What do you consider to be the last "pure" baseball season (in regards to pennant/division

Estil

Which of these would you consider to be the last "pure" baseball season, and why?

1953: The following year the first team since 1902 a team has moved (St. Louis Browns become Baltimore Orioles)

1960: The year before the AL expands to ten teams and starts the now standard 162 game season (with the NL following suit a year afterward).

1968: The year before both leagues expand to twelve teams and split into two divisions.

1993: The year before both leagues change over to three divisions plus wild card.

My vote would have to go to 1993, since that was the last year baseball had pure pennant/division races. I used to love the wild card when it first came out, but now I kinda miss the days of pure pennant/division races. Wild cards may be great for NBA or NHL, but now I think the lack of wild cards are what gave MLB its charm in the first place.

dallasactuary

1993. The first time a wild card won the WS was truly a dark day for baseball.

Second on the abomination list is 1997, when interleague play began.

stevek

Professional sports is first and foremost all about the money. Always has been, always will be. When accepting that for what it is, the other stuff doesn't bother me. A "pure" baseball season is a myth which never existed.

I like the interleague play - a lot. I don't mind the playoff formats at all. If I was king of the world, I would make one change and that would be to eliminate the DH. Other than that, I say let's root for the Phillies to win another World Series.

Connecticoin

Hard to tell. What year did the steroid-era begin?

Goot

I say the season before ESPN or any network gave a crap about the Little League World Series.

Jersey

I think it was better before the advent of divisions and playoffs (yes, I'm old enough to remember that).

Connecticoin

I think 8 teams is about right. With only 4 (or 2 in ancient times), over three fourths of the league is out of it by early September. Not much fun for most fans. Still, with 8 teams, making the playoffs is meaningful in MLB, unlike the NBA and NHL, which should cut down to 12.

Estil

I guess they could do what Bob Costas suggested and move the 'Stros to the AL (to make six three team divisions) and have only the division winners going to the playoffs with no wild cards (obviously the top seed would get the bye).

Skinpinch

If it is in terms of finding the purest champion? THen, it became impure when they decided to have teams play 132(or 154, or 162) games, and then after all those games, have two teams play a measely 7 or 9 games to decided the champion.


As for everything else along the lines of being traditional etc.., as Steve said, there is no such thing. If fans want to keep the game 'pure' and have it as it once was, then they should be hawking MLB executives to have the pitchers throw underhand again.

Basically pureness equates to what the game was when you were first immersed in it, so it is different for everyone.

Estil

<< <i>1993. The first time a wild card won the WS was truly a dark day for baseball.

Second on the abomination list is 1997, when interleague play began. >>



I think that was 1997 with the Marlins. I remember the media was making a big fuss about it and how they didn't really deserve to be in the World Series for that reason. Mike Hargrove of the Indians took the criticism to stride (the media also thought Baltimore deserved to go more), but OMG, you should've seen Jim Leyland; he was absoultely PISSED at that press conference. And can you blame him; the Marlins got to the World Series under the current rules that everyone else that season followed, and won, fair and square, whether you're pro or anti-wild card.

And if the media was that adamant about wild cards not deserving to advance to the Series, well they should've thought about that before making the damn wild card!! Do what Bob Costas suggested instead and just have the three division champs go to the playoffs with the one with the best record getting a bye and home field advantage in the LCS. Then have the two remaining division champs compete in a best-of-seven series with the "two seed" getting home field advantage there. This means you now have six pure division races, and you still are compeled to go for the best record possible as it is much easier (deservedly so) for the division champ with the first best record to get to the World Series than the second and especially the third place division winner.

I also thought it was hypocritical of the media when the 1997 Denver Broncos won the Super Bowl as a wild card, yet nobody uttered a peep about that fact.

bigfische

<< <i>1993. The first time a wild card won the WS was truly a dark day for baseball.

Second on the abomination list is 1997, when interleague play began. >>





amen to that

F1ferrari

I've never been a fan of interleague play. I know it only happens a few times per year, but to me it still undermines the 'league' status. Maybe I'm a little slow in the learning process, but I've always had trouble with NFL and NHL divisions/leagues since they play 'interleague' schedules all season. Baseball was different, the AL and the NL teams kept to themselves, until time to decide a champion. That's a 'pure' season to me.

BTW, as far as I can tell the move from St Louis to Baltimore was one of only 2 times in MLB history that a team moved east. The other was Milwaukee to Atlanta in 1966. If I've missed another, I'd like to know.

Estil

You certainly couldn't blame the St. Louis Browns for moving to Baltimore, as the Browns were the laughing stock of baseball for most of their existence (1944 being the exception of course).

RipublicaninMass

Professional sports is first and foremost all about the money. Always has been,

Do you mean $$$ for th eplayers or the owners? Back in the 50's players needed winter jobs. Now it is just a disgrace how much we pay these players, who could care less about playing. If their "tummy hurts" they sit out.

BobaFett72

I like the wildcard and the extra round of playoffs.
I do think they should lose 8 regular season games.

stitzen

This whole thread reminds me that the good ole days weren't that good.

How about when the Giants won 103 games and didn't make the playoffs - because the Braves won 104? I will say that interleague play does seem to be a bit unsavory, but that to me doesn't sway the playoff races that much. Having the wild card gives many more teams a shot and their fans hopes of a playoff run.

frankhardy

I am as much for tradition as anybody, but really like the way that the divisions are set up with the wild cards. I think it brings a lot of exitement to the regular season. I do, however, wish that they would do away with the interleague play and the DH.

rube26105

probably the 1st year mlb was ever played lol , before tv and drugs came around, when they got paid next to nothing and just wanted to play the game,they was happy to have a pair of shoes and something to eat back then!! sory! guess this one is not on your list, but its the thruth,they played back in the beginning just for the game, now they play for the big biz mackine!

bigdcards

I consider the end of segregation to be the biggest dividing point in baseball history. If pure baseball ends at the DH or inter-league but includes the years of segregation, then pure baseball is pretty meaningless to me.

Estil

<< <i>Professional sports is first and foremost all about the money. Always has been,

Do you mean $$$ for th eplayers or the owners? Back in the 50's players needed winter jobs. Now it is just a disgrace how much we pay these players, who could care less about playing. If their "tummy hurts" they sit out. >>



I disagree that the players "couldn't care less about playing"; I don't think it's possible to even have a CHANCE at making the majors w/o dedicating years and years of hard work, practice, and simple love of the game without it. And how come no one considers it a "disgrace" how much we pay actors, musicians, and other entertainers who make just as much (if not more!) than superstar athletes, and no one gives it a second thought. Come to think of it, how about all those muti-millionare CEOs who get to live in the lap of luxury and splendor at the expense of their employees that must struggle from paycheck to paycheck just to make ends meet (not all companies mind you, but some are definetly like that). Where's the outrage there?

rube26105

very tru,there were great players in the negro leagues that never got any recognition harldy what so ever,you know they sure didnt make hardly any money at it-although some did make it to the hall of fame.jackie broke the barrier in baseball,marion motley broke it in football
randy
p.s very good point estil, actors are paid rediculous sums of money for a movie-then they think they can get on tv and everyone has to be inagreement with everything they say,like about the war,lol, since when has a recent actor joined the service to know anything about war,zero.pat tillman, on the other hand, left football and died for what he though was the right thing to do,i dont see to many actors like charlie sheen/george clooney/or sean penn signing up, look at all of em from ww2-jimmy stewart/lee marvin/captain kangaroo/tons of em!!heck, even jimi hendrix was in the 101st airborne!before nam till he broke his ankle on a jump, i did't see any acotors or ceos ready to sacrifce it alll when i was in nam lol-,theyre not about to leave their hollywood mansions or wall street to do anything except to make more $ for them and less for the working man!
randy