PDA

View Full Version : Best record sets your own schedule


Fenway
09-12-2007, 10:03 AM
a new perk this year for the AL team with best record

Anaheim and Boston going down to the wire fighting for it with the Indians still having a shot

In an unprecedented move, Major League Baseball informed American League general managers near the beginning of September that the team with the best record would choose between playing in the Division Series that lasts up to eight days featuring three off days or the one that lasts up to seven days and has two off days

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?articleid=1030921

chisoxmike
09-12-2007, 10:50 AM
Why? The MLB playoff schedule is fine. (Well, before they moved game 7 of the WS to Nov. 1) Leave it alone.

Oblong
09-12-2007, 10:56 AM
It's really going to suck this year with all the off days.

pierzynski07
09-12-2007, 10:59 AM
Why? The MLB playoff schedule is fine. (Well, before they moved game 7 of the WS to Nov. 1) Leave it alone.
What, exactly, did they change according to this article? :?:

itsnotrequired
09-12-2007, 11:14 AM
What, exactly, did they change according to this article? :?:

The team with the best record gets to choose if the series would be played with one fewer off day. Before, the schedule was set in stone.

TDog
09-12-2007, 11:21 AM
With so many teams I dislike in contention for postseason play, I won't be paying any attention to the baseball postseason anyway. I won't have to worry about sports until next spring.

pierzynski07
09-13-2007, 12:37 AM
The team with the best record gets to choose if the series would be played with one fewer off day. Before, the schedule was set in stone.
It's basically the same schedule, except the AL team with the top record gets to choose if they want to be in the "A" or "B" series.

Is it really that bad?

SoxSpeed22
09-13-2007, 12:48 AM
It's basically the same schedule, except the AL team with the top record gets to choose if they want to be in the "A" or "B" series.

Is it really that bad?They were saying that the main reason they did this was to screw over the wild card by letting their opponent decide what they want. Because there really is not much of a difference between the division champions and the wild card.

Frater Perdurabo
09-13-2007, 06:40 AM
No matter who chooses what, the Yankees will be in prime time every night. :angry:

I hate the Yankees. I hate the Indians. I simply do not like the Angels. I hate that the media fawns over the Red Sox (no offense, Fenway). So unless Seattle or Detroit can go on a major run, it looks like I'll be rooting for an NL team this year.

PKalltheway
09-13-2007, 10:55 AM
it looks like I'll be rooting for an NL team this year.
Call me crazy, but I really hope the Rockies can win the Wild Card this year. It'll be a breath of fresh air.

SBSoxFan
09-13-2007, 11:17 AM
Call me crazy, but I really hope the Rockies can win the Wild Card this year. It'll be a breath of thin air.


:redneck

Fenway
09-13-2007, 11:26 AM
No matter who chooses what, the Yankees will be in prime time every night. :angry:

I hate the Yankees. I hate the Indians. I simply do not like the Angels. I hate that the media fawns over the Red Sox (no offense, Fenway). So unless Seattle or Detroit can go on a major run, it looks like I'll be rooting for an NL team this year.

FOX picks the Yankees because of the huge amount of local advertising they can sell on Channel 5 in NY....plus it looks like they will play Anaheim so that is Market #1 vs Market #2

If the Cubs make it they will be a prime time lock as well.

Boston they can put on at 3 AM and get huge ratings

PKalltheway
09-13-2007, 12:27 PM
FOX picks the Yankees because of the huge amount of local advertising they can sell on Channel 5 in NY....plus it looks like they will play Anaheim so that is Market #1 vs Market #2

If the Cubs make it they will be a prime time lock as well.

Boston they can put on at 3 AM and get huge ratings
Here's what I don't get. If Fox is soooo confident that Boston and New York will get good ratings, why won't they have them play one or two day games during the Division Series and/or ALCS? They figure people will still watch them even at that time, right? Hell, this is more of a New York thing than a Boston thing, since I have seen Boston play a few day games in the playoffs before.

itsnotrequired
09-13-2007, 12:30 PM
Here's what I don't get. If Fox is soooo confident that Boston and New York will get good ratings, why won't they have them play one or two day games during the Division Series and/or ALCS? They figure people will still watch them even at that time, right? Hell, this is more of a New York thing than a Boston thing, since I have seen Boston play a few day games in the playoffs before.

Because they can sell commercial time at a higher rate during prime time. Why simply make a lot of money when you could make even more?:redneck

champagne030
09-13-2007, 12:54 PM
They were saying that the main reason they did this was to screw over the wild card by letting their opponent decide what they want. Because there really is not much of a difference between the division champions and the wild card.

It may screw over the Red Sawx. Angels finish with best record and take short rest because the Yankees have a one-man rotation. Cleveland then gets to run out Captain Cheeseburger and Carmona twice each and on full rest against the Evil Empire Jr.

pierzynski07
09-13-2007, 06:32 PM
FOX picks the Yankees because of the huge amount of local advertising they can sell on Channel 5 in NY....plus it looks like they will play Anaheim so that is Market #1 vs Market #2

The Division Series is entirely on TBS/TNT this year.

skobabe8
09-13-2007, 08:52 PM
No matter who chooses what, the Yankees will be in prime time every night. :angry:

I hate the Yankees. I hate the Indians. I simply do not like the Angels. I hate that the media fawns over the Red Sox (no offense, Fenway). So unless Seattle or Detroit can go on a major run, it looks like I'll be rooting for an NL team this year.

Detroit? DETROIT?!?

chisoxfanatic
09-13-2007, 10:06 PM
With so many teams I dislike in contention for postseason play, I won't be paying any attention to the baseball postseason anyway. I won't have to worry about sports until next spring.
I'm with you there. Once this season ends, I'm entering a full-fledged hockey mindset and will watch NHL games on my Center Ice package over the MLB playoffs...I'm even skipping the World Series this year. Let's make this the lowest rated playoffs in history by not watching.

Brian26
09-13-2007, 11:50 PM
With so many teams I dislike in contention for postseason play, I won't be paying any attention to the baseball postseason anyway.

I'm with you there. Once this season ends, I'm entering a full-fledged hockey mindset and will watch NHL games on my Center Ice package over the MLB playoffs...I'm even skipping the World Series this year. Let's make this the lowest rated playoffs in history by not watching.

I don't understand this at all. I dislike the Red Sox and Yankees, but that 2004 ALCS was one of the greatest post-season series of all time. For that matter, all of the postseasons between 2001 and 2005 were phenomenal. The 2001 series between Arizona and NYY was epic. The 2002 Angels/Giants series was great. '03 with the Cubs meltdown against FLA was great (although the World Series that year was anti-climatic). The '04 ALCS and NLCS were great too.

I would never just skip watching the baseball postseason. What is there to protest? The Sox stunk this year, and that's not anyone else's fault.

soxfan80
09-14-2007, 09:44 AM
I don't understand this at all. I dislike the Red Sox and Yankees, but that 2004 ALCS was one of the greatest post-season series of all time. For that matter, all of the postseasons between 2001 and 2005 were phenomenal. The 2001 series between Arizona and NYY was epic. The 2002 Angels/Giants series was great. '03 with the Cubs meltdown against FLA was great (although the World Series that year was anti-climatic). The '04 ALCS and NLCS were great too.

I would never just skip watching the baseball postseason. What is there to protest? The Sox stunk this year, and that's not anyone else's fault.You failed to mention 2005.

itsnotrequired
09-14-2007, 10:00 AM
You failed to mention 2005.

It wasn't a very exciting ALCS. Game 2 had the excitement at the end with AJ and everything but the other games were rather boring i.e. only two lead changes (both in Game 5), no extra innings, no bottom-of-the-9th heroics, etc.

The Sox did have the 4 complete games in a row though but got to pitch with relatively comfortable leads, no one threatened in the 9th, etc.

voodoochile
09-14-2007, 10:06 AM
It wasn't a very exciting ALCS. Game 2 had the excitement at the end with AJ and everything but the other games were rather boring i.e. only two lead changes (both in Game 5), no extra innings, no bottom-of-the-9th heroics, etc.

The Sox did have the 4 complete games in a row though but got to pitch with relatively comfortable leads, no one threatened in the 9th, etc.

Banned...:tongue:

Bite your tongue and give back your championship garb...

itsnotrequired
09-14-2007, 10:08 AM
Banned...:tongue:

Bite your tongue and give back your championship garb...

The only championship clothing in my possession is a WS sweatshirt I borrowed from skottyj242 on one of those cold nights earlier this season. He probably wants it back.

ondafarm
09-14-2007, 10:09 AM
No matter who chooses what, the Yankees will be in prime time every night. :angry:

I hate the Yankees. I hate the Indians. I simply do not like the Angels. I hate that the media fawns over the Red Sox (no offense, Fenway). So unless Seattle or Detroit can go on a major run, it looks like I'll be rooting for an NL team this year.

I'll go one further. Bears this autumn.