Who wants the National League? anyone ?

Journeyman · Sep 17, 2007

Mets can't beat Philly, having said that they will probably win the next 8 games....and odf course Philly will turn around and wet ther bed again after destroying NY for the second time this month.

The Cubs and Brewers , I know one of these teams will win the Central, it would be nice to see one win it and not abck in like STL did last year.

And out west, Arizona, LA and SD all can still win and more than likely will get the Wild Card.

Take away the Phillies and the Mets would definitely be looking like the team to beat, 0-7 vs Philly has to have them questioning how good they really are...then again you don't have to be all that good to win the NL.

It's anyones guess with two weeks to go, and no one looks like the team to beat in the senior 'league' circuit . :think2:

SSI · Sep 17, 2007

your right about the Mets but they will still probably win the NL......... overall didnt look much different last year and the cards won it all, may fool you again this year (someone else, not cards)........

best chance may be the Pads, pitching......

Journeyman · Sep 17, 2007

SSI said:
your right about the Mets but they will still probably win the NL......... overall didnt look much different last year and the cards won it all, may fool you again this year (someone else, not cards)........

best chance may be the Pads, pitching......

This never happened in the old days, we need to go back to two teams representing each league...I don't like teams with 83-85 wins, winning the World Series.

How have you been SSI?

WVU · Sep 17, 2007

Journeyman said:
This never happened in the old days, we need to go back to two teams representing each league...I don't like teams with 83-85 wins, winning the World Series.

How have you been SSI?

The old days sucked when only 4 teams made the playoffs. If you like that system then why not crown a champion based on regular season wins and screw the playoffs? The system today with wild cards give other teams a chance, especially if they are in a division with a powerhouse. The old system had most teams illiminated before the end of August. As far as not liking it when an 85 win team wins the world series, that is crazytalk. It does not happen often, and it adds excitement rather than take away from it.

Why not just give the team who spends the most money all rings, since it is very likely they will have the most wins?

CAPNCRUNCH · Sep 17, 2007

I like the way it is now with the playoffs but with one exception, either play all the games in the daytime, like they used to - OR - do like the NFL and play the games in a warm weather site so that games cannot be played under polar conditions.

Journeyman · Sep 17, 2007

WVU said:
The old days sucked when only 4 teams made the playoffs. If you like that system then why not crown a champion based on regular season wins and screw the playoffs? The system today with wild cards give other teams a chance, especially if they are in a division with a powerhouse. The old system had most teams illiminated before the end of August. As far as not liking it when an 85 win team wins the world series, that is crazytalk. It does not happen often, and it adds excitement rather than take away from it.

Why not just give the team who spends the most money all rings, since it is very likely they will have the most wins?

Well I respectfully disagree with you (as usual lol), and here's why...MLB plays 162 games, we don't need that large of a field ,why play 162 games then? This is just one of the problems MLB has right now....make the 162 game season mean more, put a cap on each team , this is nowhere near as exciting as it once was.

You talk about teams being out of it in August , well what about the teams that are basically always out of it in April? Imagine being a New York fan , knowing your team is in the post season every year...how is that good for baseball?

SSI · Sep 17, 2007

Journey, more times than not, i agree with you but not on this one.... i like this format better than the 4 team format or to go even further back, the 2 team format......

this keeps interest alive in a lot of cities that would otherwise have put the bats and gloves away.......

last year was unusual and should not happen this year..

baseball has the same problem that it has had for a long time..... there should be a MAX cap and a Minimum cap........ teams should not be allowed to have 10 million dollar payrolls......... we should cap it between 60 million and 120 million...... this will let your bigger payrolls go up to the 120 mark but will make the smaller markets move up to the 60 mil mark...... this would even the playing field tremendously and if teams cant afford it, im not against down sizing the number of teams........ no way there should be 2 teams in florida, probably not even one......

WVU · Sep 17, 2007

Journeyman said:
Well I respectfully disagree with you (as usual lol), and here's why...MLB plays 162 games, we don't need that large of a field ,why play 162 games then? This is just one of the problems MLB has right now....make the 162 game season mean more, put a cap on each team , this is nowhere near as exciting as it once was.

You talk about teams being out of it in August , well what about the teams that are basically always out of it in April? Imagine being a New York fan , knowing your team is in the post season every year...how is that good for baseball?

somehow I agree entirely with this post, yet can not agree with you on this post

"This never happened in the old days, we need to go back to two teams representing each league...I don't like teams with 83-85 wins, winning the World Series."

I did not think I could agree and disagree with you completely in the same argument?

hno: