ELItorial: For the sake of the game, keep the leagues
I do not consider myself an intractable baseball purist.
In my relatively brief 12-year tenure as a baseball fanatic, I have
witnessed and even come to like several radical changes to the fabric of the
game, from expansion, to the wild card playoff system, to interleague play. But
the latest plan concocted by team owners--rearranging teams into divisions
based solely on geography, virtually obliterating the National and American
leagues--will destroy an important and irreplacable part of the game.
One of the few elements of baseball that has remained intact throughout the
history of the sport is its division into two distinct and identifiable
groupings of teams. The differences in style of play in these leagues is one of
the things that gives baseball its unique charm.
Of course, similar disparities in style exist in all major professional
sports. In the National Football League the AFC has always been associated with
a more open, offensive approach to the game, while the NFC has relied on more
rugged defense and offensive efficiency. In the National Basketball
Association, the Western Conference games produce final scores of 100 or more,
while Eastern Conference wars are lucky to even break 80.
Baseball's two leagues are even more sharply delineated than these. Both the
NFL and the NBA conferences have a common set of rules and a group of referees
that enforces these rules in both conferences. Interconference matchups have
been a standard element in both leagues since their inception, and as a result,
a game between the New York Knicks and the Houston Rockets does not carry any
particularly special meaning.
In baseball, the two leagues operate under two completely different sets of
guidelines both written and unwritten, and these rules are maintained by two
distinct sets of umpires who keep the differences very much intact. Thus we
have the strong pitching, defense, and strategy of the Senior Circuit while the
smaller strike zones, designated hitters, and high scoring affairs of the
current American League play.
As is true for all of the recent changes to our National Pastime, the radical
realignment plan is motivated by a desire for greater revenue in the short
term. Consider the addition of the wild card playoff teams and the advent of
interleague play as examples.
When ownership voted to implement the wild card system in determining playoff
games, it was sharply criticized in many circles for simply being greedy and
wanting to add to the phenomenal revenue potential of the post-season contests.
Unlike the current realignment proposal, however, in this instance the actual
benefit to the sport was clear: more playoff teams equaled far greater and more
sustainable fan interest at a time when baseball was indeed struggling for
public support. The experiment has worked very well thus far, as evidenced by
the excitement generated by the New York Yankees and the Seattle Mariners in
1995.
The institution of interleague play this season has also been a financial boon
for the owners, as ticket sales have been markedly higher on average for
interleague competition. The games were such a success because they were such a
novelty. It was exciting for fans to be a part of history as the two teams
from New York or the two teams from Chicago squared off for the first time
ever, and that excitement turned into revenue.
Though another tradition was trampled, it was odd how excitedly I watched as
the Mets faced the Yankees. Were the Yankees and Mets to play 15 games each
year, as the new plan would allow, I would soon not view a contest against the
Yanks any differently than I now view one against the Mets' current National
League rivals, the Atlanta Braves and the Florida Marlins.
The idea of radical realignment may be somewhat intriguing from the
perspective of creating new rivalries, but this is not a sufficient
justification to completely discard the last remnant of baseball tradition.
Even the calendar play phenomenon was not nearly as successful in the small
markets such as Minnesota--there is no reason to believe that a drastic
reshuffling of the two leagues would generate any different response there.
Once the initial excitement and quirkiness dissipates, baseball will be left
with two nondescript entities where the National and American leagues once
stood. I hope the owners realize that baseball is, at its core, a sport built
on history and tradition, and there is a point when the quest for revenue must
be put on hold for the preservation of the spirit of the game.
Back to Sports...
|