Realignment Isn’t Just a Scheduling Fix—It’s MLB’s Best Growth Play

Baseball has always thrived on rivalries: Yankees–Red Sox, Dodgers–Giants, Cubs–Cardinals. These matchups don’t just fill stadiums; they fuel headlines, drive TV ratings, and keep casual fans invested.

At the Little League Classic, MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred dropped a notable hint: if MLB expands, it could spark a sweeping geographic realignment, possibly dissolving the well-established American and National Leagues in favor of an East/West conference model that mirrors the NBA or NHL. For a league built on tradition, this would be its boldest structural shift since the pitch clock.

Manfred framed expansion as a way to “save a lot of wear and tear on our players in terms of travel,” while giving ESPN and other partners crisp East vs. West playoff matchups. But the implications run deeper. Realignment wouldn’t just adjust travel schedules; it could redefine rivalries and supercharge the business of baseball. An East/West structure wouldn’t just reduce travel, it would concentrate historic rivalries into single conferences, creating higher-stakes matchups throughout the season. Expansion has long remained a back burner idea. Yet it may be baseball’s best chance to reset its trajectory.

Rivalries Drive Relevance

An East/West conference model would give MLB a rare chance to double down on its rivalry-driven formula, while setting up new franchises for success. Imagine a Portland team dropping straight into an instant rivalry with Seattle, or a Nashville franchise locked in early battles with Atlanta. That’s what makes realignment so powerful: it doesn’t just change schedules; it creates storylines that sell themselves.

The NHL’s success with Vegas and Seattle proves the model works. By aligning expansion teams with natural regional rivals, the league gave them immediate identity, relevance, and value. MLB has an even bigger opportunity. With carefully crafted conference rivalries, it can amplify fan passion, boost national TV appeal, and deliver the kind of must-watch matchups that keep baseball culturally relevant in an increasingly crowded sports landscape.

Rivalries as the Growth Engine

MLB’s balanced schedule is more than a tweak; it’s a strategic necessity. Other leagues, especially the NFL and NBA, have leaned into rivalries and star matchups to fuel growth. Baseball can no longer afford to lag.

The league’s financial reality underscores the point. MLB revenue ($12.1B) trailed the NBA’s ($11.3B) and NFL’s ($23B) in 2024, and younger fans are drifting toward faster-paced sports. Expanding rivalry games is one of the few levers MLB can pull to recapture attention in a crowded entertainment landscape.

Imagine Mets–Yankees and Cubs–White Sox clashing in meaningful series across the calendar. Add Ohtani facing his former Angels multiple times a season, and these aren’t just games; they’re storylines that sustain engagement. Rivalries create must-see TV, and must-see TV creates revenue.

The data backs this up. In the Subway Series finale, peak viewership topped 3 million, making it the most-watched Sunday Night Baseball game in seven years. Dodgers–Giants games consistently rank among MLB’s highest-grossing gate receipts, often selling out regardless of standings. Rivalries don’t just create buzz; they drive ticket, merchandise, and media revenue.

Proof of Concept: The NHL Model

If MLB wants proof that expansion and realignment can be a growth engine, it doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel; it just needs to look at the NHL. In 2014, the NHL realigned its divisions to prioritize geographic rivalries, grouping teams more regionally to cut travel and boost local intensity. The result was a schedule packed with rivalry-driven matchups that consistently delivered higher ratings and stronger fan engagement.

That groundwork made the league’s recent expansions seamless. When the Vegas Golden Knights launched in 2017, they sold out consistently, built an instant identity, and are now valued at over $1 billion just seven years after joining the league. The Seattle Kraken followed in 2021, tapping into a ready-made regional rivalry with Vancouver and sparking another passionate fan base. NHL franchise values jumped 44% in 2024, growth that outpaced basketball and football. 

The NHL proved how strategic realignment can turn expansion into opportunity. Now MLB has a chance to take it even further: adopting an East/West model could supercharge rivalries, give new franchises instant relevance, and deliver the matchups fans and media crave. In today’s crowded sports landscape, this might be baseball’s best shot at its biggest growth era in decades. Just as the NHL’s divisional shift made Vegas–Vancouver and Seattle–Vancouver natural rivalries, MLB’s East/West structure would place expansion teams in rivalry-rich regions from day one, igniting fan engagement and maximizing media impact.

Legal Implications of Expansion and Realignment

But for MLB, bold moves come with high legal stakes, from territorial rights to billion-dollar media deals, making the legal landscape as critical as the business one. MLB’s unique antitrust exemption, upheld in Flood v. Kuhn (1972), gives the league rare power over territorial rights, franchise moves, and scheduling. But that power cuts both ways. Drop an expansion team into the wrong market or disrupt a billion-dollar regional TV deal, and suddenly that exemption looks less like a shield and more like a target.

We’ve already seen how ugly these fights can get. In San Jose v. MLB (2013), the city sued after the league blocked the Oakland A’s move to San Jose, arguing MLB’s territorial rules were anti-competitive. The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the antitrust and unfair competition claims, leaving MLB’s exemption intact, but the case underscored just how explosive relocation battles can become.

But cities aren’t the only stakeholders. Regional sports networks (RSNs) pay massive sums for exclusive broadcast territories, and realignment could scramble those boundaries overnight. If an expansion team lands in a market that overlaps existing contracts, think Nashville cutting into Atlanta’s TV reach, RSNs like Bally Sports or YES Network could sue to protect their rights.  That risk is amplified by the financial instability many RSNs already face due to cord-cutting and subscription losses. 

There are also potential marketing and branding risks. Recent controversies across sports, from missteps in NIL marketing in college athletics to disputes over team trademarks, show how quickly public perception can turn into a legal or regulatory problem. Expansion franchises would need airtight intellectual property strategies to avoid conflicts with existing brands. At the same time, the league as a whole would face increased scrutiny over how it sells and packages new rivalries.

Closing Pitch: Rivalries Are MLB’s Real Expansion Playbook

Baseball has always sold itself on tradition: the timeless rivalries, the summer rituals, the comfort of knowing which teams belong where. But in an era dominated by the NBA and NFL, tradition alone can’t capture attention. Expansion is coming, but adding new teams isn’t enough — MLB needs a structural reset. Adopting an East/West conference model would concentrate historic rivalries, give expansion franchises instant relevance, and deliver marquee matchups that drive engagement, ticket sales, and media value. Realignment isn’t just about geography; it’s about giving MLB the tools to control its competitive, cultural, and financial future. Preserving tradition while unlocking unprecedented growth opportunities for a modern audience.

Oliver Stevens 1L at Hofstra Law. You can find him on LinkedIn.