PDA

View Full Version : Talk brewing about change in Wild Card structure


chisoxfanatic
09-16-2010, 06:50 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100916&content_id=14736870&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

slavko
09-16-2010, 06:59 PM
Anything that makes the season longer has my vote. Nothing says baseball like November.

Madvora
09-16-2010, 07:00 PM
Interesting. I like the idea of the wild card in baseball, but the system is unfair when teams that are competing for the same thing don't compete against the same teams.
If the end goal is the same, then the schedule should be the exact same. That can't really work with an unbalanced schedule and a wild card.

Pablo_Honey
09-16-2010, 07:49 PM
Anything that makes the season longer has my vote. Nothing says baseball like November.
I'd also love to see a longer season of baseball. Having said that, the weather will be a huge problem to deal with that late in the year and fatigue will catch up to players. I'd rather tweak the schedule without making it last into November.

ChicagoG19
09-16-2010, 09:26 PM
Here is what I would do.

-Shorten the season back to 154 games.

-Go back to only 2 divisions per league (AL East, AL West, etc.).

-Then have two division winners and 4 wildcards in each league.

-The division winners get byes in the first round (similar to the NFL) and wildcard winners fight it out in the first rounds.

Patrick134
09-16-2010, 09:32 PM
Without reading the article, I'm guessing this is based on getting the red sox-yankees to the postseason every year.

chisoxfanatic
09-16-2010, 10:21 PM
Interesting. I like the idea of the wild card in baseball, but the system is unfair when teams that are competing for the same thing don't compete against the same teams.
If the end goal is the same, then the schedule should be the exact same. That can't really work with an unbalanced schedule and a wild card.
Exactly. I really miss the old scheduling they used about a decade ago. I liked it more than this.

gogosox675
09-17-2010, 12:19 AM
I'm not sure I'm ready to add another playoff team just yet. I would rather make the LDS a best-of-seven series. I did like the idea of keeping the LDS 3-out-of-5 but only giving the wild card team one home game. Just don't add another team.

Oblong
09-17-2010, 07:53 AM
Being realistic that MLB will not shorten the regular season or contract the # of playoff games (that's taking away money!), I am not against this idea of having 2 wild card teams face off in either a 1 game playoff or a 3 game. Make them play the 3 consectutive days after the regular season ends. Then the division winners have 3 days to set their rotations up (A bonus for winning their division).

Last week on MLB Tonight, John Smoltz had an idea where you have 2 divisions, but first half/second half winners, that face off in the playoffs. In situations where it's the same team that wins both halves, then the team with the next best record in the second half wins it. You go back to 2 divisions, but still have 4 playoff teams. I don't like that idea because I like the whole 162 game season to mean something but it is cool to think about. I think it'd help teams like the Orioles or Blue Jays.

g0g0
09-17-2010, 07:56 AM
Here is what I would do.

-Shorten the season back to 154 games.

-Go back to only 2 divisions per league (AL East, AL West, etc.).

-Then have two division winners and 4 wildcards in each league.

-The division winners get byes in the first round (similar to the NFL) and wildcard winners fight it out in the first rounds.

I like that +1

ewokpelts
09-17-2010, 10:17 AM
the current format works.

thomas35forever
09-17-2010, 11:51 PM
Why reward more teams that didn't win their division?:scratch:

Sam Spade
09-18-2010, 12:00 AM
Being realistic that MLB will not shorten the regular season or contract the # of playoff games (that's taking away money!), I am not against this idea of having 2 wild card teams face off in either a 1 game playoff or a 3 game. Make them play the 3 consectutive days after the regular season ends. Then the division winners have 3 days to set their rotations up (A bonus for winning their division).

Last week on MLB Tonight, John Smoltz had an idea where you have 2 divisions, but first half/second half winners, that face off in the playoffs. In situations where it's the same team that wins both halves, then the team with the next best record in the second half wins it. You go back to 2 divisions, but still have 4 playoff teams. I don't like that idea because I like the whole 162 game season to mean something but it is cool to think about. I think it'd help teams like the Orioles or Blue Jays.
That's sounds horrible to me.

Dan H
09-18-2010, 04:33 AM
Adding a wild card team would be dumb. The great thing about Baseball in the past was that only first place teams went to the post-season. The Wild Card has worked better than I ever thought it would but to add another is just another money-grubbing way of changing the game. I can't stand the playoff systems in other sports that take months to complete when most of the teams don't belong in the post season to begin with. Adding a fifth team to the playoffs is diluting the sport. For me it will decrease interest.

Major League Baseball wants to increase interest? Put a better product on the field. Spare me any more changes under the great Budster.

Brian26
09-18-2010, 08:29 AM
Last week on MLB Tonight, John Smoltz had an idea where you have 2 divisions, but first half/second half winners, that face off in the playoffs. In situations where it's the same team that wins both halves, then the team with the next best record in the second half wins it. You go back to 2 divisions, but still have 4 playoff teams. I don't like that idea because I like the whole 162 game season to mean something but it is cool to think about. I think it'd help teams like the Orioles or Blue Jays.

That idea was bounced around for the strike-shortened '81 season. The problem is that the first half winners have no incentive to win in the 2nd half, so there's a possibility that they could tank on purpose in certain games in the 2nd half to set up playoff scenarios. Nobody wants to watch a lame-duck 2nd half schedule.

russ99
09-18-2010, 08:58 AM
Two wild cards is a horrible idea. Why reward another team that doesn't win the division?

Besides, baseball has a bigger problem than this, the unbalanced schedule and one league with two more teams than the other.

I would prefer 4 balanced divisions and no wild card to two wild cards.

And doesn't this seem like it's being floated solely for marketing purposes? God forbid there's a postseason without either the Yankees or Red Sox...

Huisj
09-18-2010, 11:00 AM
How about something like this: In the first round, the wild car team has to win 4 games before the division champion wins 3. So, for example, if the series is 3-2 in favor of the wild card team, and the division winner wins the next game, it's over. Maybe a little weird, but a lot simpler than re-arranging an entire format. Or if you want it even tougher, make it 4 and 2. Call it something like "Five chances to win 4".

gogosox675
09-18-2010, 12:40 PM
Being realistic that MLB will not shorten the regular season or contract the # of playoff games (that's taking away money!), I am not against this idea of having 2 wild card teams face off in either a 1 game playoff or a 3 game. Make them play the 3 consectutive days after the regular season ends. Then the division winners have 3 days to set their rotations up (A bonus for winning their division).

Last week on MLB Tonight, John Smoltz had an idea where you have 2 divisions, but first half/second half winners, that face off in the playoffs. In situations where it's the same team that wins both halves, then the team with the next best record in the second half wins it. You go back to 2 divisions, but still have 4 playoff teams. I don't like that idea because I like the whole 162 game season to mean something but it is cool to think about. I think it'd help teams like the Orioles or Blue Jays.

I don't like the fact that you could end up with the best overall record in your division and still not make the playoffs. This happened with Cincinnati and St. Louis in 1981.

downstairs
09-18-2010, 01:01 PM
I hate how every time we have one boring year, or one anomaly, everything needs to be looked at. Many years there is a great fight for the wild card, and there is no clear cut "both teams are going to make it" scenario. So what, this year Yankees/Rays is a boring fight.

You realize Minny/White Sox and Texas/Oakland are also boring fights because they're 99% assured.

Plus, it will never happen that with 15 games to go *every* division and *both* wildcards are all but decided.

So Yanks/Rays is boring... but the NL West and the NL wild card certainly are not.

No need to change anything.

Oblong
09-19-2010, 10:31 AM
I don't like the fact that you could end up with the best overall record in your division and still not make the playoffs. This happened with Cincinnati and St. Louis in 1981.

That's a great point.

ewokpelts
09-20-2010, 10:42 AM
why mess witha good thing?

if anything, just make the AL/NL DS best of 7. More games should pacify TBS.

I do NOT like the "let's have the wild card have one home game" argument. Last I checked, Joe Torre's yankees were a wild card in 2007. Imagine the uproar that the yankees only got one home playoff game in the alds.

Nellie_Fox
09-20-2010, 10:44 AM
Joe Torre's yankees were a wild card in 2007. Imagine the uproar that the yankees only got one home playoff game in the alds.Too bad.

ewokpelts
09-20-2010, 11:00 AM
Too bad.it's unfair. period. the wild card does not have home field at all in the first two rounds. Is it thier fault they advance with wins on the road?

ewokpelts
09-20-2010, 11:01 AM
Too bad.
oh, and torre's calling for this when he has been a division winner all but one time as a manager.

trust me, the media outcry when the red sox or yankees get only one home ALDS game will make this proposition disappear FAST.