AH>Interleague play was a bad idea, and is nothing but a stupid gimmick 
wners
AH>thought would improve attendance.  Right - other than intracity rivalries,
AH>who really cares?  Expos vs. Tigers,  Astros vs. Brewers, etc. - big deal.
AH>Teams that are drawing well draw, teams that aren't don't, regardless of
AH>opponent.  Hopefully, interleague play will die a quick, unlamented death.
     I can see you are one of those people not happy with this
change.  But interleague play probably will last as long it does bring
fans back to the ball parks.  Even if some teams don't do well with fan
attendance it's still a major success for the teams that do bring in
bigger crowds.  Another thing here is that your not used to the change,
you will get used to it.  Exspecially if MLB makes interleague play
stick around for a long period of time.  I am enjoying the interleague
play so far and it's good for baseball.  I think change is needed if
baseball is ever going to survive so i am glad they did it.  Baseball
needs change to apply to the new generation of fans.  And as for those
that not like this change have to live with it.  Since it really doesn't
make baseball worse.  In fact, i think it's getting MLB more attention
since the long ago strike.
AH>If owners want the intracity rivalries, re-align the leagues somehow.
AH>Perhaps make the American League consist of eastern teams, and
AH>the NL of western teams, or the AL of northern teams and the NL
AH>of southern teams.  Both teams in a city will be in the same league.
AH>No interleague play except for the world series.
     Well that could work, but right now people are talking about
getting rid of the NL and AL.  Just have it east versus west.  Same idea
above.  But i dunno, it doesn't bother me with interleague play and i
think it's making baseball a bit more interesting again.
AH>--- Msged 4.10
---
 þ OLX 2.2 TD þ MSI - Redefining Telecommunications In '93
---------------