How do you feel about this 1 game WC playoff format?

Big Bear · 10-03-13, 06:54 AM

Originally posted by Louisvillekid1

I personally think its disgusting to the game...

162 and then this

Following a season that is series every week

Change this shit

its only 1 game for the wild card teams.

As a fan i love it.

I think MLB finally got it right.

Big Bear · 10-03-13, 06:55 AM

Originally posted by jjgold

One of reasons why baseball is on the massive decline is because too many games and also the games are too long soccer is surpassing baseball in the United States within five years

Hank,

Baseball is not on the decline.

Business as usual.

BB

BennyBigNuts · 10-03-13, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by BennyBigNuts

I absolutely 100% LOVE IT L-Kid. And it's very simple why once you think about a few things.

Baseball is a long, hard, grind. There should be teams who earn spots into a playoff series, and then a couple teams who were not good enough to win divisions but want to make a case they are one of the best teams in MLB.
If you win your division, you should be rewarded for it. You should have some kind of advantage on wild card teams.

A team who doesn't win a division should be forced to play something like they have setup now.
You don't wanna drag out the MLB playoffs any longer than they already do, so anything more than a 1 game playoff or a best of 3 scenario would be a waste.
I love the fact they added a couple more teams to get a chance as well, and anything more than this setup would be a drag to me.

It's simple, win your division next year. You only gotta beat out 4 teams.

Can't have anymore cake walks for wild card teams. You should be forced to used your best pitchers early, and be at some kind of disadvantage going into the next series against teams who deserve the right to be well rested and have some kind of edge for being the best team in their division.

Also another great example.
Pirates had to waste Liriano to get to this series.
NOW, instead of him pitching game 1 n 5 vs. Wayneright, he will only go game 3 or 4, depending on the series count.

This is how it SHOULD be for WILD CARD teams. They should have some kind of disadvantage going in I.E. Travelling like crazy like the Rays did, or using your ace like the Pirates.

One game for these guys is better than none like previous years.

Did you see the crowds at those 2 games by the way? BANANAS. First time I've seen a sellout at a pirates game since the Barry Bonds days, even if it was filled with 60-70% fake fans who don't support their teams until they win.
Cleveland fans were hype too, but Rays shut em up pretty quickly.

Big Bear · 10-03-13, 07:19 AM

exactly.

Teams should be rewarded for winning the division.

BennyBigNuts · 10-03-13, 07:19 AM

Been drinking, don't know if shit I'm saying makes sense or why I'm quoting myself.

TheLock · 10-03-13, 07:21 AM

Originally posted by Darkside Magick

Make season 154 and make wildcard 2 out of 3.. maybe 3 out 5

This is a great idea.

The only downside is that it changes the complexion of the record books. All those years of 162 games and then a change.

BennyBigNuts · 10-03-13, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by TheLock

This is a great idea.

The only downside is that it changes the complexion of the record books. All those years of 162 games and then a change.

They only played 152 or 153 games back in the day. Only been playing 162 since the 70's maybe?

EaglesPhan36 · 10-03-13, 07:26 AM

One could argue that they would be at more of a disadvantage having to play a three game series and using three starters, so why not make it a series?

I think the two wild card teams is stupid to begin with. The whole argument that it makes it more exciting with more teams involved doesn't pass the stink test. Cleveland was still drawing pathetic crowds while they were in the WC race. ,I don't think Tampa's attendance got a big spike. Texas may have sold a bit more, but they were already drawing pretty well. And for all the hullabaloo, the NL race wasn't really that much of a race with two of the teams: STL, PIT & CIN pretty much locked into those two spots as the final week(s) approached.

My hope is the next commissioner fixes it. I think Selig did a lot of flawed things during his tenure to try to put a stamp on his legacy. If they keep the two WC teams, then I agree as most say - turn it into a best two of three. Team with the better record should get an advantage and host all three games as if it were a regular season type of series set-up. That eliminates any bitching about travel, etc.

LT Profits · 10-03-13, 07:32 AM

Originally posted by texhooper

wouldn't they have played this game tonight anyway though? for some reason tampa's record is showing as 92-71 on espn, but they both won 92 games. would this have not been a tiebreaker game in the old format?

No, Rays were 91-71, the 92nd win was the tiebreaker, which counts as a regular season game in the record books - player stats count too.

wagerjunkie · 10-03-13, 07:40 AM

Originally posted by InTheDrink

you realize that there are five teams in the playoffs this year and last?

did you read my other comment earlier in the thread ya dumb fuk?

im against expanding the playoffs at all

you're like a women damnit, just no pleasing you.

InTheDrink · 10-03-13, 07:41 AM

Originally posted by Big Bear

Hank,

Baseball is not on the decline.

Business as usual.

BB

bear shut the fuk up with this hank shit

bear dont start using it just because billy sinker is

bear when you can hold billy sinkers jock you can go back to using hank

InTheDrink · 10-03-13, 07:41 AM

Originally posted by wagerjunkie

you're like a women damnit, just no pleasing you.

from the most emotional poster on the board

Big Bear · 10-03-13, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by EaglesPhan36

One could argue that they would be at more of a disadvantage having to play a three game series and using three starters, so why not make it a series?

I think the two wild card teams is stupid to begin with. The whole argument that it makes it more exciting with more teams involved doesn't pass the stink test. Cleveland was still drawing pathetic crowds while they were in the WC race. ,I don't think Tampa's attendance got a big spike. Texas may have sold a bit more, but they were already drawing pretty well. And for all the hullabaloo, the NL race wasn't really that much of a race with two of the teams: STL, PIT & CIN pretty much locked into those two spots as the final week(s) approached.

My hope is the next commissioner fixes it. I think Selig did a lot of flawed things during his tenure to try to put a stamp on his legacy. If they keep the two WC teams, then I agree as most say - turn it into a best two of three. Team with the better record should get an advantage and host all three games as if it were a regular season type of series set-up. That eliminates any bitching about travel, etc.

b/c the playoffs would be 2 months like the NBA playoffs.

The MLB playoffs are perfect like they are.

Just sit back and enjoy.

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 08:37 AM

If there is any team that thinks it is unfair, they should shut up and win their division and then they don't have to worry about it.

daneblazer · 10-03-13, 08:39 AM

It would be like the NFL playing a 16 game regular season, then playing one quarter of a wildcard game to decide who gets to go to the divisional round.

Then on top of that you had the stupid shit from last year where the wildcard winner hosted the 2nd round.

Can you imagine the Broncos going 15-1 and some 9-7 team like the Dolphins beat the Texans in a one quarter game then got to host the Broncos the next week?

Top it off and the winner of some exhibition all-star game in July gets to host the World Series.

Baseball's postseason is a shame.

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by TheLock

This is a great idea.

The only downside is that it changes the complexion of the record books. All those years of 162 games and then a change.

The Wild Card is not considered Game 163, the Wild Card is the playoffs. The tiebreaker between Tampa and Texas was considered part of the regular season and Game 163, but tiebreakers always were like that.

pavyracer · 10-03-13, 08:46 AM

The regular season is 162 games long. If you still can't determine which teams deserve to go to the playoffs then what's the purpose of playing 162 games?

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 08:47 AM

Originally posted by EaglesPhan36

One could argue that they would be at more of a disadvantage having to play a three game series and using three starters, so why not make it a series?

I think that actually punishes the division winners. In baseball, there is such a thing as too much time off. The AL Division winners had 4 days off, and that was only to make room for a 1-game WC. If the WC was best of 3, you could easily see division winners sitting a full week.

texhooper · 10-03-13, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by LT Profits

No, Rays were 91-71, the 92nd win was the tiebreaker, which counts as a regular season game in the record books - player stats count too.

oh, i guess i didn't realize they had updated with the most recent game. the indians record was still showing 92-70, so that threw me off.

so it does suck for indians fans. under the old system they're in the 'real' playoffs.

wagerjunkie · 10-03-13, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by InTheDrink

from the most emotional poster on the board

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by daneblazer

It would be like the NFL playing a 16 game regular season, then playing one quarter of a wildcard game to decide who gets to go to the divisional round.

Then on top of that you had the stupid shit from last year where the wildcard winner hosted the 2nd round.

Can you imagine the Broncos going 15-1 and some 9-7 team like the Dolphins beat the Texans in a one quarter game then got to host the Broncos the next week?

Except that is a bad analogy. Aside from the fact that that didn't happen last year, a better analogy is a real life situation that happened a couple years ago. The Seahawks won their division at 7-9 and played the Saints who were a Wild Card at 11-5. Who should be the home team? The division winner or the team with the better record? The NFL says the division winner, but there sure was an awful lot of criticism when an 11-5 team had to travel to a 7-9 team for a playoff game. Baseball says the team with the better record. Fact is there is no system for determining HFA which will satisfy 100% of the people 100% of the time.

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 10:00 AM

Originally posted by pavyracer

The regular season is 162 games long. If you still can't determine which teams deserve to go to the playoffs then what's the purpose of playing 162 games?

Well, what happens when you play 162 and 2 teams have identical records? I actually like baseball in that no team can be eliminated from the playoffs by virtue of a tie-breaker, like what happens in the NFL. Now I recognize that the NFL needs tie breakers because they can't just throw in a 1-game elimination on a Monday evening like baseball can, but it still is a strength of baseball that tie-breakers cannot be used to eliminate you.

daneblazer · 10-03-13, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by BriGuy

Except that is a bad analogy. Aside from the fact that that didn't happen last year,

Baseball's wild-card playoff winners will host first 2 games in this season's best-of-5 division series: Poll

http://www.cleveland.com/ohio-sports-blog/index.ssf/2012/05/baseballs_wild-card_playoff_wi.html

The danger for baseball is the possibility that a division champion with a far superior regular season record would be on the road for fhe first two games of the best-of-five series.

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by daneblazer

http://www.cleveland.com/ohio-sports...layoff_wi.html

Newsflash: If a team hosts 2 games of a best of 5 series, then that team is not the team that has Home Field Advantage. Now it's true that people didn't like the fact that the WC team started the series at home, but fact is that the WC did not have HFA. Each Wild Card team played a divisional round that went 5 games and each WC team was on the road for games 3, 4 and 5. You're comparing football, where every playoff game is single elimination to baseball, where the divisional round is a best-of-5. Obviously in a best-of-5 series, each team will have some home games. But the divisional winner has more.

daneblazer · 10-03-13, 10:30 AM

Come on Hoss, I understand homefield advantage, but you don't think having the first 2 at home out of 5 is an advantage? It's moot anyway because it was a one year thing. Like Pavy said, you play 162 games and you can't determine the best 8 teams? Come on

broadway6 · 10-03-13, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by daneblazer

It would be like the NFL playing a 16 game regular season, then playing one quarter of a wildcard game to decide who gets to go to the divisional round.

Then on top of that you had the stupid shit from last year where the wildcard winner hosted the 2nd round.

Can you imagine the Broncos going 15-1 and some 9-7 team like the Dolphins beat the Texans in a one quarter game then got to host the Broncos the next week?

Top it off and the winner of some exhibition all-star game in July gets to host the World Series.

Baseball's postseason is a shame.

1. Pirates/Rays don't have home field advantage.
2. A few years ago Seattle won the NFC West with a 7-9 record and hosted the Saints who won 10+ games. How is that fair?

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by daneblazer

Come on Hoss, I understand homefield advantage, but you don't think having the first 2 at home out of 5 is an advantage? It's moot anyway because it was a one year thing. Like Pavy said, you play 162 games and you can't determine the best 8 teams? Come on

No matter how long the season is, whether it is 16 games or 162, there is always a chance that 2 teams will be tied for that final playoff spot. So spare me the whole "you should be able to determine the best 8 after playing 162 games." I like the new Wild Card format because it restores the importance of winning the division. As for the 2-3 format versus 2-2-1, there are clear advantages and disadvantages to each. If I was the top seed, I would honestly prefer 2-3 because even though I start on the road, all I have to do is win 1 of those then come home and take 2 of 3. In 2-2-1, there is a lot of pressure on the top seed home team to win both those games.

EaglesPhan36 · 10-03-13, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by Big Bear

b/c the playoffs would be 2 months like the NBA playoffs.

The MLB playoffs are perfect like they are.

Just sit back and enjoy.

So potentially two extra games per wildcard round would make it too long for you too handle? LoL. Nothing perfect about the current format. it was okay until they added the 2nd wildcard.

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by EaglesPhan36

So potentially two extra games per wildcard round would make it too long for you too handle? LoL. Nothing perfect about the current format. it was okay until they added the 2nd wildcard.

It wouldn't be too long for me, but it would be too long that it arguably punished the top seed who had to sit around and wait for the WC series to end. The Red Sox will have 4 full off days playing against the Rays. As I mentioned above there is such a thing as too much rest in baseball. The only thing I would change is make the divisional round best-of-7.

pavyracer · 10-03-13, 11:15 AM

Originally posted by BriGuy

Well, what happens when you play 162 and 2 teams have identical records? I actually like baseball in that no team can be eliminated from the playoffs by virtue of a tie-breaker, like what happens in the NFL. Now I recognize that the NFL needs tie breakers because they can't just throw in a 1-game elimination on a Monday evening like baseball can, but it still is a strength of baseball that tie-breakers cannot be used to eliminate you.

I think there is a tie-breaker for division winners. Isn't it head to head records in divisional games?

The wildcard was introduced for TV reasons so that the owners can make more money in the post-season.

daneblazer · 10-03-13, 11:15 AM

Originally posted by BriGuy

The only thing I would change is make the divisional round best-of-7.

I wish they would do that and go back to the 8 team format. If two teams are tied, then play it out, but I'm not a fan of the structured 1 game WC format.

MoneyLineDawg · 10-03-13, 11:19 AM

It's much better than the previous format.....So atleast they improved the situation, even if its still flawed

I remember a few years ago the Yankees and probably the Red Sox(?) were neck and neck with a few games left and one was going to win the AL East and one the wildcard for sure.....I remember the Yankees were playing backups and tanking in order to get the wildcard and NOT win the division because of the 1st round matchup the wildcard had......You'll never see that BS now

Too many years where the 1 wildcard is wrapped up with 10+ games to play as well.....In most years it will be how the AL was this year with 2 wildcards, the NL this season was not the norm

LT Profits · 10-03-13, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by pavyracer

I think there is a tie-breaker for division winners. Isn't it head to head records in divisional games?

The wildcard was introduced for TV reasons so that the owners can make more money in the post-season.

That doesn't eliminate anybody though, all it does is push the head-to-head loser into a wild card (or potential wild card tie)

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by pavyracer

I think there is a tie-breaker for division winners. Isn't it head to head records in divisional games?

Tie breakers can be used to determine seeding and HFA. Tie breakers cannot be used to eliminate a team.

Originally posted by pavyracer

The wildcard was introduced for TV reasons so that the owners can make more money in the post-season.

It was introduced for 2 reasons: 1) As you said, more postseason games = more money. 2) Having the WC keeps a lot of teams in the race for a lot longer. You no longer have to worry about 1 team running away with the AL East and having fans in all 7 other cities eliminated by the end of August. But yes, it ultimately comes down to more games + more interest = more money. You're hardly making a groundbreaking observation when you say a sports league behaved in a way to increase revenues.

BriGuy · 10-03-13, 11:32 AM

Originally posted by MoneyLineDawg

It's much better than the previous format.....So atleast they improved the situation, even if its still flawed

I remember a few years ago the Yankees and probably the Red Sox(?) were neck and neck with a few games left and one was going to win the AL East and one the wildcard for sure.....I remember the Yankees were playing backups and tanking in order to get the wildcard and NOT win the division because of the 1st round matchup the wildcard had......You'll never see that BS now

Ya I was thinking of that exact same situation. Same thing happened with the Red Sox and Rays one year too. I like the fact that there is now a legit reward to being a division winner over a WC team.