Apr 27, 2010, 10:29 AM EST
The Tigers played a night game in Anaheim on Thursday and took a late night flight that got them into Dallas early Friday morning before a game against the Rangers that evening. Then they played a night game against the Rangers last night and took a late night flight that got them into Detroit early this morning before a game against the Twins tonight.
“I’m not knocking anybody in general, but you also need to take care of
your product. Two times in five days (red-eye flights). That’s just not
reasonable. That’s no good, just no good. This has been ridiculous, to
be honest with you.”
The wraparound series with the Rangers is perplexing to me, because yesterday probably should have been an offday, what with it being a transition between a west coast trip and the return to divisional play (the next Tigers off-day is May 6th, between games in Minnesota and Cleveland). I know they’re not flying commercial and carrying their own bags and stuff, but even relatively posh travel can be exhausting.
There are so many spinning plates when it comes to doing the schedule — you have to keep teams from two-team cities apart if you can; you have to deal with TV stuff; you have to worry about rainouts; — but tiring out a team with a couple of poorly planned-out stretches of travel can have competitive implications, and that’s unacceptable.
- Roy Halladay is retiring 43
- Tony La Russa Bobby Cox, Joe Torre all unanimously elected to the Hall of Fame 31
- Tony Blengino says recent report on Seattle front office is “just the tip of the iceberg” 50
- Rakuten Golden Eagles appear likely to allow Masahiro Tanaka’s departure to MLB 46
- 2013 Winter Meetings Preview 23
- Robinson Cano agrees to $240 million deal with Mariners (260)
- Yankees agree to seven-year, $153M contract with free agent outfielder Jacoby Ellsbury (160)
- Report: Mariners willing to offer Robinson Cano a 10-year, $240 million deal (143)
- Report: Yankees have agreed to a three-year deal with Carlos Beltran (125)
- Brett Gardner is drawing “significant” trade interest (112)