FIVE...changes I'd like to see for MLB in 2025, but unlikely will for quite some time

Hopes for changes in television viewing, postponements, and new league rules.

A new year has arrived, and with that comes a wishlist of changes for MLB 2025 and beyond.

Happy New Year, folks.

Of course, a new year for me, and I’m guessing many of you, means it’s getting close to at least start thinking about Opening Day being “only” a few months away. Okay, it’s less than a few months if you count the season’s first official game of the regular season landing on March 18 when the Dodgers and Cubs battle in Tokyo. A bit over a week later, on March 27, Opening Day will have 14 games on the slate. Sadly, if you’re a Rockies or Rays fan, you’ll be left out of the Opening Day fun and have to wait until the 28th before watching those franchises square off in Tampa Bay for their season opener.

Anyway, with plenty of offseason still to go, it’s time for the second episode of FIVE…Today, BFP brings you a list of changes it would like to see at some point in Major League Baseball, even though I understand that at least the odds of the first topic on the list ever happening is an even greater longshot than the Rockies winning a World Series in the next five years.

The list is ordered from 5 to 1, with #5 representing the least likely to happen before the rest. I give #1 a decent chance at coming back to us someday, with numbers 2, 3, and 4 in the “very iffy to somewhat iffy” category. I guess we’ll find out as time goes on. Let’s begin.

5. RETRACTABLE ROOFS ON ALL STADIUMS

I get it. It’s never going to happen. This is more of a dream and prayer. But, my gosh, wouldn’t it be nice if God listened and made this work? Wouldn’t it be nice for fans to know there's no chance the contest will be postponed due to inclement weather as they make their way to the stadium on Opening Day to watch their favorite team take the field on a rainy afternoon?

I think about this often during the year every time I see a canceled game or a lengthy three-hour rain delay after a contest has begun. Name another major American sport that regularly has cancellations due to rain and snow. Sure, it happens in extreme circumstances, even in the NFL at times, but MLB seems to take pride in telling its fans that because of a cancellation, you will now have the wonderful opportunity and experience of coming to tomorrow’s “Traditional doubleheader” or “Day-Night doubleheader” if you act now.

When will the annoyances end that baseball fans have to endure while dealing with the headache of not knowing whether or not the game they bought tickets for “could be” postponed due to severe weather possibly coming? The idea of taking the day off work, loading the family in the car, and for some to drive more than a few hours away, only then to be told upon arrival at the stadium that tonight’s game has been canceled due to a bit of rain, is ridiculous for this day and age. I understand this is how baseball has always been, but it seems odd that every new stadium built in modern times is not designed to include a retractable roof.

Here’s an article I dug up on Steve Cohen in 2023. The Mets owner was curious how much it would cost to add a retractable roof to Citi Field (built in 2009). He was told that it would cost around $800 million to add one to his already built ballpark, but had it been part of the plans when the stadium was being designed two decades prior, the price would have “only” been around $125 million. Obviously, for Cohen, who recently spent nearly $800 million on one player, I doubt that the 125 figure would have been an issue for him. At least he was curious.

Final thought. There were 30 doubleheaders in 2024 from Opening Day to the end of the regular season. How many MLB owners, if they had unlimited funds to spend, do you think would add a retractable roof to their open air stadiums with the thought of the fan’s pleasure and peace of mind before anything else? Yeah, I don’t think too many would either. This is a lost cause. Moving on.

4. END THE IN-GAME INTERVIEWS

“Access.” That’s the word that comes to mind every time I see these unnecessary in-game and on-field interviews with players and managers. How much access do we fans really need while these guys are trying to win a ballgame? I’ve always understood pregame and postgame discussions and questions, but I’ll never get behind this.

It’s more annoying than anything. These interviews often distract fielders when they should be focusing on the game. They certainly distract managers, especially in the playoffs, who are asked questions about their current starting pitcher’s performance and endurance after only two innings. I am shocked that teams have agreed to do this, especially in the postseason, at the frequent rate it is happening now.

How often did Dodgers manager Dave Roberts need to be asked about his in-game strategy on bullpen and starting pitcher usage? And in the NLCS and World Series, he was actually being honest during those interviews about who would likely be coming in to pitch the rest of the game and when. It’s baffling that a manager feels comfortable giving away this information while he’s trying to win.

Finally, why do fans need to know? Not only is most of it irrelevant to us, but the television screen always splits in half so we can watch the interview while the game is going on simultaneously. I don’t need to watch someone open his mouth to hear him speak.

Get rid of this in-game interview nonsense, please.

3. BRING BACK MORE TRADITIONAL STATS WHILE WATCHING GAMES ON TV

Sticking with the ‘watching games on television’ theme. I miss the days of watching baseball with a simplicity that even the average fan understood.

Remember when, not all that long ago, a player walked up to the batter’s box, and his traditional numbers appeared on the screen that most fans understood? Numbers like batting average, home runs, RBI, and maybe a couple of others. These stats gave the viewer a good understanding of how well said player was hitting using relevant numbers that most fans comprehended. These statistics still pop up occasionally, but it feels like we’re now inundated with the new-age theoretical stats, which are good for the front office and analytics guys upstairs but unnecessary for the fan’s viewing pleasure. Things like Barrel percentage and Hard-hit rate, as well as all of that other mind-numbing data that doesn’t clearly show what that batter has actually done to produce his numbers, but rather, what he could be doing in theory.

Many fringe fans of this great sport have often said they find baseball stats confusing. And this was back before all the new stuff like WAR, Spin Rate, etc. Think about what your average fan sees now on television and even on the big screen at the ballpark.

I consider myself a knowledgeable baseball fan who enjoys traditional numbers. But, it’s also gotten to the point where it gets dull looking at these new-aged stats, even for a guy who loves numbers, like myself. Often, I ignore most of the analytics thrown my way during a game because, frankly, as I’ve always said…If I don’t know the basic way a statistic is calculated, then why would I want to figure out how they got that random number on the screen while also trying to focus on the contest at hand? Don’t make me think too hard while watching. Save the complex stuff for another time.

New-aged stats have a purpose. I certainly won’t say all of them are a waste of time because they aren’t. But on television, in a sport that often struggles to get many viewers on an average day, I think it would be wise to make the viewing experience as easy-going as possible. Once a network begins popping unknown math equations and formulas in our faces during the contest, that will turn many viewers away. Keep it simple. Keep the fans watching. Most everyone understands what a home run and a base hit are. Most don’t know what OPS+ and WAR are, and even those who do couldn’t tell you how to calculate WAR without looking it up. It’s that convoluted.

Don’t believe me…Just check out Baseball Reference’s version of calculating WAR for position players. Notice I said Baseball Reference’s version. That’s because it’s such a complex and often not agreed-upon formula that there is more than one way to calculate it, leading to different outcomes. Be thankful that traditional stats ride on a one-way track to their conclusion.

2. RETURN TO TRADITIONAL EXTRA INNINGS DURING THE REGULAR SEASON

As the list dwindles, we’re getting into the categories that I’m pretty sure won’t change over the next couple of years, but I have hope that maybe under a new commissioner at the end of this decade, some common sense will be added when it comes to topics such as this one.

When Baseball Fan Perspective got underway in early 2023, I wrote a piece about my opinions on all the upcoming rule changes and some recent newbies that were announced as permanent fixtures to our game. Check it out here if you like.

I made my case about why the “Ghost Man” (or as I and others often like to call it, the “Manfred Man”) starting on second base to begin extra innings was more about the players’ happiness than the fans, even though the initial reason for the change was due to the 2020 COVID season when Manfred said it was here only as a precaution to keep teams on the field for less time due to the unknowns of the virus.

That was a fair and honorable decision at that time of uncertainty. However, as quoted in that 2023 rules post, Manfred claimed in ‘21 that this rule wouldn’t last past the COVID-era. Well, here we are, past that time of physical distancing and no spitting on the field (both rules have been reversed), and the man who made the last out from the previous inning still continues to show up at second base to begin all extra frames during the regular season, unless a pinch runner is used.

Manfred has done a great job speeding up games with the pitch clock. But, this idea that extra innings are somehow a hassle to those who play and the fans who watch and, therefore, needs to be doctored in some way to make the odds better for a contest to be over in 10 innings, or, God forbid, 11 or 12 frames at the most, is beyond old now.

It’s so unnecessary, especially when considering how infrequently games go to extras. In the 2019 regular season, the last year of traditional extra-innings rules, 208 of 2,429 games went to extra frames. Of those 208, only 56 went into the 12th inning or later. In total, 97.7% of all major league games in 2019 ended in the 11th inning or earlier.

I didn’t realize that more baseball is a bad thing. I didn’t know that fans getting more bang for their buck was so off-putting for MLB and its players that they needed to make this a permanent change. Based on how fast games are today, thanks in large part to the pitch clock (average game time of 2 hours, 36 minutes in 2024), I think we can risk having some contests under the old extra-innings rules go longer without the need for messing around with something that had worked just fine for well over a century.

Instead of treating the players like little leaguers by using unearned props to settle their contests in extras and often messing about with a relief pitcher’s outcome unfairly, let’s get back to treating them like big leaguers. They are professional athletes and can handle it. Plus, the fans would get to watch the best in the world play for a little longer on certain days.

Time to go back to the old ways. Let’s get it done, MLB.

1. BRING BACK TIEBREAKER GAME ‘163’

Now we’ve reached the final topic. The change, I think, is more likely than any of the others mentioned on this list to come back to us at some point.

Officially, the possibility of a Game 163 ended after the 2021 season. The main reasons for the deletion of one of the most exciting and unique aspects of MLB were the addition of two more franchises to the postseason picture and the change from a single-elimination Wild Card Round to a Best-of-3 format, adding more days to the playoff schedule.

I’m fine with 12 teams qualifying for the postseason. So far, it’s made for great theater. Last October was filled with entertaining contests throughout, and I love playoff baseball more than any other sport’s second season.

However, these changes have taken away the excitement of what should be the most entertaining portion of the regular season by eliminating the possibility for multiple teams tied for an important playoff position (like the final Wild Card spot) to no longer be able to settle it on the field with a Game 163. It makes watching the last day of the regular season more of a math equation than a scenario where someone can confidently say, “Hey, if my team wins today, they still get a chance tomorrow, even if the franchise they are tied with wins as well.” That is gone now. What set MLB apart from the NFL, NBA, and NHL was the idea of season-ending ties being settled on the field of combat rather than by some Head-to-Head formula based on games played earlier in the campaign.

In the three years that MLB has used this formulaic tiebreaker system, we’ve had two situations where, had the old way still been in place, fans would have had two extra games following the final day of the regular season.

2022: The Mets and Braves tied for the NL East with 101 wins. Both teams qualified for the postseason, but the division winner (Braves by Head-to-Head record) earned a Bye to the NLDS, while the loser had to play in the Best-of-3 Wild Card Round (Mets). New York ended up losing to San Diego in that series. In the old system, because a Bye was on the line, it seems probable that Atlanta and New York would have squared off one final time in a Game 163, given the stakes.

2024: Three teams (Atlanta, New York, Arizona) tied for the final two NL wild-card spots. After the whole scheduling debauchle due to Hurricane Helena in Atlanta a few days earlier, the Braves and Mets were forced to play a doubleheader on the Monday following the final day of the MLB regular season.

The Diamondbacks were left with only one scenario that would earn them a postseason berth and a chance to repeat as National League champs. Arizona needed either Atlanta or New York to win both contests on Monday, securing the D-backs with the sixth-best record in the league. Instead, the teams split their series, leaving all three playoff contenders with identical 89-73 records. Based on the Head-to-Head records between them all, Arizona was the odd team out and never had a chance to at least face one of those NL East squads in a winner-take-all Game 163.

I think at some point, MLB will figure out a way to bring this potential game back when they start to realize how many fan bases are annoyed each time their team misses out on the postseason despite having an identical record with a squad that qualified. It’s probably going to take a few of the big boys (Yankees, Dodgers, etc.) to go through this agony before the league realizes their new and lazy system for settling ties truly sucks.

I see no reason why MLB, its players, managers, owners, or fans of any team in these situations would not prefer to settle it, win or lose, with one additional game before the playoffs begin. It adds drama to the final weekend of the regular season and certainly doesn’t let a formula decide the fates of some well-deserving squads. Teams play 162 contests per year. They can, and for decades did, play one extra game if needed to settle the situation on the field.

Bring it back, Rob.

---

Enjoy the start of 2025. Plenty of baseball to get to as January continues. Thanks for stopping by. Talk to you soon.