If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   MLB agrees to add another playoff spot for the Red Sox to blow   (mlbtraderumors.com) divider line 88
    More: Interesting, Red Sox, Major League Baseball, Rosenthal, playoffs  
•       •       •

1293 clicks; posted to Sports » on 29 Feb 2012 at 5:21 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-29 02:41:07 PM  
They better stock up on fried chicken and beer.
i199.photobucket.com
 
2012-02-29 03:00:06 PM  
This is an absolutely idiotic idea. Remember the last day of the 2011 season, and how awesome that was?
 
2012-02-29 03:05:17 PM  

ricewater_stool: This is an absolutely idiotic idea. Remember the last day of the 2011 season, and how awesome that was?


It's not an idiotic idea, it finally makes the wild card a handicap. What it messes up is the schedule if there is a rain out. However that can be fixed if they decide to play day playoff games again, but that will never happen.
 
2012-02-29 03:07:27 PM  

ricewater_stool: This is an absolutely idiotic idea. Remember the last day of the 2011 season, and how awesome that was?


The last day of the 2011 season was so memorable because the odds of that happening were a brazillion to one. Even without expanded playoffs we weren't going to see that happen again.
 
2012-02-29 03:15:58 PM  

WTF Indeed: ricewater_stool: This is an absolutely idiotic idea. Remember the last day of the 2011 season, and how awesome that was?

It's not an idiotic idea, it finally makes the wild card a handicap. What it messes up is the schedule if there is a rain out. However that can be fixed if they decide to play day playoff games again, but that will never happen.



a) I disagree. What you end up with is two teams, probably with different records, pretending as if they tied and have to play the play-in game. It's really artificial, and takes away further from the premise that the 162 game season should determine who makes the playoffs.

b) They've been playing early round games during the day for years now. There's only one game on in prime time.

c) Every year I wish for scheduling on the fly so there aren't huge gaps between playoff rounds. But apparently that can't happen because of TV and they end up playing baseball in late October when it's 35 degrees at night.
 
2012-02-29 03:17:36 PM  
A one-game playoff is completely idiotic. Give the two wild card teams at least a 3 game series. It's still a handicap to them.

I agree with adding the extra teams, but one-and-done is stupid.
 
2012-02-29 03:24:21 PM  

Demetrius: A one-game playoff is completely idiotic. Give the two wild card teams at least a 3 game series. It's still a handicap to them.

I agree with adding the extra teams, but one-and-done is stupid.


I agree that it should be best of three instead of one and done. But I still think it's an improvement.
 
2012-02-29 03:27:44 PM  

Rex_Banner: Demetrius: A one-game playoff is completely idiotic. Give the two wild card teams at least a 3 game series. It's still a handicap to them.

I agree with adding the extra teams, but one-and-done is stupid.

I agree that it should be best of three instead of one and done. But I still think it's an improvement.


Why is adding more teams an improvement? There's a reason they play such a long damn season- to figure out who the best teams are. Adding in yet another team that wasn't good enough to win just cheapens the playoffs.
 
2012-02-29 03:30:29 PM  

ricewater_stool: Rex_Banner: Demetrius: A one-game playoff is completely idiotic. Give the two wild card teams at least a 3 game series. It's still a handicap to them.

I agree with adding the extra teams, but one-and-done is stupid.

I agree that it should be best of three instead of one and done. But I still think it's an improvement.

Why is adding more teams an improvement? There's a reason they play such a long damn season- to figure out who the best teams are. Adding in yet another team that wasn't good enough to win just cheapens the playoffs.


Simple. It increases the excitement of the length of the season for a boat-load more markets, thus driving up attendance and revenue.

When the season is basically over in late August and teams are out of contention then people give up, you're playing to empty stadiums, and revenue goes down the shiatter.
 
2012-02-29 03:33:39 PM  
Mets still won't make the playoffs.
 
2012-02-29 03:35:24 PM  

Demetrius: ricewater_stool: Rex_Banner: Demetrius: A one-game playoff is completely idiotic. Give the two wild card teams at least a 3 game series. It's still a handicap to them.

I agree with adding the extra teams, but one-and-done is stupid.

I agree that it should be best of three instead of one and done. But I still think it's an improvement.

Why is adding more teams an improvement? There's a reason they play such a long damn season- to figure out who the best teams are. Adding in yet another team that wasn't good enough to win just cheapens the playoffs.

Simple. It increases the excitement of the length of the season for a boat-load more markets, thus driving up attendance and revenue.

When the season is basically over in late August and teams are out of contention then people give up, you're playing to empty stadiums, and revenue goes down the shiatter.



So it's an improvement for owners and MLB because it makes them more money. That much is obvious. Like a lot of other changes (interleague play) and proposed changes, it will make the game worse.
 
2012-02-29 03:44:02 PM  

Demetrius: Simple. It increases the excitement of the length of the season for a boat-load more markets, thus driving up attendance and revenue.

When the season is basically over in late August and teams are out of contention then people give up, you're playing to empty stadiums, and revenue goes down the shiatter.


The number of teams in contention for the wild card won't change. You'll still have the same number of teams- just fighting for 2 spots. As well, the same number of teams out of it in September will remain the same.
 
2012-02-29 03:45:18 PM  

ricewater_stool: So it's an improvement for owners and MLB because it makes them more money. That much is obvious. Like a lot of other changes (interleague play) and proposed changes, it will make the game worse.


Right now there is no incentive to win the division. In 2010 the Yankees admitted their goal was to earn the wild card because their team was banged up and it was more important that they had a full strength team than a Division crown. Once they got to the playoff they were on an equal footing to the other teams. If the this new system had been in place then, the Yankees would have had to play a win-in game and waste C.C. Sabathia, meaning he would only be able to pitch one game in the ALDS, giving their opponent, who won their division, an advantage.
 
2012-02-29 03:46:14 PM  

ricewater_stool: So it's an improvement for owners and MLB because it makes them more money.


It's not just an improvement for the owners - more fans will have a stake in playoff races under the new system because more teams will be alive deeper into the season. That's good for baseball as a whole.

Also, it adds a lot more incentive to win your division and creates a bigger advantage for the division winners.
 
2012-02-29 03:52:18 PM  

ricewater_stool: Demetrius: ricewater_stool: Rex_Banner: Demetrius: A one-game playoff is completely idiotic. Give the two wild card teams at least a 3 game series. It's still a handicap to them.

I agree with adding the extra teams, but one-and-done is stupid.

I agree that it should be best of three instead of one and done. But I still think it's an improvement.

Why is adding more teams an improvement? There's a reason they play such a long damn season- to figure out who the best teams are. Adding in yet another team that wasn't good enough to win just cheapens the playoffs.

Simple. It increases the excitement of the length of the season for a boat-load more markets, thus driving up attendance and revenue.

When the season is basically over in late August and teams are out of contention then people give up, you're playing to empty stadiums, and revenue goes down the shiatter.


So it's an improvement for owners and MLB because it makes them more money. That much is obvious. Like a lot of other changes (interleague play) and proposed changes, it will make the game worse.


It's an improvement for a lot of fans, too.

downstairs: The number of teams in contention for the wild card won't change. You'll still have the same number of teams- just fighting for 2 spots. As well, the same number of teams out of it in September will remain the same.


The possibility exists for several more teams to be in the hunt depending on the separation point for teams that have a chance and those that don't. It also extends the excitement for teams that might not be in the hunt further into the season.

Sure, it benefits owners. It benefits the fans too.
 
2012-02-29 03:52:59 PM  

WTF Indeed: ricewater_stool: So it's an improvement for owners and MLB because it makes them more money. That much is obvious. Like a lot of other changes (interleague play) and proposed changes, it will make the game worse.

Right now there is no incentive to win the division. In 2010 the Yankees admitted their goal was to earn the wild card because their team was banged up and it was more important that they had a full strength team than a Division crown. Once they got to the playoff they were on an equal footing to the other teams. If the this new system had been in place then, the Yankees would have had to play a win-in game and waste C.C. Sabathia, meaning he would only be able to pitch one game in the ALDS, giving their opponent, who won their division, an advantage.



There's only one of the three divisions in which there's no large incentive for winning. The other two have to win to get into the playoffs.

And if you remember last year, the Tigers got screwed by the Yankees starting game one in the rain and burning Verlander, who then could only pitch once in the series. It didn't matter.

I think having the one wild card is a good thing. Having a second team in the mix cheapens it and possibly screws over a better team in a one game playoff. One game in baseball doesn't mean dick.
 
2012-02-29 03:59:36 PM  

ricewater_stool: And if you remember last year, the Tigers got screwed by the Yankees starting game one in the rain and burning Verlander, who then could only pitch once in the series. It didn't matter.


1) MLB makes those calls in the playoffs, not the home team. That wasn;t some Yankee conspiracy to burn Verlander

2) Both teams burned their ace in that one. With a one game playoff, the WC would burn its ace while the division winner would still get to keep theirs in place for Game 1. That's an advantage
 
2012-02-29 04:00:03 PM  

ricewater_stool: There's only one of the three divisions in which there's no large incentive for winning. The other two have to win to get into the playoffs.


Ummm...The AL East has the Yankees, Red Sox, and Rays. The Central has the Tigers. And the West has the Angels and Rangers. So aside from the Tigers, there will be three teams playing for 2 spots who will then play for one spot.

The NL East has the Phillies, Braves, Marlins, and Nats(Yes the Nats). The Central has the Brewers, Cardinals, and Reds. The NL West has every team but the Padres.

How is that bad for baseball?
 
2012-02-29 04:05:25 PM  

Rex_Banner: ricewater_stool: And if you remember last year, the Tigers got screwed by the Yankees starting game one in the rain and burning Verlander, who then could only pitch once in the series. It didn't matter.

1) MLB makes those calls in the playoffs, not the home team. That wasn;t some Yankee conspiracy to burn Verlander

2) Both teams burned their ace in that one. With a one game playoff, the WC would burn its ace while the division winner would still get to keep theirs in place for Game 1. That's an advantage


Not necessarily. It's not always the best move to start an ace against an ace if you have a deep rotation. The Yankees lack of pitching depth was what killed them last year.
 
2012-02-29 04:09:09 PM  

WTF Indeed: ricewater_stool: There's only one of the three divisions in which there's no large incentive for winning. The other two have to win to get into the playoffs.

Ummm...The AL East has the Yankees, Red Sox, and Rays. The Central has the Tigers. And the West has the Angels and Rangers. So aside from the Tigers, there will be three teams playing for 2 spots who will then play for one spot.

The NL East has the Phillies, Braves, Marlins, and Nats(Yes the Nats). The Central has the Brewers, Cardinals, and Reds. The NL West has every team but the Padres.

How is that bad for baseball?


a) those are the teams that are good right now. This change is permanent. So there could conceivably be a .500 or under team winning that last spot, getting lucky in the one game, and knocking a 90+ win team out. Once again, they play so many goddamn games for a reason- to see who is the best over the long season, not in a one game damned playoff.

b) What this really does is take a lot of the pressure off teams who are contending. It does nothing for teams who are out of it. So it actually eliminates some of the drama of a race for the playoffs.
 
2012-02-29 04:16:03 PM  

ricewater_stool: those are the teams that are good right now. This change is permanent. So there could conceivably be a .500 or under team winning that last spot, getting lucky in the one game, and knocking a 90+ win team out. Once again, they play so many goddamn games for a reason- to see who is the best over the long season, not in a one game damned playoff.


OMG! You mean there is incentive to win the division now so you don't have to subjected to that?!

ricewater_stool: What this really does is take a lot of the pressure off teams who are contending. It does nothing for teams who are out of it. So it actually eliminates some of the drama of a race for the playoffs.


Your argument is that contending teams will feel less pressure because there are more teams in contention for the same number of playoff spots?
 
2012-02-29 04:18:41 PM  

ricewater_stool: Rex_Banner: ricewater_stool: And if you remember last year, the Tigers got screwed by the Yankees starting game one in the rain and burning Verlander, who then could only pitch once in the series. It didn't matter.

1) MLB makes those calls in the playoffs, not the home team. That wasn;t some Yankee conspiracy to burn Verlander

2) Both teams burned their ace in that one. With a one game playoff, the WC would burn its ace while the division winner would still get to keep theirs in place for Game 1. That's an advantage

Not necessarily. It's not always the best move to start an ace against an ace if you have a deep rotation. The Yankees lack of pitching depth was what killed them last year.


It's always to your advantage to have your best pitcher go as many times as possible. You don't hold your best arm back in Game 1 because the other ace is a little better than your ace
 
2012-02-29 04:23:31 PM  

WTF Indeed: How is that bad for baseball?


Because adding another playoff team is pointless and stupid. The WC is already penalized, they're guaranteed to be the away team. Plus having 5 teams per league is just pointlessly unbalanced. If you can't keep the playoff formats fair, don't mess with them.
 
2012-02-29 04:32:17 PM  

Demetrius: The possibility exists for several more teams to be in the hunt depending on the separation point for teams that have a chance and those that don't. It also extends the excitement for teams that might not be in the hunt further into the season.

Sure, it benefits owners. It benefits the fans too.


As a baseball fan since I was 5, I don't think it benefits me. More is not always better. If its so great... why not have nearly every team over .500 make it into a 16-team playoff like the NBA does?
 
2012-02-29 04:48:08 PM  

downstairs: Demetrius: The possibility exists for several more teams to be in the hunt depending on the separation point for teams that have a chance and those that don't. It also extends the excitement for teams that might not be in the hunt further into the season.

Sure, it benefits owners. It benefits the fans too.

As a baseball fan since I was 5, I don't think it benefits me. More is not always better. If its so great... why not have nearly every team over .500 make it into a 16-team playoff like the NBA does?


In the previous system, baseball had the fewest amount of teams making the playoffs, in comparison to the other three major sports. Under the new system, baseball STILL has the fewest number of teams making the playoffs. They are a LONG way from reaching NBA levels.
 
2012-02-29 04:51:21 PM  

Rex_Banner: downstairs: Demetrius: The possibility exists for several more teams to be in the hunt depending on the separation point for teams that have a chance and those that don't. It also extends the excitement for teams that might not be in the hunt further into the season.

Sure, it benefits owners. It benefits the fans too.

As a baseball fan since I was 5, I don't think it benefits me. More is not always better. If its so great... why not have nearly every team over .500 make it into a 16-team playoff like the NBA does?

In the previous system, baseball had the fewest amount of teams making the playoffs, in comparison to the other three major sports. Under the new system, baseball STILL has the fewest number of teams making the playoffs. They are a LONG way from reaching NBA levels.


Doesn't mean this is a good addition.
 
2012-02-29 05:12:23 PM  

Rex_Banner: In the previous system, baseball had the fewest amount of teams making the playoffs, in comparison to the other three major sports. Under the new system, baseball STILL has the fewest number of teams making the playoffs. They are a LONG way from reaching NBA levels.


I generally don't believe in slippery slope arguments, but when it comes to playoffs in sport- I think that fear applies.

Also, I hate the fact that the true wild card (as defined by the original system) can be eliminated in 1 game. The true wild card is very often the 2nd best team in the league. That's why many of them have diservedly gone to the World Series.

I think its completely unfair for a 95+ win Wild Card team can be eliminated in 1 game, when a crappy division winner from a crappy division moves on to the playoffs.
 
2012-02-29 05:21:37 PM  
This is just stupid and single game elimination makes it almost entirely pointless.
 
2012-02-29 05:28:29 PM  
Eh, it forces the wildcard winner to use their best pitcher one more time.
 
2012-02-29 05:30:43 PM  

WTF Indeed: The NL West has every team but the Padres.


i1.kym-cdn.com
 
2012-02-29 05:32:21 PM  
The winner of the WS will be either the Tigers or the Rangers. That ALCS is going to be epic.
 
2012-02-29 05:34:42 PM  

Demetrius: A one-game playoff is completely idiotic. Give the two wild card teams at least a 3 game series. It's still a handicap to them.

I agree with adding the extra teams, but one-and-done is stupid.


Agree 100%. They could even do it in 2 days: 1st day you play game 1, 2nd day you have a tentative double-header. If the team up 1-0 wins the afternoon game then it's over; if the team down 0-1 wins, then you play a night cap for the right to go on to the divisional round.
 
2012-02-29 05:34:58 PM  
Close only counts in horseshoes, hand-grenades, and the baseball regular season.
 
2012-02-29 05:39:52 PM  

downstairs: Rex_Banner:
I think its completely unfair for a 95+ win Wild Card team can be eliminated in 1 game, when a crappy division winner from a crappy division moves on to the playoffs.


Well you should have won your damn division. Otherwise, why not just be like hockey and eliminate divisional altogether?
 
2012-02-29 05:39:57 PM  
You know, I'll admit, Baseball started to suck me back in after the Barry Bonds bullshiat and the Pirates even looked less dead last year. But this Ryan Braun crap, 31/2 hour games and now this playoff thing pretty much kills it for me.

Bud Selig ruined my baseball


Waaaa waaaaaaa
 
2012-02-29 05:41:12 PM  

germ78: Close only counts in horseshoes, hand-grenades, and the baseball regular season.


Baseball should be more like the other sports...or something.
 
2012-02-29 05:46:09 PM  
Blue Jays are back in the playoffs baby!

/'92-'93 all over again.
//Ok, I'll take '85.
 
2012-02-29 05:53:06 PM  

Decillion: Blue Jays are back in the playoffs baby!

/'92-'93 all over again.
//Ok, I'll take '85.


under the new system they would have made the playoffs once in the last 18 years. i agree their chances are improved, but not by much, unless they start winning a whole lot more games.
 
2012-02-29 05:57:34 PM  
Win-or-go-home wild card game... I'm OK with this. As someone else said up-thread: win your division, or be laughed at (Yes, Red Sox, I'm looking at you... and Detroit? If your bullpen woes continue, I'm including you).
 
2012-02-29 05:58:18 PM  
Total bullshiat.

As was said up-thread, they play 162 for a reason... to find out who the best teams are.

This isn't not a play-off. It's a fuggin' play-in.
 
2012-02-29 06:12:14 PM  

ClavellBCMI: win your division, or be laughed at


In some cases, win your division and be laughed at. And rightly so.

I'M LOOKING AT YOU, NL CENTRAL
 
2012-02-29 06:13:18 PM  
People want winning the division to matter.
Owners want more money for their team if they make the playoffs.
Teams want home field advantage if they get in.

So, to make winning the division count, you need to handicap the wild card team or give a big advantage to division winners.

Without changing the game number or playoff team number, then you need to give the division winning team 4 home games in the first round against a wild card opponent. Owners would never agree to that because, even if it is one game, everybody wants a playoff game. Nobody is going to agree to 3-1-1 structure for the first round and a 2-1-2 structure would be scheduling stupidity plus not really giving as big an advantage.

If you change the playoff team number. then obviously the two wildcard teams would play each other. Given that, you aren't going to have them play a 3 game playoff for a couple reasons. The scheduling would have to be 1-1-1 because both teams would want a playoff game. That means, at minimum, a 4 day round. If there are ties, then you're looking at a playoff that could start 5+ days after the end of the regular season. Nobody is going to agree to that because shutting down a team for 5-6 days would be hell for their timing and momentum. Not to mention, the playoffs would definitely be in November every year.

They should have all players report to spring training when pitchers and catchers report, plus moving the start of the season up several days. We should see the return of scheduled double-headers. National double-header day would be f*cking awesome.

They should also get rid of one off-day during the first round of the playoffs.
 
2012-02-29 06:20:25 PM  

BKITU: WTF Indeed: The NL West has every team but the Padres.

[i1.kym-cdn.com image 251x235]


Enjoy Josh Byrnes giving Eric Byrnes another huge contract so he'll get paid to play softball when he rides his bicycle off into the sunset again....
 
2012-02-29 06:23:25 PM  

december: Demetrius: A one-game playoff is completely idiotic. Give the two wild card teams at least a 3 game series. It's still a handicap to them.

I agree with adding the extra teams, but one-and-done is stupid.

This

Agree 100%. They could even do it in 2 days: 1st day you play game 1, 2nd day you have a tentative double-header. If the team up 1-0 wins the afternoon game then it's over; if the team down 0-1 wins, then you play a night cap for the right to go on to the divisional round.


And That
 
2012-02-29 06:23:29 PM  
And horrible news for the D-Backs... contract talks with Montero shelved and he'll be a FA next season. Solid hitting catcher with low mileage hitting the market.
 
2012-02-29 06:27:59 PM  

ricewater_stool: Why is adding more teams an improvement? There's a reason they play such a long damn season- to figure out who the best teams are. Adding in yet another team that wasn't good enough to win just cheapens the playoffs.


SO MUCH THIS. Why even play 162 games if you're going to let a team who got hot for one or two months out of six play against a team that was hot for all six months?
 
2012-02-29 06:34:04 PM  
If this change were in place over the last decade, damn near every compelling end of season story wouldn't have been interesting.

Last year, for instance. Mets' collapse(s)? No problem. Etc.
 
2012-02-29 06:38:09 PM  
Is the 2011 season over yet?
 
2012-02-29 06:39:56 PM  
The only bad thing about that epic collapse was that its epicness made people forget the Braves farked up nearly as bad.
 
2012-02-29 06:40:55 PM  
I'm all for expanding the playoffs but a 1 game playoff is farking stupid.
 
Displayed 50 of 88 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report