Jump to content

should MLB contract a few teams??


Blackout

Recommended Posts

Yup, but no team is going to go to a disadvantage of carrying one less player than teh rest.

I forget how many years they did it at 24, but they held their ground.

Everyone thought that one of the big market teams would break rank, but they didn't.

pissed me off when I was a kid and didnt know why they wouldnt carry an extra player.

gotta love collusion!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assumed you included that under the "union would be panda-sad" argument... Sorry.

Nonetheless, I think that eliminating affiliated minor leagues would only strengthen the independent minor league system. The independent minors THRIVED before the farm system was popularized/institutionalized by the Cardinals (i think) and the Dodgers.

no prob... my a-d-d prevents me from forming good paragraphs and my thoughts dont flow well...:)

It would strengthen the Indys, but the cost to buy out the current minor league teams would be ridiculous. I would think many minor league franchise owners would sue if they werent well compensated for their loss. And those teams go for serious money these days.

It just doesnt make sense for MLB to contract teams when they have so many issues that need to be addressed if they do. Also, if people look back at the history of baseball and the attendance, the Marlins really arent doing too bad. Sure it looks like crap on TV, but how many fans were there to witness Maris' feat in '61?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Championships Since 2001: Marlins 1 - Yankees 0

Sure lets contract the Marlins. While we're at it lets contract every team in MLB that spends over $150 M a year that doesnt win a title. So the Mets and Yanks are out, as are BAL and SEA. Now we're gettin somewhere.

:rl: Don't be too hasty with the Mets. They are still the only NYC team with a shot at a title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...