Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: trumandogz
This is by no means an excuse for the juiced players but in time baseball will have to address the issue of the 162 game season.

That season was instituted long before there was television broadcasts that could allow millions to see individual games. Would anyone really notice if the schedule were cut in half? How many times is it necessary for the Yankees to play the Redsox each season?

10 posted on 12/13/2007 10:35:02 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: Paleo Conservative

Personally, I love the 162 game season. It is a true test of a team’s durribility and I like to be able to follow the standing throughout the season.

But, players are humans and I understand that they are not working in a coal mine and are paid very well. But the season in brutal.

AS for me, I would love a 20 million dollar contract to play ball and would most likely do Roids to keep me in the game.


14 posted on 12/13/2007 10:42:57 AM PST by trumandogz (Hunter Thompson 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Paleo Conservative; trumandogz
in time baseball will have to address the issue of the 162 game season.

Yeah, they should go back to the 154-game season that worked just fine from 1904 until 1961. That schedule seemed to work out well for Ruth, Gehrig, Williams, Ott, DiMaggio, Musial, and a whole lot of other Hall-of-Famers.

Also, back then there was only ONE playoff series - - the World Series. Nowadays it's possible that a team could play an additional 11 to 19 games beyond the regular season rather than just 4 to 7 games.

16 posted on 12/13/2007 10:52:38 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson