Major League Baseball has a problem it can't seem to admit to.

Plainly put, in a game that is not timed (i.e. 60 minutes in the NFL, 48 mins. in the NBA, 60 mins in the NHL) there is a ton of time where spectators watch players just walking around. Running the clock, playing keep-away, taking a knee; These are all strategies in the other sports I mentioned.

The league says it wants to increase the pace of the play and decrease the amount of time between action. However, the proposals to accomplish that task are off the mark. They're misguided and really have zero impact on the pace of the game.

Personally, I'd favor a pitch clock. I don't object to a pointing to first for an intentional walk so the pitcher doesn't have to lob balls at the catcher (although, frankly, I think it has virtually no impact on reducing the length of an average MLB game). But, the idea that you'd place runners on base in extra-inning game comes out of left field.

Could it mean the end of the game would come sooner?


Does it improve the pace of play? It does not.

Jim Rondenelli and Jon Meyer joined me to share their thoughts on what MLB plans to do to improve the pace of play - which it won't. It's not a rule change and not something that's slated to take effect any time soon, but they do plan to test it in low-level, rookie/minor ball:


More From WIBX 950