after 162 games in regular season would two more possible games give a better determination of who should advance?
thoughts?
thoughts?
-
22YES0%11NO0%11 -
yes, the more games there are in a playoff series, the more fair the result is going to be, it makes outliers less significant, especially in baseball, where any team can win on a flukeComment -
A qualified yes. They need to shorten the season already, making the division series a best of seven makes this more important. Playing games into November is ridiculous. I can only imagine what a World Series marred by an early snow in Minnesota would be like.Comment -
a lot of people don't like the wild card play in game but that's the best way to give the favorite the advantage after 162 games....take away from a team's pitching staff and give them a disadvantage
that would mean the #1 team would have to be able to play someone in their division in the first round tooComment -
Yes. This should have been a case a long time ago. 162 games and then first round its best out 5 games. Sure you are suppose to bring it in the playoffs but if you lose the 1st game, then you are in big trouble if you don't win game 2. Imagine a team goes 110-52 faces a team 86-76 and the favorite loses the 1st game. They are in pretty desperate mode. Basically a short series puts pressure on every single game. Sure the team with the much better record should beat the other team more times than not but when you make it a best out of 5, there isn't no room for error. In baseball, any team can beat any team on any given day so it should be best out of 7. After the first round, its then the AlCS or NLCS and after that its the world series. If people complain about 7 games making it go to November, then they should just take games off the regular season. Make it 150 games or 160 games. And the case about if it wasnt for 162 games, then there would been no way for that exciting last regular season game of the season, well 150 or 160 games is surely enough to see who should be in the playoffs.
Compare that to the NBA where there is one more round than MLB and there is 7 games in the 1st round. There is really no point to make an nba 1st round best out of 7 games. It is a complete waste of time because the 1 and 2 seeds will take care of the 7 and 8 seeds pretty easily. Even if it was best out of 5 games, a 7 and 8 seed rarely beats an 1 or 2 seed and thus the more talented team will still win the series.
In baseball, if you ask a lower seed if they want to play the higher seed in a best of 5 or 7 series, obviously they would take best of 5 because they can easily sneak a lucky win there and outplay the other team in a short series. If you ask a really good team how many games you want to play, obviously they take best out of 7 because they know even if they are down 2-1 games, they still have wiggleroom. In baseball when the 1st round best out of 5, there is just no wiggleroom. If you put the KC Royals against the Texas Rangers in a best of 5, theres a decent chance the royals can win. Likewise in the nba, the chance of a team like clippers beating lakers in a best of 5 , the lakers will win almost every single time. I still don't know which person decided that the nba first round should be best out of 7 as oppose to best of 5. The 7 and 8 seeds still never had a chance.
1st round of baseball postseason with 5 games is definitely a joke
.
Comment -
Yes
Its a joke right now, best teams dont always win a short seriesComment -
YEs.Comment -
reg season back to 154?Comment -
It be ok if there were byes for the best teams but that's not going to happen so 7 game series would be fair.
Mind you, I like seeing yanks, phillies,etc. losing in the first round. lolComment -
im with youOriginally posted by InTheDrinkComment -
No.
NBA should go back to the Best of 5 in the first round as well.
If your the better team, prove it.Comment -
Yes it is ridiculous, must be 7 games.Comment -
For sure but that would give way less chance to teams like the tigers and cardinals and I like seeing big faves go out. Put two more teams from each league in and give the top two teams in each league a bye if you wanna keep it best of five.Comment -
Yes. Best of 5 series are jokes.Comment -
Originally posted by onlooker
I think it should be 1 inning. If you are the better team, you will find a way to win. No excuses.Comment -
Originally posted by KGambler
Stop being asinine.Comment -
I think it should be a two game total run series. These things drag on forever otherwise.Comment -
yes i think it should be extending if your playing 162 games what is the difference of adding 2 more games in the first round its the fking playoffsComment -
No. 3 out of 5 ought to be enough to make it fair and competitive and not exhaust all the pitching for the pennant.
Too many games in the divisional playoff would give a huge advantage to the team that could sweep 4-0.Comment -
You cant give a first round bye. That would mean teams not playing for 8-9 days. No team likes to not play for 8-9 days. The rust negates the advantage the bye gets you arguably.
I like best of 5. Let's get it on. Makes every pitch from the start of game one very intense & important. Must win right outta the gate makes for good TV & puts you on the edge of your seat right away. Gives underdogs a chance & who doesn't like to see an underdog compete?? Remember in the 70's & 80's when only the division winners made the playoffs?? Only 2 teams from each league made the playoffs. LCS was best of 5 & WS was best of seven. Now that was a joke.
The biggest factors going 1st round best of 7 would be the season lasting well into November. That's not good. And if you add 2 more teams & give a bye now you have teams not playing for over a week. Neither of these options are preferred by too many people.
One of MLB's recent proposals was to add 2 more teams, give byes to top teams & make the 1st round a best of 3 w/ no travel off day. Also proposed playing the WS on a neutral field in warmer climate cities like they do the Super Bowl.
Pros & cons both ways but I like the current set-UP.Comment
