minutes does each player see on the field? All 9 fielders are on the field in a baseball game for the whole game. Ok 8 if a pitcher doesn't go a full 9.

The great thing about baseball is that there is no clock. A game could go 2 hours or 4.
Click to expand...
You think is great? For me that is one of the reasons I don't watch too much baseball, you never really know when its gonna end and I have things to do, so unless is the finals of the season I don't watch too much baseball. :cool:

I'm a soccer fan first> american football = basketball> baseball> tennis.

How about timed innings?
 
Carlanga said:
You think is great? For me that is one of the reasons I don't watch too much baseball, you never really know when its gonna end and I have things to do, so unless is the finals of the season I don't watch too much baseball. :cool:

I'm a soccer fan first> american football = basketball> baseball> tennis.
Click to expand...
I don't always watch a full game, when I am in the car I have it on the radio. My phone updates me with scores. Who says you have to sit in front of a TV for 4 hours to enjoy baseball? The pace is casual, and that is what I like about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back