PDA

View Full Version : Should baseball add more teams to playoffs?


Lip Man 1
07-17-2004, 03:06 PM
Many here at WSI talk about how 'luck' basically decides who wins in the post season (as opposed to talent...)...well the MLBPA has apparently decided they have had enough of 'luck over talent,' and are trying to do something about it. (Hear, hear!)

Jayson Stark's column (read the whole thing...)

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1840668

Lip

WinningUgly!
07-17-2004, 03:29 PM
Six teams would make the playoffs in each league -- three division winners and three wild-card teams.

The two division winners with the best record in each league then would receive first-round byes.I do not like the idea of teams getting bye-weeks in the post season.

Brian26
07-17-2004, 07:58 PM
Ugh.

Reading that just gave me a headache.

Let's just keep the playoff format the way it is now. We don't need 6 teams from each league (12 teams total...which is 40% of the teams in MLB) making the playoffs. Both proposals in Stark's column are convoluted messes that one would expect to see in Arena Football. The set-up right now is fine as long as its not tweaked every two years. The "two-leagues of 8-teams" format worked for years without a problem. The 4 divisions worked just fine from the late 60's to 1993. The current format is fine too. If a wild card team occassionally wins, like Florida, then so be it. I don't care about attracting kids who might be watching skateboarding on Saturday afternoons- any news fans this convoluted mess of a playoff postseason who attract would certainly drive away 10 times as many existing fans. Isn't this a recycled column that Stark puts out every 6 months?

Lip Man 1
07-17-2004, 11:27 PM
Gotta love the idea of cutting the regular season back to 154 games they way it used to be. And if this column is 'recycled,' then Jayson sure has a lot 'current' quotes doesn't he?

I like the simple, logical, basic idea that the team with the best record gets all the breaks, all the edges just like in the other pro sports.

This is insane that the wild card doesn't automatically play the best team and that depending on matchups a team that won 86 games can beat out a team that wins 100 because it's only a five game series..

That's wrong.

Lip

samram
07-19-2004, 04:37 PM
Possible playoff expansion. (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1840668)

Jayson Stark wrote about this today. It's Al Leiter's idea to expand the playoffs to six teams in each league with the two top teams getting a first round bye, then extending the division series to seven games, and leaving the LCS and WS alone. (The Sox would have had to play a one game playoff with Toronto last year to determine the final wild card spot.) It sounds interesting, but I wonder if it would cheapen the playoffs if teams with 85 wins and the sixth best record in the league were in. What do you think?

ma_deuce
07-19-2004, 04:41 PM
I think the flawed system we have right now is the best it is going to get. At least with the current system, the division and the league titles still have some meaning. Further erosion is not necessary.

Deuce

FarWestChicago
07-19-2004, 05:17 PM
No!

Irishsox1
07-19-2004, 05:18 PM
For years only 2 teams made the playoffs, then 4 teams in 69, then 6 in '94. So with expansion I believe baseball should have more teams make the playoffs. I like Starks idea. As for the All-Star game providing home field, its a bad idea. Best record should decide homefield, here's proof. The team on the left had the best record going into the World Series, they would have had homefield if best record actually decided homefield advantage. The team on the right actually won the world series. The star shows who actually had homefield advantage for that year. So according to the results the team with home field adavantage has won the World Series 7 out of the last 9 world series. The old system of flip flopping was bad, but the All-Star game is worse.

95 - Cleveland Homefield - Winner Atlanta*
96 - Braves Homefield - Winner Yankees*
97 - Marlins Homefield - Winner Marlins*
98 - Yankees Homefield - Winner Yankees*
99 - Atlanta* Homefield - Winner Yankees
00 - Mets Homefield - Winner Yankees*
01 - Yankees Homefield - Winner Arizona*
02 - Anaheim Homefield - Winner Anaheim*
03 - Yankees* Homefield - Winner Marlins

PaleHoseGeorge
07-19-2004, 05:21 PM
NO!!!

VA_GoGoSox
07-19-2004, 05:27 PM
Absolutely not. Baseball has a LONG season with a ton of games, but what makes is cool is that every game matters. To cut down the importance of regular season games and division races is just stupid. JMHO.

Even though this would have helped the Sox last year, I'm still against it. The Sox had a so-so year and didn't deserve to make the playoffs.

Dadawg_77
07-19-2004, 05:30 PM
Lieter idea is too make it harder for Wild Card teams to win it all. Thus the lower teams would have to one more series then better teams. Inventive idea, that might work, plus additional revenue form the increased playoff spots might be worth it.

Brian26
07-19-2004, 05:31 PM
This is insane that the wild card doesn't automatically play the best team and that depending on matchups a team that won 86 games can beat out a team that wins 100 because it's only a five game series..

That's wrong.


But that's the way it has always been in one form or another. Up until '85, weren't the NLCS and ALCS both best of 5 format? So, from 1969 to 1984, the League Championship Series was decided in a best 3 of 5 format that didn't give an edge to either team. The Detroit Tigers could have won the AL East by 30 games with over 100 wins, but they'd still have to play the Kansas City Royals, who won the AL West with 87 victories. That's a heck of a short series to decide who gets to the World Series. But, it seemed to work just fine.

samram
07-19-2004, 05:32 PM
Absolutely not. Baseball has a LONG season with a ton of games, but what makes is cool is that every game matters. To cut down the importance of regular season games and division races is just stupid. JMHO.

Even though this would have helped the Sox last year, I'm still against it. The Sox had a so-so year and didn't deserve to make the playoffs.
Yeah, I agree with you. I also would hate to think the Sox could break their WS drought after getting into the playoffs as a fifth seed or something like that. What makes the baseball playoffs better than any other sports' is you basically have to win your division, and the wild card has usually had at least 90 wins. The other sports have third and fourth place teams in (even football in some cases).

Brian26
07-19-2004, 05:33 PM
One other quick thought...

Although 154 games was used for a long time, I think it would be doing a disservice to all of the guys who have set records with the current 162-game format if it was changed again. We've had 162 games long enough to establish a tradition that shouldn't be changed. Let's keep it the way it is.

Dadawg_77
07-19-2004, 05:35 PM
Yeah, I agree with you. I also would hate to think the Sox could break their WS drought after getting into the playoffs as a fifth seed or something like that. What makes the baseball playoffs better than any other sports' is you basically have to win your division, and the wild card has usually had at least 90 wins. The other sports have third and fourth place teams in (even football in some cases).
But if the Sox won the World Series under the Lieter format that would have been one tough road. First a three game series in either Boston or Min, then taking on Yankees in a best of seven, then another AL team, only to face the NL team. That would have been one hell of a ride.

Dadawg_77
07-19-2004, 05:38 PM
Arena football the propose system is lifted straight form the NFL. Wild cards games, then divisional games, then conf, then Super Bowl. Seems to work for those guys, pretty well.

PaleHoseGeorge
07-19-2004, 05:42 PM
Arena football the propose system is lifted straight form the NFL. Wild cards games, then divisional games, then conf, then Super Bowl. Seems to work for those guys, pretty well.
Huh? Football's season is 16 games long and every single one of them is a week-long build-up to the actual event.

Add more baseball playoff teams = flush the relevance of 162 regular season games right down the drain. Worst-idea-ever.

I swear to God, I would talk to West and put the entire website on a 6-month hiatus from April through September. We'll talk Sox baseball when the games start meaning something again. No sense flushing our money down the toilet pissing about meaningless games.

Baseball is not the NFL. Copying the NFL is how MLB wound up in the mess it is in today.

doublem23
07-19-2004, 05:50 PM
I agree with George. I'd personally rather see the MLB go back to the two-division format and just have 2 teams make the postseason from each league.

samram
07-19-2004, 05:50 PM
But if the Sox won the World Series under the Lieter format that would have been one tough road. First a three game series in either Boston or Min, then taking on Yankees in a best of seven, then another AL team, only to face the NL team. That would have been one hell of a ride.
That's true, and I guess the best of seven in the second round protects against a team getting hot in the three game series and carrying momentum to the next round and winning the first two just based on that. I still think there is something to be said for making the regular season count more. During the last two weeks of the regular season, I think people like watching the top two in a division fight for a chance at the playoffs. Under Leiter's system, there could be teams with no chance at the division, who have 78 or 80 wins, fighting it out- the quality of teams battling would be lower. Who knows, MLB may have to do something if they want to keep the ASG the way it is, with the winning league getting homefield.

doublem23
07-19-2004, 05:51 PM
No, too many teams make it as is.

FarWestChicago
07-19-2004, 06:30 PM
Arena football the propose system is lifted straight form the NFL. Wild cards games, then divisional games, then conf, then Super Bowl. Seems to work for those guys, pretty well.You want to copy arena football? http://www.flyingsock.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/confused.gif

Does Billy Beane own an arena football team or something?

RKMeibalane
07-19-2004, 07:01 PM
Absolutely not!

doublem23
07-19-2004, 07:28 PM
Does Billy Beane own an arena football team or something?
The San Jose Sabermetricats

fuzzy_patters
07-19-2004, 07:56 PM
I agree with George. I'd personally rather see the MLB go back to the two-division format and just have 2 teams make the postseason from each league.
Bingo! While the expanded playoffs added attendance for a few teams by giving them some extra playoff games, it has decreased interest in the pennant races by cheapening their value. For example, who really cared who won the AL East last year when you knew both Boston and New York would probably make the post-season anyway. Expanding the play-offs was Bud's stupidest idea ever, aside for that radical realignment crap.

OurBitchinMinny
07-19-2004, 08:04 PM
No!!!Thats why making baseballs postseason is so much more meaningful than other sports. You dont see NBA or NHL teams spraying champagne when they make the playoffs, because half the league does. If you reach baseballs postseason you have already had a great year. You are one of the best 8 teams in the league.

Brian26
07-19-2004, 08:34 PM
Add more baseball playoff teams = flush the relevance of 162 regular season games right down the drain. Worst-idea-ever.
Thank You. Agreed 100%

FarWestChicago
07-19-2004, 09:10 PM
The San Jose SabermetricatsWell done!!

http://www.flyingsock.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/banana.gif

RKMeibalane
07-19-2004, 10:01 PM
I agree with George. I'd personally rather see the MLB go back to the two-division format and just have 2 teams make the postseason from each league.
I agree, as well. Baseball was much more interesting when only two teams from each league advanced to post-season play, primarily because everyone knew that they were seeing the best teams in each league. That isn't the case anymore, as teams like the Cubs come within five outs of the World Series. When something like that happens, it's time to make changes.

A lot of people think reverting to the two-division format would hurt competition. I actually think it would increase competition, because teams that were originally playing for a Wild Card berth would be focused on winning their division. Teams wouldn't be able to hope that 85 wins would be enough, becuase it wouldn't be under the old format. Owners would have no other choice but to spend money to put together more competitive ballclubs. That is, every owner expect Reinsdorf. Nothing will make him spend money.

:reinsy

"And it's ALL YOUR FAULT, too!"

Dadawg_77
07-20-2004, 12:23 AM
You want to copy arena football? http://www.flyingsock.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/confused.gif

Does Billy Beane own an arena football team or something?
Wow, your wit never ceases to amaze me. Is that your millionth Beane joke so far?

Dadawg_77
07-20-2004, 12:31 AM
Huh? Football's season is 16 games long and every single one of them is a week-long build-up to the actual event.

Add more baseball playoff teams = flush the relevance of 162 regular season games right down the drain. Worst-idea-ever.

I swear to God, I would talk to West and put the entire website on a 6-month hiatus from April through September. We'll talk Sox baseball when the games start meaning something again. No sense flushing our money down the toilet pissing about meaningless games.

Baseball is not the NFL. Copying the NFL is how MLB wound up in the mess it is in today.George, come on. This is all about the money. More teams that make the playoffs will increase attendance, regular season rating and the national contract for the additional 20 playoff games.

Also there will be more teams racing for something, the top teams trying to get the bye and bottom teams trying to finish 3rd or 4th, or they will be at a distinct disadvantage under the proposed system. While it would cheapen the regular season a bit, it wouldn't change it to the level of the NBA or NHL, but on par with the NFL in terms of what the regular season means. All this talk about the season more meaningful and more exciting under a two divisional format is complete missing it. More teams have a chance under the current system thus baseball is a lot more exciting, remember all the hoopla here last year. It would have never happen because we would have been fighting for fourth under the two divisional format. Expanding the playoffs was the one good thing Pud has done.

StillMissOzzie
07-20-2004, 12:39 AM
Sure, when they reorganize all of MLB with 4 divisions in each league, do away with the DH, and shave about a dozen games off the schedule.


SMO
:gulp:

bigfoot
07-20-2004, 01:01 AM
Finally, the true definition of college football's BCS. Bud Concessionaire Selig!!!!! If Bud wants to watch those flaming monkeys fly out his arse, and try to turn MLB into the NHL/NBA type of playoff series.

Maximo
07-20-2004, 09:31 AM
No.

I'd be more in favor of eliminating divisions and having one pennant winner from each league face each other in a one game World Series taking place in the middle of the night in a cornfield somewhere in Iowa.

Baby Fisk
07-20-2004, 09:47 AM
No!

Just look at the NHL/NBA -- regular seasons are meaningless because most teams make the playoffs anyway. NHL is a joke: Season starts in October and doesn't end until JUNE! Pathetic. :angry:

Champs2004
07-20-2004, 09:52 AM
Honestly i would do this:

Split the NL up into 4 divisions with no Wild Card. The N.L. East being the same minus Florida, the N.L. West the same without Arizona and the newly created N.L. North would have the Cubs, Cards, Reds and Brewers, while the N.L. South would have the Fish, D-Backs, Astros, and Pirates. The A.L. would stay the same.

Maximo
07-20-2004, 10:28 AM
I just don't accept the "more is always better" logic that seems to encompass all aspects of professional sports.

Baseball already has too many teams and plays too many games. It's a sport that should be played in the spring and summer..........football in the fall........basketball and hockey in the winter...........only one day during the year with no professional sports. That would be December 24 and we could use it for things such as celebrating Christmas, convening grand juries, and watching reruns of "Pardon the Interruption".

bigfoot
07-20-2004, 10:31 AM
What's next, a time limit on the ballgames?

Dadawg_77
07-20-2004, 11:20 AM
I just don't accept the "more is always better" logic that seems to encompass all aspects of professional sports.

Baseball already has too many teams and plays too many games. It's a sport that should be played in the spring and summer..........football in the fall........basketball and hockey in the winter...........only one day during the year with no professional sports. That would be December 24 and we could use it for things such as celebrating Christmas, convening grand juries, and watching reruns of "Pardon the Interruption".
What about the day after the All Star Game?

mdep524
07-20-2004, 11:40 AM
No!!!Thats why making baseballs postseason is so much more meaningful than other sports. You dont see NBA or NHL teams spraying champagne when they make the playoffs, because half the league does. If you reach baseballs postseason you have already had a great year. You are one of the best 8 teams in the league.
I agree, making the playoffs is something special in baseball- the system shouldn't be tinkered with.

:jerry
Hmm, maybe for the first year we could have 5 teams in the NL make the playoffs and 3 in the AL, then the next year 5 AL teams and 3 NL teams. And then 6 and 2.

:tool
Excellent idea Jerry! Now is there a way we can assure the Cubs and Red Sox play in the World Series no matter what?

sendimjoey
07-20-2004, 11:57 AM
I like the baseball playoffs the way they are now. I think having the five-game ALDS adds to the excitement. Look what happened to the first rounds of the NBA and NHL playoffs when they expanded to seven games -- borrrring (although you still get some upsets in the NHL). Baseball strikes a nice balance between making the regular season meaningful yet keeping the postseason in reach for enough teams that they can do some business.

I know there's an argument that a mediocre team can beat a stronger team by riding a hot pitcher in two starts in the DS. I'm not convinced. Sorry to bring this up, but I seem to recall that the 1983 Orioles were a heck of a team. They couldn't touch LaMarr Hoyt in Game 1, but they proceeded to show that they were better over the next three games. :whiner:

Edit: I didn't mean to imply that the '83 Sox were mediocre, just that having a dominant pitcher in a five-game series isn't insurmountable for the other team.

SOXSINCE'70
07-20-2004, 11:59 AM
In a word,NO!!