Report: September roster expansion rules may change as soon as 2013

Pettitte faces hitters for first time since leg injury
Game 136: Game One

Via Scott Miller, there is “increasing momentum” to change the September roster expansion rules as soon as next year. Teams can currently deploy their entire 40-man roster in the season’s final month, but the new scenario would limit clubs to a designated 30-man roster for each game.

I think I’ve said this before but I’m a big fan of the current incarnation of expanded rosters. Everyone plays by the same rules — if a team doesn’t call-up as many players as another, tough, that’s a willful decision on their part — and it rewards depth. You need more than 25 players to win anything these days anyway, so the clubs with better 28th and 30th and 35th men should have the opportunity to take advantage of that down the stretch when fatigue becomes a factor. Anyway, it’s only a matter of time before MLB changes the rules somehow, probably for the worst.

Pettitte faces hitters for first time since leg injury
Game 136: Game One
  • Better off Eddard

    Good. Ballgames are sometimes hard to watch when managers like Joe go out there every better to match up right/lefty. You should be able to win with the ballplayers you have and if that’s not good enough then you don’t deserve to make the playoffs. Great idea by MLB.

    • Need Pitching & Hitting

      A 30-man roster will still give Joe plenty of opportunities to mix and match.

    • JobaWockeeZ

      What? 25 is already too much for some people.

  • Tremont

    Nice start. I would chop it down to 27 or 28 man rosters for any individual game.

    • gageagainstthemachine

      I like this a lot. In fact, let them have their 40 man expanded roster (no need to go down to 30 in this system) and just make it an eligible 27-28 (as you proposed) per game due at the time of lineups. Young players get a shot, teams get reinforcements if they want to use them, and MLB keeps the length of games in check. I’m really surprised MLB hasn’t taken such a simple approach. Then again, look at how the division winners get the on-the-road home-field advantage in the first round this year.

  • Pat D

    It’s just not fair for teams to play with uneven rosters. I mean, some teams have to keep spots open for injured players and some teams just don’t have as much in their minor league systems to recall. It’s something that seems to hurt the Yankees, naturally, which is the whole reason I bring up this talking point every game. It’s just not fair, it’s not right. You could have one team with 28 guys and another team with 39. Where’s the fairness in that? It’s not right and it’s not fair.


  • RetroRob

    The problem with the proposed change is it will limit the opportunities of young players. For example, Joe Girardi will decide to always have three LOOGY’s available per game. It will end up restricting the playing opportunities of position players in favor of always having another reliever in the pen.

  • Laz

    September roster expansion makes it easier for a player to get a shot. I like the callups, it allows teams to see what they got in the minors without being shorthanded.

  • QT

    They should expand the rosters to 28 players all season long, and play one double header a month so they are not playing in November.

  • Gee

    If it ain’t broke, let’s fix it – B. Selig

    • JLC 776

      And if it is broke, let’s call it ‘the human factor of the game’… not that I’m still bitter or anything.

  • John

    This actually makes sense. It’s like in Hockey where a team can have anywhere from 20-25 on the active roster, but must only dress 20 for each game. The others, if any, are inactive for the game. Having a set 30 for a game would’ve been the norm by now, but it seems some teams want to go 40 every game.