One off day each week. Also, Division winner gets to pick the wild card round opponent.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/50134346/mlb-proposes-shorter-regular-season-best-7-division-series

https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-mlbpa-proposal-154-game-schedule-new-playoff-structure

I'd rather re-seeding. The first round: best record vs worst record, 2nd best record against 2nd worst record, 3 best record vs 3rd worst. After that, re-seed.

Edit: just realized what I said doesn't make sense ha best 2 records get the bye and then of the remaining teams: best record vs worst record, 2nd best record against 2nd worst record. And then the best team with a bye gets the team with the worst record out of the 2 that move on from Wild Card Round.

Edited yesterday at 08:53 PM1 day by Bob Sacamano

1 minute ago, Bob Sacamano said:

I'd rather re-seeding. The first round: best record vs worst record, 2nd best record against 2nd worst record, 3 best record vs 3rd worst. After that, re-seed.

Same.

4 minutes ago, Bob Sacamano said:

I'd rather re-seeding. The first round: best record vs worst record, 2nd best record against 2nd worst record, 3 best record vs 3rd worst. After that, re-seed.

This

Unless they plan on paying players for the same 162 game scale, this is a non-starter.

15 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Unless they plan on paying players for the same 162 game scale, this is a non-starter.

Agreed.

Like the idea of a best of seven but picking your opponent?

What is this some sort of game show??????????

That's asinine.

17 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Unless they plan on paying players for the same 162 game scale, this is a non-starter.

For each team: Four fewer home dates for ticket sales and stadium district revenues. Eight fewer games for the RSNs to broadcast.

39 minutes ago, AntMan26 said:

Same.

36 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said:

This

I just realized what I said didn't make sense ha best 2 records get the bye and then of the remaining teams: best record vs worst record, 2nd best record against 2nd worst record. And then the best team with a bye gets the team with the worst record out of the 2 that move on from Wild Card Round.

Biggest feedback so far is aversion to Dodgers being able to choose opponent...thus making WS runs even easier.

Obviously this year, Milwaukee would theoretically have that right. But basically every year there's that assumption LA will end up with the best record at the end of the season.

18 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

For each team: Four fewer home dates for ticket sales and stadium district revenues. Eight fewer games for the RSNs to broadcast.

The teams get WAAAAY more money from the playoffs.

31 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

The teams get WAAAAY more money from the playoffs.

but only for the 8 teams that make it to the division series? Also, going to best of 7 means most likely 1 or 2 extra games per division series.

1 hour ago, 77 Hitmen said:

but only for the 8 teams that make it to the division series? Also, going to best of 7 means most likely 1 or 2 extra games per division series.

And more night playoff games, better ratings, more revenue generated, etc.

5 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

And more night playoff games, better ratings, more revenue generated, etc.

That's true.

I'm actually not against the idea of going back to a 154-game schedule. Fewer games to burn out pitchers arms. Built in off days make scheduling rain out make ups easier. I was just trying to figure out why the owners would want this.

I suppose other than the teams like the Yankees, Dodgers, and Padres who have packed houses every night, having 4 fewer home games on weeknights during the year isn't going to make a huge dent in attendance.

Is Shore Capital Private Equity Field at the Railyards still going to be worth the money for Ishbia with only 77 home games? 😜

15 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

That's true.

I'm actually not against the idea of going back to a 154-game schedule. Fewer games to burn out pitchers arms. Built in off days make scheduling rain out make ups easier. I was just trying to figure out why the owners would want this.

I suppose other than the teams like the Yankees, Dodgers, and Padres who have packed houses every night, having 4 fewer home games on weeknights during the year isn't going to make a huge dent in attendance.

Is Shore Capital Private Equity Field at the Railyards still going to be worth the money for Ishbia with only 77 home games? 😜

Most of those higher attendance teams make the playoffs as well fwiw

ofc there are the new traditionalists who won't want to compare statistical records from 162 and adjust down again to 154

you could even argue more planned off days fits in more dates for summer stadium concerts

Edited 22 hours ago22 hr by caulfield12

I like the idea of 154 games with a day off in the week.

3 hours ago, Falstaff said:

I like the idea of 154 games with a day off in the week.

There will be games everyday though...right? I mean...this plan isn't suggesting that every team will be off on every Thursday (or something like that) is it?

4 minutes ago, BrittBurnsFan said:

There will be games everyday though...right? I mean...this plan isn't suggesting that every team will be off on every Thursday (or something like that) is it?

Only some select national TV games will be played on Monday involving a few teams who would then get Thursday off. All the other clubs would be off Monday.

28 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Only some select national TV games will be played on Monday involving a few teams who would then get Thursday off. All the other clubs would be off Monday.

So the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, and Cubs will be playing a lot of Monday games.

33 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

So the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, and Cubs will be playing a lot of Monday games.

More than likely.

Not a fan of less baseball.

Do fans really want fewer games?

From a old guy who counts on seeing Sox most every day of summer, I vote no to 154.

Its interwoven into the fabric of summer...watching is optional for those who tire of too much Sox baseball.