What's new

MLB plotting playoff expansion — with reality TV twist

Das Texan

Loria can kiss my ass
Moderator
VIP
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
21,377
Reaction score
92
This makes the 3 batter rule seem like a smart way to go.
 

Michael

Wind Surge
Moderator
VIP
Writer
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
48,428
Reaction score
713
"Trevor Bauer has been suspended for hurting Rob Manfred's feelings."
 

rmc523

Jumbo Shrimp
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,327
Reaction score
281
I do think the wild card should be a 3-game series, and not a single game. All of baseball is decided on series, yet we have this one aberration for a wild card, "because"?
 

SilverBullet

Marlin
Moderator
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
28,503
Reaction score
1,441
I do think the wild card should be a 3-game series, and not a single game. All of baseball is decided on series, yet we have this one aberration for a wild card, "because"?
Because the Wild Card teams should be punished for not winning the division. It's not a full proof plan but I like this part of it. It's the way my mind has always justified the one game wild card.

Too many times in history the wild card team destroys the division winner in the first series without having any consequences for not winning their division.
 

SilverBullet

Marlin
Moderator
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
28,503
Reaction score
1,441
So basically I like that there is now more incentive for winning the divison.
 

Michael

Wind Surge
Moderator
VIP
Writer
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
48,428
Reaction score
713
I'm quoting this hot-take in a Marlin Maniac article.
I approve of the usage.

Throw this in:

If this format had been implemented previously, then as recently as 2017, TWO sub-.500 teams in the American League would have made the playoffs.
 

rmc523

Jumbo Shrimp
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,327
Reaction score
281
Because the Wild Card teams should be punished for not winning the division. It's not a full proof plan but I like this part of it. It's the way my mind has always justified the one game wild card.

Too many times in history the wild card team destroys the division winner in the first series without having any consequences for not winning their division.
I get that, but I don't know if you're quite getting my thought - My idea is the division winners/series stay with the 5 game series playing each other as-is. I'm not saying have the division winner play the wild card in a series (until you get to the NLDS). I'm saying instead of a single wild card game it'd be a wild card series where the two wild cards play each other in a 3 game series (like is played throughout the year).

I don't like that a team's entire season can be ended by a single error in that single game.

That way, there's still an incentive to win the division (you get a bigger chance at moving on with the 5 game series), but a season doesn't come down to a single game.
 

yxnarbo

Muckdog
Joined
Mar 7, 2019
Messages
86
Reaction score
36
I approve of the usage.

Throw this in:

If this format had been implemented previously, then as recently as 2017, TWO sub-.500 teams in the American League would have made the playoffs.
You got it, and thank you.
 

SilverBullet

Marlin
Moderator
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
28,503
Reaction score
1,441
a season doesn't come down to a single game.
I like your idea but I have an issue with this mindset. A season never really comes down to a single game although it may seem that way.

Think of all the blown games during a season, all of those accumulate to be the reason teams don't win their division. The season is so long that it's never truly one game that makes the difference.

A team collapses and loses the division because of an error the final game of the season? I bet you there's a 4 game losing streak the month before that they could have done better on... or a walk off loss... or a blown save... etc.

And even in a series of games, if the series gets tied and it comes down to one final elimination game then guess what it's once again down to a single game.

So I just don't think the argument about a single deciding game is the big factor that some think it us.
 

rmc523

Jumbo Shrimp
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,327
Reaction score
281
I like your idea but I have an issue with this mindset. A season never really comes down to a single game although it may seem that way.

Think of all the blown games during a season, all of those accumulate to be the reason teams don't win their division. The season is so long that it's never truly one game that makes the difference.

A team collapses and loses the division because of an error the final game of the season? I bet you there's a 4 game losing streak the month before that they could have done better on... or a walk off loss... or a blown save... etc.

And even in a series of games, if the series gets tied and it comes down to one final elimination game then guess what it's once again down to a single game.

So I just don't think the argument about a single deciding game is the big factor that some think it us.
Eh. I get what you're saying, but again, aside from a play-in game which doesn't happen often, the entire postseason is series-based except for this wild card game.

I get some are happy with the single game idea, but I've hated it ever since it was announced.
 

Top Bottom