Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

[Chrisksaint]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

Heh people hate it just because most baseball fans are about tradition.

I think it's good as long as it's either 1 game or even a 3 game series, I think a win or go home game right off the bat in the playoffs would spark a lot of excitement lost by maybe not having as exciting of a wildcard race.

[lilbiggio]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

I wouldnt' have a problem with this. Going from 8 teams to 10 isn't going to hurt the game as much as people are making this out to be.

[wwharton]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

As a fan of an AL East team not named the Yankees or Red Sox (won't even count the Rays bc I don't think they could consistently keep their name in the hat just like the O's and Blue Jays) I think it's about time. Plus the way it is now, the way they decide how the Wildcard teams play doesn't really make sense.

1 game or 3 games, I think it's good for the game. They do need to figure out how to keep the WS out of November though. I wouldn't be against cutting the season down either.

[ImTellinTim]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

Heh people hate it just because most baseball fans are about tradition.

I think it's good as long as it's either 1 game or even a 3 game series, I think a win or go home game right off the bat in the playoffs would spark a lot of excitement lost by maybe not having as exciting of a wildcard race.

Eh, I think most people hate it because it's pointless. If you have a better record over the 5th-placed team after 162 games, why should you be punished by having to basically play a lottery scratch-off ticket to see if you make the playoffs?

[Sportsforever]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

Eh, I think most people hate it because it's pointless. If you have a better record over the 5th-placed team after 162 games, why should you be punished by having to basically play a lottery scratch-off ticket to see if you make the playoffs?

Exactly. Take the Braves/Padres last year. I think the fact the Braves had a better record over 162 games is a better indication than playing a one game playoff to see who gets the WC. Again, I think it's all about generating more playoff games and more money...nothing more, nothing less. To hear Selig pontificate about how MLB has so few playoff teams as compared to the NBA or NHL makes me sick...I don't want MLB to be the NBA/NHL.

[lilbiggio]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

As a fan of an AL East team not named the Yankees or Red Sox (won't even count the Rays bc I don't think they could consistently keep their name in the hat just like the O's and Blue Jays) I think it's about time. Plus the way it is now, the way they decide how the Wildcard teams play doesn't really make sense.

1 game or 3 games, I think it's good for the game. They do need to figure out how to keep the WS out of November though. I wouldn't be against cutting the season down either.

But.. but, the games in the regular season won't matter any more?

I've always felt that depending on what division you were in, your games could theoretically not matter as early as July depending on how the NL East or AL East shook. That's just how it is right now and those divisions have the better teams record wise.

The 5th team would be playing a team that didn't win their division so I don't see how that hurts division winners so there's still an incentive to win the division so you don't risk getting knocked out in an earlier round

People throwing out their arms over one extra series? In cases where it could be one additional start or appearance?

Adding one additional team in each League makes the playoffs less prestigious and dilutes the games and quality of teams getting in?!


To me people can hate the idea for whatever reason, but to say that it will ruin baseball or make the postseason less prestigious is another conversation in itself. As someone else said a lot of dislike over this idea (not neccessarily just here at OS but as a whole) is mainly over traditions of the game.

[Sportsforever]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

But.. but, the games in the regular season won't matter any more?

I've always felt that depending on what division you were in, your games could theoretically not matter as early as July depending on how the NL East or AL East shook. That's just how it is right now and those divisions have the better teams record wise.

The 5th team would be playing a team that didn't win their division so I don't see how that hurts division winners so there's still an incentive to win the division so you don't risk getting knocked out in an earlier round

People throwing out their arms over one extra series? In cases where it could be one additional start or appearance?

Adding one additional team in each League makes the playoffs less prestigious and dilutes the games and quality of teams getting in?!


To me people can hate the idea for whatever reason, but to say that it will ruin baseball or make the postseason less prestigious is another conversation in itself. As someone else said a lot of dislike over this idea (not neccessarily just here at OS but as a whole) is mainly over traditions of the game.

I don't think it will ruin the post season or reduce the prestige, but I do think it's a slippery slope. Heck, I have nightmares that one day MLB announces they regular season is just used to seed all the teams for a March Madness style tourney.

You play 162 games in baseball...you SHOULD be rewarded for being the better team over that period. The more teams you let into the playoffs, the less important that 162 games becomes. I understand fans of teams that haven't competed in a while want to see this, but the last thing I want to see is a .500 team or so get hot and win the whole thing (and for the record I wasn't wild about the 2006 Cardinals winning it all with 83 regular season victories...although I think they won their division).

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

I don't think it will ruin the post season or reduce the prestige, but I do think it's a slippery slope. Heck, I have nightmares that one day MLB announces they regular season is just used to seed all the teams for a March Madness style tourney.

You play 162 games in baseball...you SHOULD be rewarded for being the better team over that period. The more teams you let into the playoffs, the less important that 162 games becomes. I understand fans of teams that haven't competed in a while want to see this, but the last thing I want to see is a .500 team or so get hot and win the whole thing (and for the record I wasn't wild about the 2006 Cardinals winning it all with 83 regular season victories...although I think they won their division).

Question: by that same logic, do you not feel that the 1 seed, or the team with a better record than both of those other teams, should be rewarded by facing a team who does not have it's ace or has a different rotation setup? I guess I'm asking do you think it's fair that for all intents and purposes, a wild card team that wins 86 games is on equal footing with a division winner who won 100 at the beginning of a series? I guess I look at it more as a punishment for the 4th team than a reward for the 2nd team.

[Sportsforever]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

Question: by that same logic, do you not feel that the 1 seed, or the team with a better record than both of those other teams, should be rewarded by facing a team who does not have it's ace or has a different rotation setup? I guess I'm asking do you think it's fair that for all intents and purposes, a wild card team that wins 86 games is on equal footing with a division winner who won 100 at the beginning of a series? I guess I look at it more as a punishment for the 4th team than a reward for the 2nd team.

No, I don't think it's fair. I wasn't a fan of the WC to begin with (heck, I'd love to go back to no divisions!). I have no problem with penalizing the current wild card in some way. Maybe no home games for the WC team. Maybe you say the WC team needs to win 3 games to advance while the division winner only needs 2 games. I am not so worried about the 9th and 10th teams being added, it's the 11-16th teams that worry me.

[lilbiggio]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

I don't think it will ruin the post season or reduce the prestige, but I do think it's a slippery slope. Heck, I have nightmares that one day MLB announces they regular season is just used to seed all the teams for a March Madness style tourney.

You play 162 games in baseball...you SHOULD be rewarded for being the better team over that period. The more teams you let into the playoffs, the less important that 162 games becomes. I understand fans of teams that haven't competed in a while want to see this, but the last thing I want to see is a .500 team or so get hot and win the whole thing (and for the record I wasn't wild about the 2006 Cardinals winning it all with 83 regular season victories...although I think they won their division).

I just want to say I see where you coming from and there is a lot of risk involved by allowing some other team to get in that probably in the past would not be in. You'll get a lot more teams that got hot at the right time (aka the Rockies of late) sliding in through the back door and possibly knocking out a team that had #4 on lock for weeks. I can definately see where the complaints would be if the #5 team came in and did damage throughout the playoffs.

With that said the way things used to be before the wildcard, the regular season was absolutely meaning less for the entire league except for 4 or 5 teams by late August early September. That's not good for business, and after the strike this was one of the things the MLB corrected. I'm sure people were just as upset then as they are now.

Here we have another situation where the MLB has a chance to make a good business decision and add a little more hope for other teams down the stretch and reduce throw away games in divisions late in the year. Is it traditional? Nope... but I won't knock them for wanting to add another Wild Card spot.

[ImTellinTim]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

Question: by that same logic, do you not feel that the 1 seed, or the team with a better record than both of those other teams, should be rewarded by facing a team who does not have it's ace or has a different rotation setup? I guess I'm asking do you think it's fair that for all intents and purposes, a wild card team that wins 86 games is on equal footing with a division winner who won 100 at the beginning of a series? I guess I look at it more as a punishment for the 4th team than a reward for the 2nd team.

I would argue that any team could be fighting for a playoff spot until the final day, so they aren't worried about setting up their rotations unless they've earned the right to do so by clinching early. So, yes, I do think it's fair that if the wild card team is that much better than 5th place that they've earned the chance to go ace-to-ace in Game 1 against a higher seed.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

No, I don't think it's fair. I wasn't a fan of the WC to begin with (heck, I'd love to go back to no divisions!). I have no problem with penalizing the current wild card in some way. Maybe no home games for the WC team. Maybe you say the WC team needs to win 3 games to advance while the division winner only needs 2 games. I am not so worried about the 9th and 10th teams being added, it's the 11-16th teams that worry me.

I see what you're saying, and I don't want this to snowball either. If they go through with this 10 team playoff setup, that should be it as any more teams added would kind of dilute the playoffs and cause it to be like the NBA or NHL where half the league makes it in.

I would argue that any team could be fighting for a playoff spot until the final day, so they aren't worried about setting up their rotations unless they've earned the right to do so by clinching early. So, yes, I do think it's fair that if the wild card team is that much better than 5th place that they've earned the chance to go ace-to-ace in Game 1 against a higher seed.

I can see that in the NL, and I can't find the actual standings because mlb.com keeps saying there's an error, but I don't remember recently any wild card races in the AL. By the end of the season it's normally which AL East team is gonna win the division and which is gonna win the Wild Card, in which case both teams are going to make the playoffs anyway. The AL playoff race is normally decided by early-mid September, so I think this playoff would provide some type of spark, and in the process provide some type of incentive to teams to win their division and not have to worry about that extra game or 3.

[spit_bubble]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

Bad idea. It's basically trying to fabricate those special baseball moments instead of letting them naturally develop. By doing so it waters it all down and makes the ones that do naturally develop less special.

MLB hasn't done anything right for the past 20 years though, so I don't expect them to get this one right.

[19]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

Do. Not. Like.

It just seems like change for the sake of change to me.

[DrJones]

Re: Commish: 10 teams in playoffs for '12

Those last few weeks of september can be pretty intense if you are a wild card team where every one of those games matters. If you start adding teams to the format then I think some of that intensity is diluted because you have less and less quality teams vying for that final spot.

Let's look at the AL wild card "races" over the last 5 seasons.

2010: Yankees win WC by 6 games
2009: Red Sox win WC by 8 games
2008: Red Sox win WC by 6 games
2007: Yankees win WC by 6 games
2006: Tigers win WC by 5 games

How many of those September games really mattered?