Will Bardenwerper on Baseball's Betrayal of Its Minor League Roots
Key topics
The nostalgic charm of minor league baseball is being lost on some fans as the sport's priorities shift away from its roots. Commenters wistfully recall the intimate experience of watching minor league games up close, with one fan reminiscing about spectators once standing in the outfield to yell at players. However, others point out the logistical hurdles that make promotion and relegation – a system where teams move between divisions based on performance – impractical in baseball, citing issues like shared ownership and player contracts. The debate highlights the tension between preserving the unique character of minor league baseball and the financial realities driving the sport's major league-centric structure.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
2d
Peak period
4
66-72h
Avg / period
2.4
Based on 12 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Aug 25, 2025 at 1:46 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Aug 28, 2025 at 1:11 AM EDT
2d after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
4 comments in 66-72h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Aug 29, 2025 at 9:50 AM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
As the OP article mentions it’s a great pastime for all walks of life. Minor league games aren’t even about winning most of the time as you get to watch coaches prepare players for the show instead of worrying too much about the final score. I love baseball and especially my local minor league team.
MLB is just a completely different thing. It’s a sanitized experience packaged for TV.
† https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/68227883
One of the ways that Promotion/Relegation systems work is that regional draw is a lot less of a factor because there aren't big "regional draw teams". The big cities get complex webs of "neighborhood teams" instead; for instance, London alone has dozens of football clubs and the distance between many of them is only a couple of miles. The "regional draw" teams such as national teams are what American sports would refer to as "All-Star" teams that exist briefly, are drafted from local teams, and generally only last for the shape of "a tournament".
The call for Promotion/Relegation in MLB is a bit of asking for an entire rebuild of the current landscape of baseball. What if Denver, Colorado had say five or six smaller teams instead of just the Rockies? They'd all use stadiums smaller than Coors Field. Coors Field would not be filled as often/regularly. There's less money in concessions/merch for any specific team. People in other corners of Colorado are going to feel less like any of those teams represent "the whole state" and are less likely to make trips to Denver to catch games, or even be eyeballs for TV Nielson ratings for Denver team sports. There would be fewer dividends to split to big investors, fewer sponsorships to sell in any one stadium, etc.
All of of which is to say, the big money gaps exist as much because of the hierarchy of the system generates more regular, centralized revenue. Team owners also want a hierarchy of ROI in team investments. The bigger stadiums exist in places with more "regional money", which raises more revenue, which keeps them in a cycle of encouraging bigger stadiums in that area (or moving to an area they think might have more money). It's an unvirtuous cycle of money and breaking that system would require either a lot more money to buy out existing owners or a lot of team owners to agree greed is bad and smaller teams would be a lot chaotic and so more fun for the sport itself.
(ETA: All of which is relevant today in watching the direct struggle play out as we speak between the two big American Men's Soccer organizations. Major League Soccer [MLS] is trying to reproduce the MLB system, including its hierarchy of centralized revenue, and USL is trying trying to build the promotion/relegation system of relatively balanced tiers, with the catch that USL started by trying to be the "down-level" leagues below MLS and so has started on the left foot of following similar stadium and revenue and ownership hierarchies, some of the owners of which don't really want relegation/promotion even if they say they might, and also that USL adding a top tier to directly compete with MLS also has to compete with MLS' first-mover advantage and revenue structure. Women's soccer relationship between NWSL and USL is similar but less chaotic and slightly fewer MLB aspirations from NWSL, given Women's sports in general rarely get to MLB [or NBA or NFL] levels of ROI.)
Relegations would also mean more opportunities for teams to be fan-owned. It's reasonably common in relegation/promotion leagues, especially after major upsetting relegations (though "Welcome to Wrexham" is an interesting story of the reverse, a fan-owned team selling to new money for the hopes of resources for promotion). In the US, we mostly just have the Packers as a fan-owned team, and that situation is truly an exception and almost impossible to replicate.
It does feel strange that so many US "major" teams need a billionaire or two or three to run. Why aren't more of the teams themselves public companies? Why are they all as much private toys for the super-rich as anything else? We've already seen that shows up as a lack of concern for/nonalignment with local/regional/fan interests on long enough timescales (all the "team moves", for instance).
If you have the totality of all baseball salaries, even though it would be “unfair” to whoever is signing the billion dollar contracts these days (have they got that high?) it’d be much nicer if it was spread over many MANY more teams and players, even if the lowest teams are almost “volunteers”.