One change I'd love to see enacted, although it's not feasible, is make ballpark dimensions uniform. Only sport there is that the playing field isn't uniform.

 

To me that's part of the charm of the game. They already have minimum dimensions. As long as those are satisfied I don't see why you'd want cookie cutter playing fields. Can you imagine if they brought the fences at Coors field in to match the uniform dimensions?

 

It's a moot point anyway because no way could they retro-fit the stadiums and adjust the heights of the walls in a lot of them.

You wouldn't have to take it down. It could be moved.

 

How would everything be uniform then? If you moved it back 30-40 feet to make it match other stadiums that would make it almost impossible to hit a homer over a lot of it. If you're going to make it uniform wouldn't the fence heights need to be the same as well?

I hope they enact a pitch clock. That will really help the speed of the game. I think the did it in Arozona Fall ball this year and games were significantly less

 

I'm not a fan of anything that "speeds up the game". Not necessary, IMO.

I'm not a fan of anything that "speeds up the game". Not necessary, IMO.

 

There is no need for a pitcher to wait 30-45 seconds in between pitches

How would everything be uniform then? If you moved it back 30-40 feet to make it match other stadiums that would make it almost impossible to hit a homer over a lot of it. If you're going to make it uniform wouldn't the fence heights need to be the same as well?

 

Ideally yes. I'd be all for that, but it'll never happen. The whole "it's a historic part of the game" argument for things just doesn't hold any weight to me.

There is no need for a pitcher to wait 30-45 seconds in between pitches

 

If it's part of their process, sure there is.

 

I don't get people complaining about the length of games. If it bothers people so much, they don't have to watch. :idunno:

There is no need for a pitcher to wait 30-45 seconds in between pitches

 

The slowest pitcher in 2010 threw a pitch every 25.9 seconds. Average pace of game was 21.5 seconds. No way a pitch clock is implemented below 30 seconds. The pace is fine. I know most starting pitchers shoot for 18-19 seconds between pitches. Relievers are a different story.

There is no need for a pitcher to wait 30-45 seconds in between pitches

 

Sure is...beer guys can sell more beer. Johnny Cueto sure hurts beer sales with as quick as he gets through games sometimes. Combine that with a Reds offense that didn't get hits, costs MJ lots of money last year haha!

If it's part of their process, sure there is.

 

I don't get people complaining about the length of games. If it bothers people so much, they don't have to watch. :idunno:

They are not watching, that is why baseball is trying to find ways to improve the sport. I am not sure the problem is length of the game as it is the pace of the sport. Something feels wrong about a clock though...

They are not watching, that is why baseball is trying to find ways to improve the sport. I am not sure the problem is length of the game as it is the pace of the sport.

 

I get it but you can't force the action. How long is it between plays in the NFL? Is there much of a difference between a snap every 20 seconds and a pitch every 20 seconds?

 

Again, I know not every pitch creates "action" according to the average viewer but it's still necessary.

 

Furthermore, while that rush up the middle for no gain is part of the game, to potentially set up something later, the same is true for each pitch. While sometimes that pitch is viewed to be much more insignificant than that no gain rush.

I get it but you can't force the action. How long is it between plays in the NFL? Is there much of a difference between a snap every 20 seconds and a pitch every 20 seconds?

 

Again, I know not every pitch creates "action" according to the average viewer but it's still necessary.

The NFL just lends itself to better commentary and replay in between their "action." It is more of a tv experience they need to improve upon, imo. You can only break down a ball low and away so many times. I concur you can't compromise the sport by forcing too much action.

The NFL just lends itself to better commentary and replay in between their "action." It is more of a tv experience they need to improve upon, imo. You can only break down a ball low and away so many times.

 

Right. Which was my initial point. You can't force the action. Baseball is what it is. Take it or leave it.

Right. Which was my initial point. You can't force the action. Baseball is what it is. Take it or leave it.

 

The question is, can you create more action by tweaks (mound height, shift restrictions etc.)? Forcing it via a shot clock probably is not wise, but Manfred's idea is more along the lines of generating more scenarios where action can occur. Interesting thought.

The question is, can you create more action by tweaks (mound height, shift restrictions etc.)? Forcing it via a shot clock probably is not wise, but Manfred's idea is more along the lines of generating more scenarios where action can occur. Interesting thought.

 

Personally, I would adjust the mound height first. You can't push it back due to arm issue's. Restricting coaches strategy and willingness to take risk is a bad idea, IMO.

 

And I think we agree that a pitch clock is not the way to increase action, just get the game over quicker.

Where they were trying the pitch clock, what was the penalty for not throwing it in time? A ball?

 

I have found that pitchers like to get with it. The routines of batters is more of an annoyance to me. If anything put a clock on them to be back in the box ready to go. Staring in to the stands, readjusting their gloves, and rubbing their thighs in between each pitch gets old.