MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred Has Some Terrible Ideas For Future Of Baseball

Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred has made a number of major changes to the sport of baseball during his tenure. 

Despite initially facing heavy opposition, most of those changes have been well received over time. The pitch clock was viewed as an abomination, yet has rapidly sped up game times and most importantly, made games feel faster. It's become such an afterthought that in most broadcasts, it's barely noticeable. 

The larger bases have increased stolen base attempts and stolen bases significantly from previous seasons. Limits on mound visits have tamped down on time-wasting, as have the limits on timeouts per plate appearance. Even the extra innings ghost, "Manfred," runner, has become less controversial. 

That said, he's also made a number of remarkably poor statements and explanations for some of his less successful decisions. He pulled the All-Star Game from Atlanta in 2021 because of misinformation and inaccurate statements from Stacey Abrams and then-President Joe Biden about Georgia's voting bill. Then never faced a serious question about it, because sportswriters are overwhelmingly liberal and supported the misinformation. 

In 2019 and 2020, when the stunning news broke that the 2017 Houston Astros had been cheating by stealing signs with an elaborate, electronic system, he completely mishandled it. Instead of punishing the players, he gave them immunity. Then, when fans said he should strip the Astros of their World Series, he referred to the trophy as a "piece of metal," downplaying the importance of it to avoid risking the wrath of one of his bosses. 

Well, his latest statements on the future of baseball might somehow be even worse than that.

Commissioner of Major League Baseball Robert D. Manfred Jr. (Photo by Daniel Shirey/MLB Photos via Getty Images)

Manfred Has Some Awful Ideas For MLB's Future

In a new interview with WFAN’s Chris Carton and Chris McMonigle, Manfred said they've discussed a number of terrible ideas to adjust the league's 162-game schedule. 

"We’ve talked about split seasons. We’ve talked about in-season tournaments," Manfred explained. "We do understand that 162 (games) is a long pull. I think the difficulty to accomplish those sort of in-season events, you almost inevitably start talking about fewer regular-season games."

But, uh, why do we need in-season events? Has the NBA Cup been a success? Because anecdotally, it seems like there's minimal interest. Yes, the NBA Cup Final has gotten higher television ratings than your average regular season NBA game, but it's far below what an actual Finals game would draw. For example, the 2025 NBA Cup Final drew just over three million viewers, compared to the NBA Finals average of 10.27 million. That's 30% of the viewership.

So why does MLB want to copy that model with an "in-season tournament?" 

Having "split seasons," a first half and second half, is also unnecessary. The sport's regular season is already extremely long, from late March to essentially October. If there's an extended break in the middle, it would drag out even longer. Though fewer regular season games might alleviate that somewhat.

Speaking of fewer regular season games, one other change that might automatically lead to that is divisional and geographic realignment. Such realignment would come as a result of expansion. Expansion would either make for uneven distribution of teams, meaning the league would need to be reconfigured. Maybe eight divisions of four teams, or four divisions of eight teams. Or two of 16, and so on. There are plenty of competing theories and plans for how to achieve that. 

When asked about expansion and how to handle it with two-team markets like Chicago, LA, and New York, Manfred said he'd separate them. 

"I think you would try to keep the two-team cities separate," Manfred said. "That would be my thinking."

When you're talking about geographic realignment, how do you keep two-city teams separate? Yes, they're already separated in the current format, but the current format isn't as narrow as the ones the league is discussing. 

Manfred also said realignment around geography would help "alleviate" some travel issues.

"You would realign, you would do it along geographic lines, which would alleviate — could alleviate — a ton of the travel burden that’s on players. Remember, we ask our players (to play) 162 times in 186 days. … You can eliminate a lot of that travel and make it less burdensome, which would be a great thing in terms of player health and safety."

That's all true, and that's where reducing the number of regular season games could help. But if you're geographically realigning, how do you separate the two teams in the LA area, for example? Geographic realignment would depend on where expansion teams are located. But it's hard to see how it works without putting the same city in the same division. 

Regardless, if there's a reason to adjust schedules, it's to cut down on travel and wear and tear, not to add a pointless in-season tournament. The game has a ton of momentum. Just leave well enough alone.