+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: The Sports Bar (/forum-531.html)
+----- Forum: Pro Sports (/forum-516.html)
+----- Thread: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? (/thread-1012528.html)
MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - Fighting Muskie - 07-15-2025 06:03 PM
Presuming MLB goes to 32 and places one expansion team in the South (Charlotte or Nashville) and one in the West (Portland or Salt Lake City) this is how I see the leagues aligning. To make things fit, I had to swap 2 of the 90s expansion teams (COL & TB) but I think it makes things a lot cleaner.
AL East: NYY, TOR, BOS, BAL
AL North: CLE, DET, CWS, MIN
AL South: KC, COL*, TEX, HOU
AL West: SEA, LAA, LV, (SLC/POR)
NL East: NYM, PHI, WAS, PIT
NL North: CIN, CHC, MIL, STL
NL South: ATL, MIA, TB*, (NVL/CLT)
NL West: LAD, ARZ, SF, SD
However, if MLB sees 32 as a brief stop between 30 and 34/36, it might make sense to leave the existing division structure largely intact and just add the 2 expansion teams to the existing ones with no significant changes.
As cash hungry as MLB is, I could see them giving the impression that they are only adding 2 teams, only to decide to take more and pocket the expansion fees.
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - BePcr07 - 07-15-2025 07:20 PM
I posted for 32 in a different thread with this alignment:
American League
Central: Houston, Kansas City, Minnesota, Texas
East: Baltimore, Boston, New York, Tampa Bay
North: Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Toronto
West: Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Seattle, Utah
National League
Central: Chicago, Colorado, Milwaukee, St. Louis
East: Atlanta, Miami, Nashville, Washington
North: Cincinnati, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh
West: Arizona, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - PirateTreasureNC - 07-15-2025 09:14 PM
I am feeling sure that NC will make a hard push for a team and most likely out of Raleigh.
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - chargeradio - 07-16-2025 07:25 PM
(07-15-2025 06:03 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: As cash hungry as MLB is, I could see them giving the impression that they are only adding 2 teams, only to decide to take more and pocket the expansion fees.MLB has a lot on their plate - a potential labor stoppage; new stadiums for the Athletics, Rays, White Sox, and possibly others; and a very challenging media rights landscape.
I think if MLB can get past those, 32 will happen. I actually think Portland and Utah should happen at the same time, then come back for an eastern expansion, or vice versa. Portland and Utah seem to be the farthest along in terms of ownership groups, stadium site, and public subsidies. There are some logistical advantages to having an even number of teams in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones, especially with regards to MLB's relationship with MiLB.
The more interesting question might be would MLB expand to Orlando if the Rays stay in Tampa Bay? The Orlando market is becoming quite large in its own right.
NL West: Portland*, LA Dodgers, San Francisco, San Diego, Arizona, Colorado
NL Central: Chicago Cubs, Milwaukee, Saint Louis, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Austin*
NL East: Atlanta, Miami, New York Mets, Washington, Philadelphia, (Montreal/Orlando)*
AL West: Seattle, LA Angels, Las Vegas, Utah*, Houston, Texas
AL Central: Kansas City, Minnesota, Chicago White Sox, Cleveland, Detroit, Nashville*
AL East: (Charlotte/Raleigh)*, Tampa Bay, Baltimore, Boston, New York Yankees, Toronto
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - Nerdlinger - 07-17-2025 10:47 AM
MLB has been fairly conservative about expansion historically, often compelled to add teams primarily due to the threat of legal actions against the league. Of the Big 4 leagues, the MLB has spent the most time since expanding, last adding Arizona and Tampa Bay in 1998. This is also by far the longest time in the MLB Expansion Era between expanding.
As the league has stated on many occasions, stadium issues of existing teams, mainly the Athletics and Rays, need to be resolved before they will consider expansion. Though the Rays don't currently have plans for a new stadium, the A's are on track for a new stadium in Las Vegas in 2028. Hopefully, the Rays' stadium situation will be resolved by then, at which point we could indeed see an expansion to 32. Existing teams will very much welcome the exorbitant expansion fees they'll be able to charge the new franchise owners.
MLB members are currently split into 14 Eastern Time Zone and 16 Central/Mountain/Pacific Time Zone teams. I believe that both expansion teams should thus be placed in or close to the Eastern TZ. Montreal deserves another chance given how MLB screwed them over, and a Southern team in North Carolina (Charlotte or Raleigh) or Nashville makes good sense.
AL Atlantic: Baltimore Orioles, Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees, Tampa Bay Rays
AL East: Cleveland Guardians, Detroit Tigers, Montreal Expos*, Toronto Blue Jays
AL Central: Chicago White Sox, Kansas City Royals, Minnesota Twins, Texas Rangers
AL West: Arizona Diamondbacks, Las Vegas Athletics, Los Angeles Angels, Seattle Mariners
NL Atlantic: Miami Marlins, New York Mets, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates
NL East: Atlanta Braves, Carolina Cougars*, Cincinnati Reds, Washington Nationals
NL Central: Chicago Cubs, Houston Astros, Milwaukee Brewers, St. Louis Cardinals
NL West: Colorado Rockies, Los Angeles Dodgers, San Diego Padres, San Francisco Giants
(Note that I've moved Arizona to the AL and Houston back to the NL for geographic reasons.)
Expanding beyond 32 to either 34 or 36 seems a possibility that's very far off. If/when they do, I would hope that they don't settle on 34 but skip right to 36. You can't get a balanced alignment with 34 unless you just have two 17-team groups. My idea of the alignment for 36 is fairly similar to chargeradio's:
AL East: Baltimore Orioles, Boston Red Sox, Montreal Expos, New York Yankees, Tampa Bay Rays, Toronto Blue Jays
AL Central: Chicago White Sox, Cleveland Guardians, Detroit Tigers, Kansas City Royals, Minnesota Twins, Texas Rangers
AL West: Arizona Diamondbacks, Austin/San Antonio*, Las Vegas Athletics, Los Angeles Angels, Portland Beavers*, Seattle Mariners
NL East: Carolina Cougars, Miami Marlins, New York Mets, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates, Washington Nationals
NL Central: Atlanta Braves, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati Reds, Milwaukee Brewers, Nashville Stars*, St. Louis Cardinals
NL West: Colorado Rockies, Houston Astros, Los Angeles Dodgers, San Diego Padres, San Francisco Giants, Utah Raptors*
I'd also hope that given the lack of difference in the rules between the two leagues, MLB might consider a geographic realignment by then, like so:
AL North: Boston Red Sox, Montreal Expos, New York Mets, New York Yankees, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates
AL South: Atlanta Braves, Baltimore Orioles, Carolina Cougars, Miami Marlins, Tampa Bay Rays, Washington Nationals
AL West: Cleveland Guardians, Cincinnati Reds, Detroit Tigers, Indianapolis Bulldogs*, Nashville Stars*, Toronto Blue Jays
NL North: Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox, Kansas City Royals, Milwaukee Brewers, Minnesota Twins, St. Louis Cardinals
NL South: Arizona Diamondbacks, Austin/San Antonio*, Colorado Rockies, Houston Astros, Las Vegas Athletics, Texas Rangers
NL West: Los Angeles Angels, Los Angeles Dodgers, Portland Beavers*, San Diego Padres, San Francisco Giants, Seattle Mariners
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - Fighting Muskie - 07-19-2025 12:46 PM
I don’t think the Texas teams are thrilled about playing in the Pacific time zone. I hope that any future reorganization attempts to bring them with other Central Time team. My proposed AL South (although Central is probably a better geographic designation) would get them out of Pacific Time
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - Nerdlinger - 07-19-2025 02:11 PM
(07-19-2025 12:46 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I don’t think the Texas teams are thrilled about playing in the Pacific time zone. I hope that any future reorganization attempts to bring them with other Central Time team. My proposed AL South (although Central is probably a better geographic designation) would get them out of Pacific Time
I too placed the Texas teams with the other Central TZ teams in my 32-team alignment. When you go to 36, though, with three 6-team divisions in each league, even having 3 expansion teams in Texas or west means at least one of the Astros or Rangers would have to be in a West Division. Unless you want to screw over someone even farther east, like the Nashville expansion team.
Another option of course (besides full geographic realignment), would be two 5-team and two 4-team divisions per league, but that's such an inefficient alignment when you have 36 teams.
Here's an alternate geographic realignment with two 9-team divisions per league:
AL East: Boston Red Sox, Miami Marlins, Montreal Expos*, New York Mets, New York Yankees, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates, Tampa Bay Rays, Toronto Blue Jays
AL West: Atlanta Braves, Baltimore Orioles, Carolina Cougars*, Cincinnati Reds, Cleveland Guardians, Detroit Tigers, Indianapolis Bulldogs*, Nashville Stars*, Washington Nationals
NL East: Austin/San Antonio*, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox, Houston Astros, Kansas City Royals, Milwaukee Brewers, Minnesota Twins, St. Louis Cardinals, Texas Rangers
NL West: Arizona Diamondbacks, Colorado Rockies, Las Vegas Athletics, Los Angeles Angels, Los Angeles Dodgers, Portland Beavers*, San Diego Padres, San Francisco Giants, Seattle Mariners
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - chargeradio - 07-19-2025 02:42 PM
(07-19-2025 12:46 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: I don’t think the Texas teams are thrilled about playing in the Pacific time zone. I hope that any future reorganization attempts to bring them with other Central Time team. My proposed AL South (although Central is probably a better geographic designation) would get them out of Pacific Time
It would break symmetry, but another option at 36 teams would be to go to four divisions:
NL West: Portland*, LA Dodgers, San Francisco, San Diego, Arizona
NL North: Chicago Cubs, Milwaukee, Saint Louis, Colorado
NL South: Atlanta, Miami, Austin*, Washington
NL East: New York Mets, Philadelphia, (Montreal/Orlando)*, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati
AL West: Seattle, LA Angels, Las Vegas, Utah*
AL South: Houston, Texas, Nashville*, Tampa Bay, (Charlotte/Raleigh)*
AL North: Kansas City, Minnesota, Chicago White Sox, Cleveland, Detroit
AL East: Baltimore, Boston, New York Yankees, Toronto
I guess if MLB ever wanted to get to 40, Colorado could move to the AL West go square off both West divisions at five teams.
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - Nerdlinger - 07-19-2025 03:31 PM
Those South Divisions cover a lot of ground. That might work with the NFL, but with MLB travel matters a lot more. Also, if possible I try to keep the Florida teams with the Northeast teams to help keep MLB more viable in a state full of snowbirds.
AL Atlantic: Baltimore, Boston, New York, Tampa Bay
AL East: Cleveland, Detroit, Montreal*, Toronto
AL Central: Austin/San Antonio*, Chicago, Kansas City, Minnesota, Texas
AL West: Arizona, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Portland*, Seattle
NL Atlantic: Miami, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh
NL East: Atlanta, Carolina*, Cincinnati, Washington
NL Central: Chicago, Houston, Milwaukee, Nashville*, St. Louis
NL West: Colorado, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Utah*
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - Fighting Muskie - 07-20-2025 03:01 PM
Honestly if we go to 36, 6 divisions of 6 make the most sense. Portland, SLC, Nashville, and Charlotte all make sense. Beyond that, it gets a little hazy as to where the best place to put teams are.
RE: MLB at 32; would they dare go to 34 or 36? - BePcr07 - 07-22-2025 01:02 AM
(07-20-2025 03:01 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: Honestly if we go to 36, 6 divisions of 6 make the most sense. Portland, SLC, Nashville, and Charlotte all make sense. Beyond that, it gets a little hazy as to where the best place to put teams are.
I like the idea of 32 and 36. 34 is just a wonky number unless you have zero problem with either uneven divisions within the leagues or uneven leagues. When the 30-team setup was 16/14, it just "felt" wrong. I've done 32 (Utah and Nashville) a few times but at 36, I'd have those two plus Carolina, Portland, Montreal, and Indianapolis. MLB only has 1 team in a city where its the only Big 4 team: San Diego. So, there's not much precedence of having an MLB team in a non-occupied city.
AL
Central: Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Minnesota
East: Carolina, Baltimore, Boston, New York, Tampa Bay, Toronto
West: Houston, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Seattle, Texas, Utah
NL
Central: Chicago, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Nashville, Pittsburgh, St. Louis
East: Atlanta, Miami, Montreal, New York, Philadelphia, Washington
West: Arizona, Colorado, Los Angeles, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco