Cincinnati Reds and the 2003 Harvard Tix office

Remember Harvard's special men's ice hockey package that you had to buy to get tickets to the Cornell game at Lynah East? Well it seems that the person running the ticket office at that time has a new job... with the Cincinnati Reds!

The Red Sox go to the Queen City for interleague play and in order to get a ticket to just one of the three games through the Reds website, you have to buy the REDS 4-pack. The pack is based on the day of the game (Friday, Saturday or Sunday) and say if you wanted a ticket to the Saturday game, you have to buy tickets for 3 other Saturday games!

What a crock.

But why would you want to see a Red Sox vs. Reds game that wasn't in March or October?

Or alternately, there is no Reds/Red Sox game in June...

KeithK
But why would you want to see a Red Sox vs. Reds game that wasn't in March or October?

To get out of Lafayette for the weekend!

The pundits say the Reds have an outside chance to still be playing baseball in October, but I'm not holding my breath on that World Series rematch.

Even on StubHub, the cheapest tickets are over $50.

Keith, how did SF handle the Yankee-Giant series last year? Did they have special "Yankee ticket" packages?

Rita
Keith, how did SF handle the Yankee-Giant series last year? Did they have special "Yankee ticket" packages?

You're asking the wrong person. Huge baseball and Yankees fan that I am, I would never dream of going to an interleague RS game.

But I doubt it. The Giants were stilling selling tickets pretty well last year due to Bonds and might not have needed gimmicks.

Rita
The Red Sox go to the Queen City for interleague play and in order to get a ticket to just one of the three games through the Reds website, you have to buy the REDS 4-pack. The pack is base on the day of the game (Friday, Saturday or Sunday) and say if you wanted a ticket to the Saturday game, you have to buy tickets for 3 other Saturday games!

What a crock.

That sucks, but it's not surprising. When a team's fans are known to invade visiting parks en masse (first the Yankees, now the Red Sox have joined them, and I'm sure the Mets aren't far behind) or when there's a high-demand ticket for home fans, it makes sense for the ticket offices to cash in. One way is to jack up the prices for that game. ECAC schools have been doing that for Cornell games for years. Cornell set the Harvard tickets at a higher face value since at least I was in school. The Mets introduced five pricing levels of games a few years ago.

This is the first year I've seen at a professional level of not allowing fans to buy single-game seats. The Rockies did that for Opening Day tickets...if you wanted a ticket to Opening Day, you had to buy one for another game in that series.

[cbs4denver.com]

It's a horrible trend for the fans.

BTW, I'm right with Keith in despising Interleague Play.

Yeah, Interleague play is not my favorite either, but there aren't many opportunities to see the Red Sox play here. Mid-June is a good time for me to get away for a game or two. The Red Sox's visit to the Cell is in early August and I'll still be pollinating corn.

Maybe I should just go see the Cubbies, no special "Cub-Reds 4 pack" for any of those games at the Great American Ballpark. From what I saw watching the games on TV, there were a heck of a lot of Cubs fans that made the trek to Cincy.

RichH
BTW, I'm right with Keith in despising Interleague Play.

Interleague Play = unbalanced schedule = yuck

Josh '99
Interleague Play = unbalanced schedule = yuck

Interleague Play didn't make the schedule imbalanced. It exacerbated the problem a bit, but not really as much as intraleague scheduling shenanigans have. It's more a particularly nauseating symptom of the disease that is Overreliance on Rivalries for Ticket Sales.


Anyway, I don't like Interleague Play, either. But I'm not going to let another bad Bud Selig move shorten the season by eighteen games for me.

Jacob 03

Josh '99
Interleague Play = unbalanced schedule = yuck

Interleague Play didn't make the schedule imbalanced. It exacerbated the problem a bit, but not really as much as intraleague scheduling shenanigans have. It's more a particularly nauseating symptom of the disease that is Overreliance on Rivalries for Ticket Sales.

Unbalanced schedules are great. More games against the teams you are actually competing with. You just need to get rid of that pesky wild card... (and maybe divisions too while you're at it).

Purism uber alles!

KeithK

Jacob 03

Josh '99
Interleague Play = unbalanced schedule = yuck

Interleague Play didn't make the schedule imbalanced. It exacerbated the problem a bit, but not really as much as intraleague scheduling shenanigans have. It's more a particularly nauseating symptom of the disease that is Overreliance on Rivalries for Ticket Sales.

Unbalanced schedules are great. More games against the teams you are actually competing with. You just need to get rid of that pesky wild card... (and maybe divisions too while you're at it).

Purism uber alles!

Maybe "unbalanced" isn't the word I mean. I agree with a schedule that has teams playing more games against other teams in their division than against teams in other divisions. I don't agree with a schedule that has the Mets in competition with the Phillies for a playoff spot and the Mets play six games a year against the Yankees and their $200M payroll while the Braves get to play the crappy Blue Jays.

Josh '99
I don't agree with a schedule that has the Mets in competition with the Phillies for a playoff spot and the Mets play six games a year against the Yankees and their $200M payroll while the Braves get to play the crappy Blue Jays.

I presume you mean the Phillies get to play the Jays (who aren't exactly crappy), not the Braves.

In any event, it's an interesting way to put it. Based on the 2008 payroll data, by your use of money as a proxy for strength, here are your best interleague matchups by simply taking AL #1 vs. NL #1 and going down the list. What do ya know? Mets-Yanks...

NYY (1) $209M v. NYM (3) $138M
Det (2) $139M v. CHC (7) $119M
Bos (4) $133M v. LAD (8) $119M
CHW (5) $121M v. Atl (10) $102M
LAA (6) $119M v. StL (11) $101M
Sea (9) $118M v. Phl (13) $98M
Tor (12) $99M v. Hou (14) $89M
Cle (16) $79M v. Mil (15) $81M
Tex (21) $68M v. SF (17) $77M
Bal (22) $67M v. Cin (18) $74M
Min (24) $62M v. SD (19) $74M
KC (25) $58M v. Col (20) $69M
Oak (28) $48M v. Ari (23) $66M
TB (29) $44M v. Was (26) $55M

Pit (27) $49M v. Fla (30) $22M

Chris '03

Josh '99
I don't agree with a schedule that has the Mets in competition with the Phillies for a playoff spot and the Mets play six games a year against the Yankees and their $200M payroll while the Braves get to play the crappy Blue Jays.

I presume you mean the Phillies get to play the Jays (who aren't exactly crappy), not the Braves.

In any event, it's an interesting way to put it. Based on the 2008 payroll data, by your use of money as a proxy for strength, here are your best interleague matchups by simply taking AL #1 vs. NL #1 and going down the list. What do ya know? Mets-Yanks...

The scheduling is different this year; both the Phillies (5/16-5/18) and the Braves (6/27-6/29) play the Jays this year. And the Jays are probably the #4 team in their division. They're not as bad as the O's, but they're not a great team. (I didn't use money as a proxy for strength, though I can see why it seems that way.)

As a Phillies fan, all the Toronto series does is remind our fans of one of the teams biggest choke-jobs. There's no rivaly, and no expectation there ever will be one.

AFAIC, the only legitimate interleague rivalries are the intercity or interstate rivalries: Mets/Yankees, Cubs/White Sox, Dodgers/Angels, Giants/A's, and Cards/Royals. Maybe Astros/Rangers or Orioles/Nationals.

Buit that leaves a whole lot of teams for whom these interleague games are irrelevant.

Josh '99
Maybe "unbalanced" isn't the word I mean. I agree with a schedule that has teams playing more games against other teams in their division than against teams in other divisions. I don't agree with a schedule that has the Mets in competition with the Phillies for a playoff spot and the Mets play six games a year against the Yankees and their $200M payroll while the Braves get to play the crappy Blue Jays.

Fair enough, but in any given season the Mets will play a number of NL teams one, two, or three more times than the Braves or Phillies do (and vice versa). Those will add up to a 10-15 game difference in schedules over the course of the season, which has a much greater impact on schedule strength than Bud's Interleague Geographical Rival Spectacular. The only saving grace for Atlanta and Philly is that those extra games against NL teams will even out over multiple seasons, whereas the Mets will play a good Yankees team too many times every year for the foreseeable future.

Jeff Hopkins '82

Buit that leaves a whole lot of teams for whom these interleague games are irrelevant.

And so is the alternative.

I've never understood "irrelevancy of pairings" as a legitimate argument against interleague play. Sure, Marlins/Rangers is "irrelevant"; but so would be Marlins/Rockies. Especially with todays division-weighed schedule, the true league rivalries happen, and happen often.

As a Mets fan, where's the harm in seeing the Angels and Indians come to town, as opposed to the Diamondbacks and Astros?

I can understand the inequality argument, where it might be "unfair" for the Mets to play 6 against the the Yankees whereas another team plays a weaker opponent. But maybe we can worry about that after showing an ability to beat the Marlins and Nationals in the last 2 weeks of the season.