A more comprehensive case for a shorter MLB season

Jackie Robinson Day to Labor Day

A few years ago, I mused upon a shorter MLB season—140 games instead of the usual 162. Well, after tiring of watching hardball during—and even after—spooky season, as well as seeing starting pitchers continue to struggle against inning limits, I’m back with a more comprehensive plan:

Season starts on/around Jackie Robinson Day (April 15)

Taking a cue from cinema’s recent survival tactics, event-programming (remember Barbenheimer?) still draws crowds. So, let’s start the MLB season not in late-March but on or around April 15—Jackie Robinson Day. Everyone wearing #42 for Game 1? A nice visual each year and a memorable date for baseball fans to look forward to. Plus, it further reduces Target Field’s uncontrollable-shivers games (usually against the Dodgers, for some reason).

Season ends Labor Day weekend

Again, an event to look forward to! Imagine the attendance for and eyeballs on the final playoff push over a long weekend. Baseball players are often called the “boys of summer”, and Labor Day represents the end of that period for most folks, so it seems a natural coda.

Playoffs run from early September to early October

Seemingly every year, I struggle more with baseball interfering in Halloween festivities and even nudging November. Between the cold weather and focuses shifting to other activities (fall, football, holidays, what have you), my fandom wanes in equal proportion to every day ticked off the October calendar. A final “amen” to the season by Oct. 10 seems perfect.

Set Number: X161490 TK6

More Pros

• In looking at the ‘24 Minnesota Twins schedule, my plan would chop roughly 40 games off the ledger—down to about 122 overall. That’s 360 less innings for teams to fret over their arms—potentially (if managed correctly) leading towards a return to SP relevance of yore.
• MLB not having to compete with the NBA season-opening and one less month of being dwarfed by the NFL monolith.
• Surprisingly, I bet most MLB owners would heartily accept this plan. Aside from the enormous markets, most teams operate somewhere between half and 2/3rds full stadiums any given night—often lower on school-season weeknights. With the majority of revenue coming from media deals, I bet more owners than one might think would sign off on this.

Photo by Hannah Foslien/Getty Images

Cons

• The big one, obviously: significantly less baseball—especially for die-hards like us on Twinkie Town. Would you take the tradeoff of the current setup for less baseball overall but more optimally structured?
• The big markets—Los Angeles Dodgers, New York Yankees, Houston Astros, maybe a few others—would immediately balk at this, as they generally fill every chair every game.
• All the milestone MLB records would instantly be rendered unreachable. Yet, didn’t PEDs do that for the batsmen and usage patterns do the same for mound-dwellers?

Photo by Tony Avelar/San Francisco Giants/Getty Images

I know this would be a radical plan for MLB—but any more radical than what folks 20-some years ago would have thought about shift bans, pitch clocks, batter minimums and ghost runners? I will continue to enjoy 162-game baseball for as long as it is presented to me, but I do believe less would = more for my favorite professional sport.