I do not like that the schedule becomes "un-balanced". At the end each team in the division has played different teams.

 

But I understand attendance spikes like 8% for those games so the fans must like it.

I'd be curious to see the attendance figures normalized by subtracting the rivalry games, and see what the difference is then.

I like it for the fact that you get to see matchups that you would probably never see (Frank Thomas against Kevin Millwood or Mark Buehrle against Chipper Jones) and the six games against the Cubs are great. The unbalanced thing doesn't bother me either since they still get to play 19 games a season against the division foes which is how it should be.

I'd be curious to see the attendance figures normalized by subtracting the rivalry games, and see what the difference is then.

I'd bet they are then about the same but the interleague games are being compared to inner league play which includes equally compelling rivalries. If you take out the Sox v. Cubs series you should also take out Sox vs. Twins for example. Or Yankees-Mets take out Yankees Bo Sox.

 

Or am I way off base?

I like it. It bothers me how people who don't like it point out the Brewers-Angels and D-Rays-Giants as bad series. Basically these people would complain no matter who those teams are playing. The bad series in interleague play is a lot like any bad series during the year. It is different and as mentioned the attendance is huge.

What's there not to like?

 

A better poll question should be "Should ML baseball stop using juiced baseballs, get super-tough on performance-enhancing drugs, force teams to expand park dimensions to at least 340-380-410, raise the mound and program the Questec system so the strike-zone is to where it was 20 years ago"

Its good for the fans, and the game. Last year I went to the SF game and Bonds hit a HR. You dont get to see that often at U.S. Cellular, so I enjoyed it. Just went tuesday and saw the Phillies, and am going Saturday to see the Braves. I have never seen Chipper, Andruw or Smotlz before, and now  I can(well not Smotlz). Interleauge is a good change of pace.

That's another point. Isn't interleague more interesting for cities with one team? Theoretically, Chicagoans can see NL teams just by buying a ticket to the Wrigley Urinal. Maybe for cities like Houston, interleague is more relevant?

That doesnt have anything to do with it. Its about that team playing the Sox, and seeing players you cant normally see playing the Sox.Seeing Bonds at Wrigley wouldnt do much for me, beucase I dont care what he does against the Cubs, and its alot more normal to see him playing the Cubs than it is the Sox.

I agree with 100%

 

I'm just thinking A-Rod never travels to Houston or St. Louis for a game, for those fans it's their only chance. Fans in Chicago, New York, I guess San Francisco, and LA, all have an opportunity to see any superstar they want, if they are willing to go to the "other teams" field.

 

You are right, I would rather see Buerhle strike out Bonds 4 times than Prior.

don't care just as long as we play...

I like the regional games. Sox-Cubs, Yanks-Mets, Giants-A's, etc.

I like interleague play. Gives fans a chance to see players that they wouldn't be able to see without it. Plus, we get the chance to kick the Cubs ass every year.

I like interleague play.  Gives fans a chance to see players that they wouldn't be able to see without it.  Plus,  we get the chance to kick the Cubs ass every year.

...and vice versa ;o

What's there not to like?

 

A better poll question should be "Should ML baseball stop using juiced baseballs,  get super-tough on performance-enhancing drugs, force teams to expand park dimensions to at least 340-380-410, raise the mound and program the Questec system so the strike-zone is to where it was 20 years ago"

Start your own poll!

I liked it at first, now it has grown old for me. This was the subject of a lively debate at a Memorial Day barbeque.