PDA

View Full Version : expanded playoffs


jortafan
10-18-2002, 01:05 PM
just noticed this "wonderful" idea from everybody's favorite commissioner. If something like this were to go through, would this give our beloved ballclub a chance at the post-season, or is our management so inept that they would still screw things up. Either way, I'm shuddering in disgust.


http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E96%257E932624,00.html

Dadawg_77
10-18-2002, 01:09 PM
No, there is no rhyme nor reason for a three game playoff series. This should be placed with the worst ideas ever pile.

Nellie_Fox
10-18-2002, 01:15 PM
"We have the tightest playoff system in sports. I'm grateful for our playoff system. But we have to keep moving forward. The fact of the matter is, our fans like this." Not this fan.

doublem23
10-18-2002, 01:20 PM
And the sport keeps kicking itself in the gonads....

Iwritecode
10-18-2002, 01:42 PM
After seeing the Sox finish second or third for the past decade or so, I think that this idea could actually help their chances to eventually get to the WS once in our lifetimes. :o:

Paulwny
10-18-2002, 01:51 PM
Increase play-off games = increase in tv revenue

Nellie_Fox
10-18-2002, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by Paulwny
Increase play-off games = increase in tv revenue Yeah, those ABC Family Channel games probably really rake in the bucks. Add another round, and the first round games might end up on QVC.

Paulwny
10-18-2002, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox
Yeah, those ABC Family Channel games probably really rake in the bucks. Add another round, and the first round games might end up on QVC.

QVC = increase in female viewers

soxtalker
10-18-2002, 02:15 PM
I think that this is a horrible idea. Sure, Selig is looking at it as a way to increase the revenues. But does he care anything about the traditions? I hate to see the normal 162-game schedule become more and more irrelevant.

I'd dearly love to see the Sox get into the WS. An expanded playoff system might increase their chances of being in post-season play. But I'm not sure that it helps that much in getting to the WS or becoming champions, as playoffs also mean that you can get eliminated very quickly after having played a tremendous season. The Sox have been in the playoffs 3 times in the past 20 years, and they've been eliminated each time.

I wouldn't be surprised if the reduced importance of regular season games doesn't translate into lower attendance and local TV revenue. Of course, that will be harder to measure than the immediate increase in playoff TV.

Dadawg_77
10-18-2002, 02:25 PM
If 40% of the teams make the playoffs the regular season means a lot less then now, where you either have to be the best second place team or win your division format we have now.

But a Three game series, that every eclipses new coke for bad ideas.

voodoochile
10-18-2002, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox
Yeah, those ABC Family Channel games probably really rake in the bucks. Add another round, and the first round games might end up on QVC.

Wherever ABC puts the games is irrelevent. Without the extra games, the contracts go down in value, period. If ABC is dumb enough to hide the games where no one can see them, that is there problem and their revenue lost on advertising sales. It doesn't affect the contract they sign with MLB one bit...

Lip Man 1
10-18-2002, 05:14 PM
Unless baseball is willing to reduce the number of regular season games (end the year on September 15th) or move playoff games to warm weather or domed sites, this is STUPID.

What are we going to play baseball in New York, Chicago, or Detroit on November 15th? Are players going to be able to see or find a white baseball with snow on the ground?

How about those great fans being forced to sit in 20 degree weather!

Yea that'll increase the popularity of the sport!

Lip

PaleHoseGeorge
10-18-2002, 05:51 PM
The answer here is simple. Playoff games get TV ratings. Baseball can't be played at night in most northern cities in October. Baseball has 162 regular season games, twice either basketball or hockey, and ten-times football's.

So, solve the problem!

Reduce the number of regular season games, such as down to 120. Every team plays every other team in their league 8 times (8 games x 15 league opponents = 120 league games). The best team in each league goes to the World Series. Those 120 games will be VERY meaningful.--a trip to the frickin' World Series is riding on the outcome.

Throughout the summer, schedule tournament games completely apart from the other 120 games scheduled. (These could include regional rivalries such as Cubs/Sox). This tournament would eliminate teams after Labor Day, but every team would play not less than 40 games. Punch-out series to eliminate additional teams would occur in September and October until one championship game for the "Commissioner's Cup" would be played--probably someplace tropical--after the World Series. Make it a one-game "winner takes all" championship, like the Super Bowl. Now THAT will bring ratings.

The Commissioner's Cup championship would be the big corporate blowout with lots of hype and a long promotional build up, especially during the previous two weeks when World Series games were being played.

Play it at 6 pm Eastern Time on a Sunday in late-October. Really stick it to the NFL who thinks they can schedule their garbage Arizona/Detroit match ups anytime they want. I bet NBC (who has no NFL package) would eat it up. I bet they would do pre-game coverage the entire afternoon, too.

I'm just radical enough to suggest playing it in early-November. Screw the NFL. WE'RE BASEBALL, DAMMIT! :smile:

Baseball is a great sport. If the people running the game had any nerve, they could do great things with it.

jortafan
10-18-2002, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Unless baseball is willing to reduce the number of regular season games (end the year on September 15th) or move playoff games to warm weather or domed sites, this is STUPID.

What are we going to play baseball in New York, Chicago, or Detroit on November 15th? Are players going to be able to see or find a white baseball with snow on the ground?

How about those great fans being forced to sit in 20 degree weather!

Yea that'll increase the popularity of the sport!

Lip

Actually, I've always wondered if shortening the season would be feasible.
What I could see happening is going to roughly a 140-game season, ending at Labor Day weekend. Rounds of playoffs could be held throughout September, with the World Series being held the first week of October.
That would be radical enough that you'd have to close off the record books and start over, much in the way that 19th Century baseball statistics and records are considered separate from the Modern Era. Some people (although not myself) might even think that preferable, since you wouldn't have to pay attention to long-dead ballplayers, and everybody current would be setting records.
While a part of me shudders at the thought of a shorter season, 140 games (like the full-season minor leagues do now) still gives quite a few games, allows for a month of playoffs, you probably could add an extra round or make the first round of playoffs a full seven-game series, though I'm not suggesting how that should be done. It also would put the World Series back to early October, which is the way it used to be, and gets us out of the habit of Halloween basebal in the friggin cold. Wo0rld Series
OK everybody, you can now attack me and tell me I'm being ridiculous, but I find this "radical" idea preferable to Bud's babble.

StepsInSC
10-18-2002, 08:28 PM
i cant imagine anyone in baseball agreeing to shorten the season, especially the players' union running the show. players like sammy would have a fit over not being able to reach the 60 HR plateau as easily

MarkEdward
10-18-2002, 09:11 PM
Hey, I've got an idea: At the beginning of the season, all 30 teams are named Wild Card teams. Then, they play a 162-game round-robin tournament. The top two teams from each league make it to the Super-Duper Championship Round (could also be called the League Championship Series). The winners of these two series makes it to the World Series.

StepsInSC
10-18-2002, 09:14 PM
make it 29 teams that get access to the wild card 162 game round robin tournament (all but the devil rays) and i'll jump on board.

guillen4life13
10-19-2002, 10:10 AM
change it to how it was without the division series.

and i never actually thought about it, but here's something that's interesting to think about:

had the old, old system (only playoff series was world series, with best team from each league making it) was still in effect in 2000, the Sox would have been to a World Series.

don't that suck?

longshot7
10-19-2002, 01:56 PM
I have to agree with Nellie - expanding the playoffs even more would be disaster - one of the nice things about baseball is that NOT everyone makes the playoffs.

But I am in favor of the division series - I hope they leave it the way it is now.

and PHG, good suggestions - but this isn't soccer - a separate tournament is really not a good idea. It would confuse people as to who was the real #1, not unlike the way college football is now, and besides in my opinion, why fix something if it ain't broke.

and yes, I realize if the playoff format hadn't changed, our boys would've made it to the series in 2000, but you know what, we didn't deserve it. we got swept by the wild-card team, for crissakes. eventually, we'll get there.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-19-2002, 04:00 PM
Originally posted by longshot7
I have to agree with Nellie - expanding the playoffs even more would be disaster - one of the nice things about baseball is that NOT everyone makes the playoffs.

But I am in favor of the division series - I hope they leave it the way it is now.

and PHG, good suggestions - but this isn't soccer - a separate tournament is really not a good idea. It would confuse people as to who was the real #1, not unlike the way college football is now, and besides in my opinion, why fix something if it ain't broke.

and yes, I realize if the playoff format hadn't changed, our boys would've made it to the series in 2000, but you know what, we didn't deserve it. we got swept by the wild-card team, for crissakes. eventually, we'll get there.

It's not "soccer" to have multiple champions. In fact, few sports besides football, basketball, and hockey pick just one champion. The only reason these sports do it is because their seasons are so short they can't support more than one champion. Can you imagine playing a forty game football season? Everyone would be dead.

American sports like auto racing (all types), golf, and tennis do just fine awarding champions for any number of different accomplishments. The winner of the Indy 500 has been the defacto champion of open wheel racing regardless of some silly point system the league created for the entire season. What's the big deal with confusion? There is none.

There is NOTHING preventing a truly great baseball team from winning all the championships. To the contrary, Tiger Woods winning the grand slam elevates his accomplishments over all the mediocrities who've won simply one U.S. Open. This would be OUTSTANDING publicity for baseball, too.

And the Sox most-definitely deserved a trip to the World Series in 2000. It's the Seattle Mariners who slimed their way into the playoffs with a wild-card berth. The Mariners playing for the league championship is what cheapens the World Series and the 162 regular season schedule, too. You got that one exactly bass ackwards.

And finally, if you think baseball "ain't broke, don't fix it", then you simply aren't paying very close attention. Playoff games are being televised on ABC Family Channel, for crying out loud!

MarqSox
10-19-2002, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge

And finally, if you think baseball "ain't broke, don't fix it", then you simply aren't paying very close attention. Playoff games are being televised on ABC Family Channel, for crying out loud!

Baseball's certainly broke ... but the playoffs aren't the problem. Revamping the postseason now would be akin to the Sox trading for an outfielder to address their pitching woes. It just doesn't make sense.

duke of dorwood
10-19-2002, 05:02 PM
Baseball, which relied on tradition to connect the game with its history, continues to lose that link. Expanding playoffs would continue that disintigration. (In my opinion)

WhiteSox = Life
10-19-2002, 06:41 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
Baseball, which relied on tradition to connect the game with its history, continues to lose that link. Expanding playoffs would continue that disintigration. (In my opinion)

I don't even think baseball relied on tradition to get fans back into the game. It relied more on gimmickry and showmanship.

I could see Cal Ripken, Jr. breaking Gehrig's streak as tradition because that took years of hard work and effort and a never-say-die attitude.

But, as many people will tell you, Sham-Me's and McGwire's "magical summer" of '98 is what brought the fans back into the game. And, as many traditionalists will tell you, the home run, while an important part of baseball nowadays, is not baseball tradition. Even if a large portion of the greatest players were home run hitters, the home run was not a baseball tradition until Babe Ruth came along. Long before the Babe ever showed up, tradition was, and still should be, playing hard, always trying your best, and never giving up. How much tradition is there really in Major League Baseball nowadays?

And, baseball's foundation is absolutely NOT using certain types of supplements to reach what are so-called traditions...

:moron
"My Sammy is no less a total baseball iconic tradition than I am any less of a tremendously remarkable person, who is also an incredibly magnificent, unbiased sportswriter!"

:nandrolone
"Thanks Jay-Jay. Hey, WS=L! I am too a traditionalist! I use all the traditional... uh... vitamins, like: dehydroepiandosterone, androstenedione, androstenediol and nandrolone."

PaleHoseGeorge
10-19-2002, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by MarqSox
Baseball's certainly broke ... but the playoffs aren't the problem. Revamping the postseason now would be akin to the Sox trading for an outfielder to address their pitching woes. It just doesn't make sense.

I have three words for this:

ABC Family Channel.

Baseball's playoffs are most-definitely broke.

Jerry_Manuel
10-19-2002, 09:32 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I have three words for this:

ABC Family Channel.

Baseball's playoffs are most-definitely broke.

It could be worse.

They could be on the "U", home of great looking White Sox baseball.

MarqSox
10-19-2002, 11:48 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I have three words for this:

ABC Family Channel.

Baseball's playoffs are most-definitely broke.

That's a remnant of Fox's contract with MLB, which put extra games on what was then Fox Family, since Fox had few other networks to show games. The Fox Family package was transferred as part of Fox Family's sale to ABC, which converted it to ABC Family. I believe (though I'm not positive) that Family contract ends this year, which means next year the extra playoffs will be shown on any of ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 or even ESPNClassic.

Either way, you don't fix a bad TV package by revamping the whole postseason, that's illogical.

WinningUgly!
10-20-2002, 12:08 AM
I actually think expanding the playoffs is a no brainer. MLB is hurting so bad because the casual fans could care less about the sport. What brings the casual fans back to their local teams? Having their local team in the playoffs...or at least in playoff contention. How do you get more teams in playoff contention? Expand the playoffs.

Are most diehard baseball fans against expanding the postseason? Yes, but it's not gonna be enough to make you stop following the sport is it? Were most diehards against Bud & the boys' decision to expand from 4 to 8 playoff teams back in 93? Yes? Are you still around?

Nellie_Fox
10-20-2002, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by WinningUgly!
Are most diehard baseball fans against expanding the postseason? Yes, but it's not gonna be enough to make you stop following the sport is it? Were most diehards against Bud & the boys' decision to expand from 4 to 8 playoff teams back in 93? Yes? Are you still around? Oh, they've come close to killing me off several times. I didn't watch a game for a couple of years after '94. They could finish me off with further expansion of playoffs. Just wait until they get a sub-.500 team into the playoffs.

I suspect that they think that for every "traditional" fan like me that they lose (and those they've already lost aren't here to answer you, are they?) they will pick up a couple of casual fans, for a net gain. I really think they don't care about losing fans like me, so long as they pick up some soccer mom, throw back the home run ball, do the wave, casual fan.

Dan H
10-20-2002, 07:51 AM
Baseball doesn't need to expand the playoffs in any way. If you can't generate interest with three division races and a wild card team in each league, and two sets of playoffs before the World Series, you have some real problems.

As far as giving the Sox a better chance of getting to the Series, how about putting a championship team on the field once in a while? And George, if Seattle slimed their way into the playoffs, why couldn't the Sox slime their way past them? Three and out with having the first two games at home is inexcusable.

jortafan
10-20-2002, 08:13 AM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox
It really think they don't care about losing fans like me, so long as they pick up some soccer mom, throw back the home run ball, do the wave, casual fan.

all bud and his cronies care about is drawing the kind of soccer mom fan with her three kids whose willing to spend her money at the concessions stand for hot dogs and souvenirs to keep her kids quiet and entertained for an afternoon. face it, they probably think we're chumps for even caring as much as we do. yes, that includes me too.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-20-2002, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by Dan H
...As far as giving the Sox a better chance of getting to the Series, how about putting a championship team on the field once in a while? And George, if Seattle slimed their way into the playoffs, why couldn't the Sox slime their way past them? Three and out with having the first two games at home is inexcusable.

I said Seattle "slimed" their way into the playoffs because 162 games ought to count for more than getting home-field advantage in a best-of-5 series over a team that couldn't even win one of THREE diluted down division championships--forget about achieving the best record in the league!

Isn't THAT what made the World Series great? The two BEST teams, proven across 162 games (154 before that), playing in a do-or-die world championship? MLB even tried expanding it to best-of-9 because it was so important, LOL!

Baseball plays 162 regular season games. Giving Seattle a chance to beat the Sox cheapens every last one of those games--and the World Series, too. This, in a nutshell, is why ratings for baseball games--both regular season and playoffs--are down. Not just this year, but for the last 15+ years, too.

If baseball went to an 81 game schedule (like the NHL and NBA) or a 16 game schedule (like the NFL), yours would be a valid point. Stupid **** (like a blocked kick, a freak goal, a lousy ref call, or the best offense in the league going cold for 3 games) would determine "the champion team in the league" like it already does without complaint from moronic fans in basketball, hockey, and football. Stupid **** wins all of their championships.

Baseball is DIFFERENT. We'll all be better off when we finally recognize it, deal with it, and move on with the reality of it.

Denial has landed us on ABC Family Channel.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-20-2002, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by MarqSox
That's a remnant of Fox's contract with MLB, which put extra games on what was then Fox Family, since Fox had few other networks to show games. The Fox Family package was transferred as part of Fox Family's sale to ABC, which converted it to ABC Family. I believe (though I'm not positive) that Family contract ends this year, which means next year the extra playoffs will be shown on any of ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 or even ESPNClassic.

Either way, you don't fix a bad TV package by revamping the whole postseason, that's illogical.

Look, the reason MLB playoff games are being played on an obscure cable TV channel is because Fox WON the bid over everybody else. If you think it is bad now, you ought to see the bids the losers like ABC/ESPN made, LOL!

It's a happy coincidence that ABC bought Fox Family and, in theory, some playoff games will end up on ESPN next season. But let's stop kidding ourselves that MLB didn't award television rights to Fox, including Fox Family Channel. The level of denial around here! Sheesh...

Baseball is broken and all I'm hearing from the rest of you are reasons to believe it will get a lot worse before it will ever get better.

More playoff games with even more mediocre teams participating? You know I was joking when I said future MLB playoff games would end up on Local Cable Access. Reading what some of you are advocating here, now I'm not so sure it's not a joke.

Please start thinking outside the box, people. That's the only place the answers lie.

voodoochile
10-20-2002, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Look, the reason MLB playoff games are being played on an obscure cable TV channel is because Fox WON the bid over everybody else. If you think it is bad now, you ought to see the bids the losers like ABC/ESPN made, LOL!

It's a happy coincidence that ABC bought Fox Family and, in theory, some playoff games will end up on ESPN next season. But let's stop kidding ourselves that MLB didn't award television rights to Fox, including Fox Family Channel. The level of denial around here! Sheesh...

Baseball is broken and all I'm hearing from the rest of you are reasons to believe it will get a lot worse before it will ever get better.

More playoff games with even more mediocre teams participating? You know I was joking when I said future MLB playoff games would end up on Local Cable Access. Reading what some of you are advocating here, now I'm not so sure it's not a joke.

Please start thinking outside the box, people. That's the only place the answers lie.

Us thinking outside the box won't make a bit of difference, if the owners won't do it also. I wish they had more sense at MLB, but they don't and for now it is simpler to expand the playoffs and keep more fans interested later in the season than to create an entirely new system. No way do they go back to only 2 or 4 teams making the playoffs. Not going to happen, ever - get used to the system, whether you like it or not. I don't care where the games are televised. I don't think it matters to most people and other sports have had games on cable stations for a long time and are doing just fine. Like it or not, the current economic environment calls for more playoff games, not less. That's just basic economics and going back to only two teams in the playoffs won't mean a more exciting regular season (games between KC and Detroit still won't matter nationally in August) and if a few teams continue to dominate the regular season, it will eventually lead to less people watching, not more.

I for one would like to see the current system continue. I think it is a good one, but that's just my opinion, and doesn't make it right.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-20-2002, 05:47 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Us thinking outside the box won't make a bit of difference, if the owners won't do it also. I wish they had more sense at MLB, but they don't and for now it is simpler to expand the playoffs and keep more fans interested later in the season than to create an entirely new system. No way do they go back to only 2 or 4 teams making the playoffs. Not going to happen, ever - get used to the system, whether you like it or not. I don't care where the games are televised. I don't think it matters to most people and other sports have had games on cable stations for a long time and are doing just fine. Like it or not, the current economic environment calls for more playoff games, not less. That's just basic economics and going back to only two teams in the playoffs won't mean a more exciting regular season (games between KC and Detroit still won't matter nationally in August) and if a few teams continue to dominate the regular season, it will eventually lead to less people watching, not more.

I for one would like to see the current system continue. I think it is a good one, but that's just my opinion, and doesn't make it right.

Who said anything about cutting back to just 2-4 playoff teams? To the contrary, I'm proposing ALL teams being kept alive in a separate championship through at least Labor Day. This would be in addition to 3-4 teams chasing the pennant. A really good team would be alive for both championships.

Who said anything about cutting back the number of playoff games? To the contrary, I'm proposing most of September and all of October (and even perhaps early-November!) being devoted to playoff rounds with teams getting eliminated. The total number of playoff games played would at least equal, if not exceed, the total playoff games currently played.

Who said anything about lousy teams (like Detroit and KC) playing boring games in August? To the contrary, I'm proposing these teams still having a chance to reach the playoffs through at least Labor Day. Playing a short 40-game tournament, it's not unthinkable a lousy team could win a few improbable games and sneak into the next round. If you don't believe me, look at the 2001 Chicago Bears. :smile:

Admit it--this format solves all your problems. It's scary to contemplate blowing up "the current system", but who cares? The current system landed us on ABC Family Channel (formerly doing business as Fox Family Channel).

Good riddance, I say!

:gulp:

Soxheads
10-20-2002, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Who said anything about cutting back to just 2-4 playoff teams? To the contrary, I'm proposing ALL teams being kept alive in a separate championship through at least Labor Day. This would be in addition to 3-4 teams chasing the pennant. A really good team would be alive for both championships.

Who said anything about cutting back the number of playoff games? To the contrary, I'm proposing most of September and all of October (and even perhaps early-November!) being devoted to playoff rounds with teams getting eliminated. The total number of playoff games played would at least equal, if not exceed, the total playoff games currently played.

Who said anything about lousy teams (like Detroit and KC) playing boring games in August? To the contrary, I'm proposing these teams still having a chance to reach the playoffs through at least Labor Day. Playing a short 40-game tournament, it's not unthinkable a lousy team could win a few improbable games and sneak into the next round. If you don't believe me, look at the 2001 Chicago Bears. :smile:

Admit it--this format solves all your problems. It's scary to contemplate blowing up "the current system", but who cares? The current system landed us on ABC Family Channel (formerly doing business as Fox Family Channel).

Good riddins, I say!

:gulp:

I believe the word are loooking for is 'riddance' my good man! :D:

PaleHoseGeorge
10-20-2002, 06:54 PM
Thanks for catching this before Nellie!

:)

Soxheads
10-20-2002, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Thanks for catching this before Nellie!

:)

I got your back, George!

Dadawg_77
10-20-2002, 10:46 PM
George, I think you may have something but your execution is way off. I believe MLB should keep the current system they have but throw in something new at the end of the World Series. The World Cup of Baseball. Each country forms a team from their citizen or ex-patriots. Games should be played at international locations, San Juan, Havana, Tokyo and Mexico City just to name a few. You would not only generate interest in the US, but pick up tons more of international interest and money then you do now. The US marketplace is already saturated with sports entertainment products so it may be time to move to markets with a greater potential to grow.

MarqSox
10-20-2002, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
George, I think you may have something but your execution is way off. I believe MLB should keep the current system they have but throw in something new at the end of the World Series. The World Cup of Baseball. Each country forms a team from their citizen or ex-patriots. Games should be played at international locations, San Juan, Havana, Tokyo and Mexico City just to name a few. You would not only generate interest in the US, but pick up tons more of international interest and money then you do now. The US marketplace is already saturated with sports entertainment products so it may be time to move to markets with a greater potential to grow.

I think a more likely scenario would be the World Series champion playing the winner of the Japanese league. That matchup is probably a decade or two away, since MLB would have more to lose than to gain from it, but I think it'll happen eventually.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-20-2002, 11:23 PM
Don't you just love how Marilyn leans into it in Dawg's sig file?

"Hey batter, batter, batter..."

:)

Dadawg_77
10-21-2002, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Don't you just love how Marilyn leans into it in Dawg's sig file?

"Hey batter, batter, batter..."



Who knows, maybe after the shoot they both said what the hell. I guess you were the one that pick the pic to be a tag.

MarqSox
10-21-2002, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
I guess you were the one that pick the pic to be a tag.

:?:

Dadawg_77
10-21-2002, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by MarqSox
:?:

Pic was short for picture and it is one of the tags found here at WSI.

pudge
10-21-2002, 04:36 PM
My random thoughts that nobody will care about:

1) A "separate" championship as suggested by PHG is an admirable attempt at "thinking out of the box" - but who in the heck is going to care about a secondary title? Nobody! It's like saying, "Hey, the Bears suck this year, but Chicago's Arena team may win the title! Woo hoo!"

2) The idea that the Sox should have been in the World Series because they had the best record in 2000 is weak. The problem with this logic is that if the rules were different, teams like the Yanks, M's or A's would have structured their entire season differently... The Yanks would have played the entire season with the goal of winning 100+ games. Nobody can say the Sox would have had the best record in 2000 if the rules were different. "Best record" now means nothing, and because of that, I wish MLB went back to the days when it was just the division champs (two in each league) that went to the LCS.

3) If you are going to have more play-offs, I agree with "thinking out of the box" - how about a first-half champ and a second-half champ playing each other in each division? (If the same team wins both halfs, then there's no series.) How many times does an underdog team go on to have a great second half? It's like mid-season would be the start of a whole new season, how cool would that be?

Dan H
10-22-2002, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I said Seattle "slimed" their way into the playoffs because 162 games ought to count for more than getting home-field advantage in a best-of-5 series over a team that couldn't even win one of THREE diluted down division championships--forget about achieving the best record in the league!

Isn't THAT what made the World Series great? The two BEST teams, proven across 162 games (154 before that), playing in a do-or-die world championship? MLB even tried expanding it to best-of-9 because it was so important, LOL!

Baseball plays 162 regular season games. Giving Seattle a chance to beat the Sox cheapens every last one of those games--and the World Series, too. This, in a nutshell, is why ratings for baseball games--both regular season and playoffs--are down. Not just this year, but for the last 15+ years, too.

If baseball went to an 81 game schedule (like the NHL and NBA) or a 16 game schedule (like the NFL), yours would be a valid point. Stupid **** (like a blocked kick, a freak goal, a lousy ref call, or the best offense in the league going cold for 3 games) would determine "the champion team in the league" like it already does without complaint from moronic fans in basketball, hockey, and football. Stupid **** wins all of their championships.

Baseball is DIFFERENT. We'll all be better off when we finally recognize it, deal with it, and move on with the reality of it.

Denial has landed us on ABC Family Channel.

Don't misunderstand. I've never been a fan of the wild card or expanding the playoffs. First place teams should make it and that should be it. The fact that two wild card teams are in it now takes away from the Series. I agree with you that the NBA, NFL and NHL playoffs are too long and even anti-climatic and that a division title doesn't mean what is once did. And we all know that the money is the motivating factor. This year's TV schedule? It's atrocious.

My point about the Sox was this: They now have lost 9 straight post season home games. And if a team has the best record in the American League, it shouldn't drop its first two home games of the playoffs no matter who they are playing. Plus, we really don't know what would have happened in 2000 if the Sox remained in the old West and had to contend with Seattle and Oakland instead of Cleveland and Kansas City.

This is what I want for the Sox no matter what the dumb asses who run the sport do: A World Series. No more promises, no more rebuilding, no more blaming the fans and even less promoting of the All-Star game. I will not be satisified with some division title or wimpy wild card berth. So right now, my beef is more with the Sox not going to the Series than the system, as bad as that system is.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-24-2002, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by pudge
My random thoughts that nobody will care about

2) The idea that the Sox should have been in the World Series because they had the best record in 2000 is weak. The problem with this logic is that if the rules were different, teams like the Yanks, M's or A's would have structured their entire season differently... The Yanks would have played the entire season with the goal of winning 100+ games. Nobody can say the Sox would have had the best record in 2000 if the rules were different. "Best record" now means nothing, and because of that, I wish MLB went back to the days when it was just the division champs (two in each league) that went to the LCS....

Huh? How do you figure that? It was the SOX, not the Yankees, who clinched early. Manuel played the "b" team the entire last week. We were the ones who backed into 95 wins; not the Yankees.

EVERYONE structured their season exactly the same. Only one team had the best record, the Sox. 95 wins got them nothing but an extra game at Comiskey if the series went the full five games. Big Deal.

I bet even Chicago's arena league team would get a better shake than that, don't you think?