Interleague Cons (by division) - again, my opinion

NL East - Interleague could allow this division to see a 120-game winner. Will be a rough and tough division
w/o interleague; close to the end.

NL Central - Should be tough division either way. Records within division would be over-inflated with
interleague play.

NL West - Would definitely be most hurt w/o interleague. Would hate to see sub-.500 winner from NL team.
Don't really see any interleague cons for this division.

AL West - This division would benefit the most w/o interleague, playing exclusively vs inferior teams. Would
allow a better division record for division winner and should keep division very tight all season.

AL Central - Interleague may ruin this division, taking a potential 90-win team and turning them into a .500 club.

AL West - will be slightly better w/o interleague play, but will most likely be bad regardless.

I could be totally off on some of this, but I think the pros outweigh the cons a bit. "Yankee-effect" could throw monkey wrench into my opinions also

My guess is that the NL East would not have any Yankees, whereas probably every AL team and the whole NL West would have them.  Maybe half the NL Central, too.  Like the analysis, JAMESA. This kind of affects which Dodgers team I trot out there first.

Good analysis, but you are missing one very important point - this league *most likely* will only have 4 divisions(either as a 20 team or 16 team league).

I still don't really see how everyone playing the exact same 12 teams and 24 games is going to make any difference in the overall standings.  I mean, obviously the NL East teams will win more interleague games, but I don't think it's going to make any difference whatsoever on which West teams will pull away from the pack.

I think the best NL West team will win more games vs AL than the worst NL West team will, thereby having a better chance at pulling away from division foes. If they only played NL teams I think wins would be much harder to come by, therefore keeping NL West tighter--you're probably right though as far as who will win.

Also we are assuming that just because things are lining up by winning pct. that will relate to "sim quality" of the teams. We probably will see some teams in the AL East actually being better teams than some of the NL West teams.

I imagine that some lower winning pct teams may actually have higher salaries. I haven't compared any of my teams yet, but I'm sure somewhere there will be some sleepers with inflated salaries (I know this doesn't necessarily translate to better team, but neither does winning pct).

I agree that win pct in real life does not always equal sim success. My biggest concern is wiping out WC with only 20 teams.

so my friends....what are we gonna do here if stuck at 16 or 20?

I say go with 16 or 20 if we don't reach 24. 

I concur

16 or 20 works for me.

This is too good to pass up.  However, personally i am not interested in a 16 or 20 team league.  I am not a fan, so if we decide to wait and get to 24 i am in with the Angels.

Also, i would vote for interleague, but i am OK without it.  Also, i haven't had a chance to read every page, but i personally like the idea of every season being a different theme.  For example, Season 1, best of the best, Season 2, Best of the best, Season 3, worst season possible, Season 4, only between .500 and .550.

If we don't have a season theme, i do like the idea of teams being put into divisions based on winning percentage.

Again, i love this idea, i just feel like 20 teams with no Wild Card really takes away from the league in my opinion.  I have only done a 16 team league and that was fairly boring after a while.  All it took was 1 good team in a division and 40 games in, the rest of the division knew it was over because they we're going to win 120 games.  I am currently in a 20 game league and because of it's unique nature i think it fits fine with 20 teams.

I will also add that with the rule of a sub .600 getting to choose 1 Yankee from their season, i think with no Wild Card that still gives a .550 to .575 winning percentage team the advantage over a .500 winning percentage team.  Again, this is just me and it looks like i may be outnumbered when it comes to this opinion, but i feel it is worth the extra wait for a full 24 team league with wild card spots.  After all, that makes the season last longer and makes just about everyone feel like they are a contender at the beginning of the season.  Besides, it looks like you have only been filling this league for 2 weeks and 17 owners isn't bad for 2 weeks.

it's just that we haven't had a bite in a while...and are down to the worse teams

Like i said, i realize i am outnumbered, but i feel as if without the Wild Card some owners over a few seasons will get frustrated and leave.  Personally, that isn't my style as i run a few progressives myself.  However, i think 4 playoff teams out of 20 really makes it less fun then 6 out of 24.

If you decide to shoot for 24 or somehow add a Wild Card team with 20, i will take the Angels .