Will MLB revert back to a 154-game schedule?

It could be baseball's most drastic scheduling change in more than half a century.

It likely would assure that no one would ever break Barry Bonds' single-season record of 73 home runs.

The record 262 hits by Ichiro Suzuki in 2004 probably would stand, and it might be another century before another team wins 116 games.

For the first time since 1960, Major League Baseball could be going old school on us, reverting to a 154-game schedule from the current 162 games.

MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred and Tony Clark, director of the Major League Baseball Players Association, each said Tuesday that the topic would be heavily discussed in negotiations for their next collective bargaining agreement, which expires in December 2016.

MLB SALARIES: Baseball's top 25 highest-paid players in 2024

"In looking back from the time I played to now that I'm watching what these guys are doing, I don't know how they do it," Clark said. "What these guys are being asked to do with respect to games' start times, with respect to the travel distances themselves, with respect to performing at an elite level with three days off a month, is a challenge.

"I think that's why as we continue to move forward here, and guys continue to be asked to do more and more, it's something that we have to look at significantly.

"We're at a point in time where perhaps there are any number of things that guys are being asked to do that's directly affecting the way they play. And that's not beneficial for anybody."

The schedule has never been more demanding on players. Teams are playing more night games than at any other time in history. Teams, even on getaway days, usually don't get to their hotel until 2 or 3 in the morning, and after a few hours of sleep they are back on the field.

And you wonder at times why these players look like they're sleepwalking, particularly playing day games after night games, with lethargic performances.

It was different back in the day, when amphetamines were a ballplayer's best friend.

It didn't matter how tired you were or how many adult beverages you had the night before, greenies could get you through that day.

It all stopped before the 2006 season when Major League Baseball banned amphetamines.

Just like that, we've seen a drastic decline in offense. Hardly anyone can hit .300, let alone pop 50 homers. And guys can't even stay on the field, with only 35 playing in 155 or more games last year, the lowest total since 1977.

It's not the lack of steroids that brought baseball's offense to a grinding halt. It's the lack of greenies.

Now, besides the rash of players trying to get legalized exemptions to use Adderall, the time has come for baseball to react.

That means shortening the schedule, providing at least eight more off days a season and perhaps forcing teams to play day games, or at least twilight games, when a team is traveling after the game.

It has become so ridiculous that two weekends ago the San Francisco Giants played an ESPN Sunday night game in Washington, D.C., and were scheduled to play the next day in San Francisco. The Giants, on the advice of a sleep expert, returned to the hotel after game, flew the next day to San Francisco and proceeded straight to the ballpark without even dropping their suitcases back home.

The result?

You guessed it: The Giants were shut out by the New York Mets 3-0, producing three hits.

The New York Yankees tried the same thing on May 4, after an ESPN Sunday night game in Boston. They spent the night in Boston, traveled to Toronto on Monday, headed straight to the ballpark and also got three hits in a 3-1 loss.

"It's like pick your poison," Giants catcher Buster Posey said. "When you get to your house at 6 in the morning and play a game that night, it takes a toll on your body not for just that day but a couple of days.

"I don't know what the answer is necessarily, but I think just from a performance, health and safety standpoint, it's going to have to be brought to the forefront."

The problem, of course, is that a reduction of eight games means eight fewer paid admission dates, eight fewer TV broadcasts and perhaps a 5% loss of revenue to clubs.

"We sell out in a lot of markets in terms of gates, we have television commitments and there are game guarantees that could be affected by a shortened season," Manfred said.

"So it's a huge economic issue."

And, perhaps it's an obstacle impossible to overcome.

"I think people's pockets are happy keeping it the way it is," Baltimore Orioles center fielder Adam Jones says. "Everybody's making money. That's all right.

"They always say when I got called up to the big leagues, 162 is telling the truth. They never say 154."

Yeah, but it used to be 154 games, back in the days of Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig and Ted Williams.

"Yeah, but I wasn't even born yet," Jones said. "(Ronald) Reagan used to be the president, too, but I wasn't born yet. What they need to do is stop the other sports from having such long playoff series."

It's possible that Major League Baseball could recover its loss of income by expanding the postseason, a move that Manfred said is a possibility, though he prefers to keep the format intact.

"When you're giving up revenue, you've got to figure out something that is offsetting in the other direction," Manfred said. "The one obvious possibility is that you make a change in terms of playoff format."

The players and union can argue that a shortened regular-season schedule could enhance clubs' revenue. The fewer games they play, the fewer injuries. The fewer games, the fewer times a marquee player would have to sit out of the starting lineup.

"Ultimately, people want to see the best players play," Milwaukee Brewers outfielder Ryan Braun said. "If I'm going to see the Los Angeles Angels, I want to see Albert Pujols and Mike Trout in the lineup. If you play 154 games, it increases the likelihood they're in there every day instead of taking the occasional day off.

"It's like if you got watch the Los Angeles Lakers, you want to see Kobe Bryant. If you want to watch the Cleveland Cavaliers, you want to see LeBron James. But our 162-game schedule is such a grind, it makes it so hard to do that, and it increases the likelihood of injuries.

"There were less than 10% of guys who played 150 games or more last year, so if you're one of those fans that only gets to go to a couple of games, you could miss seeing your favorite player. It would be ultimately beneficial in everybody's best interest."

Even Texas Rangers All-Star first baseman Prince Fielder, baseball's current ironman, who once played all 162 games in three consecutive seasons and four of five, says he'd love to have a few more breathers.

"Let's put it this way: I sure wouldn't be upset about it," Fielder said. "It's such a long season, and the longer you play, the more you realize it's tough.

"Those day games, they're tough. I'm 31 now. I'm not young anymore."

There were 39 players in this year's All-Star Game 27 years or younger, but, remarkably, not a single All-Star has played in every game this year.

"You hate to change how the game has been, but I would be good with 154 games," Giants and National League All-Star manager Bruce Bochy said. "I would really be for it. It would be easier for the players. It think it would be easier to get the regular players out there more. And you would cut back on injuries.

"You think about it, it makes a lot of sense.

"I really think it would work.''

It's now time to make it work.

GALLERY: ALL-STAR GAME