The Mets play the Yankees six times, and despite their record, that's hardly a walk in the park. The Mets also play each of last year's American League playoff teams, so excuse me if I don't shed any tears for Larry.

Why? What did he say that isn't correct? I'm not a Braves fan, but--in my view at least--he's spot on. I'm sure that the question asked of him had to deal with the Braves and inter-league. At least he's speaking his mind...and in this day and age, I appreciate people saying what they actually think and not hiding behind a fear of controversy. His point is no less valid for the Mets or the Yankees or the Red Sox; his point is that inter-league is poorly designed and I believe that many-a-baseball fan already knew this.

In this article it made it seem like he was saying the Braves had an fair schedule compared to everyone else, while the Braves' number one competitor had an equally tough schedule. However, in the Cbs Spiortsline article he also includes the Mets, so I do qualify my earlier comment.

Frankly, as a Mets fan, neither team should complain. The schedule is what it is. Both teams are good enough where it shouldn't matter who you play. But I can understand the frustration.

Part of Chipper's argument got cut out: "It's unfair for us and the Mets on a year-in, year-out basis to have to play the Yankees and Red Sox when other teams don't"

So he is including the Mets in the unfairly treated category.

well, chipper IS right, it IS unfair.

the entire unbalanced schedule is already unfair and IL makes it worse.

there is no way in heck that bud will do anything about it until IL play loses money.

bud is NOT interested in a level playing field - one of the many reasons i have endless contempt for him about all the crocodile tears he is shedding over barry bonds supposed roids use

What about the Wild Card though? What if the Mets win the Division and Atlanta is 2 games behind Arizona or the Dodgers for the Wild Card? You can look back at stuff like this and say that the NL West teams, in this hypothetical situation, had an unfair advantage on the Braves. I thought in the beginning of the year this would screw the Mets, but we'll see how it turns out.

No one in the NL can complain about having the toughest schedule in baseball. Put the Braves in the AL East for the last 20 years, and they'd be looking at 3 or 4 division championships, tops. The NL is so much weaker than the AL right now, it's ridiculous.

Baltimore, Tampa Bay, and Toronto, are the only teams that have a legitimate gripe about schedule difficulty. Every single year, they play 38 games against ridiculous payrolls, and there's nothing they can do.

How about a disadvantage without any games being played or scheduled? Anyone in the NL Central automatically has only a 1/6 chance to win their division, as opposed to 1/5 (or 1/4) in most other divisions, as well as a 1/16 chance for the wild card, vs. 1/14 in the AL. Will someone please straighten this mess out?

The quote from Chipper is incomplete. He includes the Mets in having a tough schedule, but compares theirs to the easier schedules of the Phillies and Marlins.

You know, Atlanta plays the Red Sox EVERY year? Is this some kind of tradition that goes beyond schedule strength, etc?

Saburo, it's because the Braves used to play in Boston.

I think that's lame. How many people in Boston wax nostalgic about their lost Braves, Spahn and Sain or whatever. Has it really lasted since the early 50s? Do fans in Atlanta really think there's something special about their team playing the Red Sox every year?

I just don't feel it...