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.

(USA Today)   One-game wild-card playoffs: "Now, in one game, any given day, a college team could beat a big league team. It's just the way the ball rolls. So I don't know how much one game proves as far as who deserves to move on,"   (usatoday.com) divider line 127
    More: Stupid, Adam LaRoche, playoffs, Mike Matheny, Jon Daniels, Davey Johnson, Dan Uggla, grinding, Chipper Jones  
•       •       •

897 clicks; posted to Sports » on 05 Oct 2012 at 1:25 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-05 02:20:52 PM

A Fark Handle: hulk hogan meat shoes: The President's Trophy means fark-all. Who won the cup last year? An 8 seed. Playoffs are fun because once you're in, you've got as equal a chance of winning as a team who won forty more games than you did.

and that ladies and gentlemen is my whole farking point. due to playoffs we actually mock and deride teams the do well in the regular season, but fail to win in a the playoffs. meanwhile we praise the winners of a small tournament the great team in the land. why not praise both? the premier league champion is the winner of the regular season, but there is also the fa cup which is a knockout tournament. both are valued. as it should be.


...hard to argue. It's a little different in European soccer since every team has the same exact schedule (home-and-home against everyone else), while in American sports that's not going to ever be the case. But I do agree that we shouldn't be mocking the team that played the best during the regular season just because they came up short in playoffs.
 
2012-10-05 02:21:11 PM

Yanks_RSJ: An unnecessary and potentially costly one that I'm not willing to excuse. The team with homefield advantage should be guaranteed to play at least twice at home in a five game series. Period.


See, this is why the Boston Red Sox tanked this season; a selfless act of defiance against an unfair system for this year.
 
2012-10-05 02:21:19 PM

downstairs: Richard Sauce: Should be at least a 3 game series. But one & done is pretty exciting, I can't deny that.


To each their own.  I'm not all that excited for today's two one-and-done games.  I mean, I love playoff baseball, and will watch most likely (I no longer have a horse in the race).  But it just doesn't feel right.  Those game 163's we had for like 3 straight years were exciting as hell.  But something just feels unfair about this one game WC thing.
 
It should be best of 3.  Baseball isn't and never has been a "one game" sport.


I chose yours to respond to, but all y'all calling for a 3-game playoff should read.

A 3-game postseason series will take 6-7 days:
Sunday: possible travel day
Monday: Game 1 (home)
Tuesday: travel day
Wednesday: Game 2 (away)
Thursday: travel day
Friday: Game 3 (home)
Saturday: possible travel day (before the *LDS)

If the teams are geographically close (NYY/BAL, LAD/SD, that kind of thing), I don't think they'd get a travel day, but it wouldn't be 3 days/3 games.

Instead, a 2-game home-and-home decided by aggregate runs. Introduce a little...anarchy, and don't take a week to do it.
 
2012-10-05 02:23:20 PM
The moral is win your division or suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous Wildcard rules.
 
2012-10-05 02:24:44 PM

FreakinB: A Fark Handle: hulk hogan meat shoes: The President's Trophy means fark-all. Who won the cup last year? An 8 seed. Playoffs are fun because once you're in, you've got as equal a chance of winning as a team who won forty more games than you did.

and that ladies and gentlemen is my whole farking point. due to playoffs we actually mock and deride teams the do well in the regular season, but fail to win in a the playoffs. meanwhile we praise the winners of a small tournament the great team in the land. why not praise both? the premier league champion is the winner of the regular season, but there is also the fa cup which is a knockout tournament. both are valued. as it should be.

...hard to argue. It's a little different in European soccer since every team has the same exact schedule (home-and-home against everyone else), while in American sports that's not going to ever be the case. But I do agree that we shouldn't be mocking the team that played the best during the regular season just because they came up short in playoffs.


No, it's totally valid to mock a team that dominated in the season (the 06 Wings) yet shiat the bed in the playoffs (lost in six to Edmonton.) I'm a Wings fan and I mock that team.
 
2012-10-05 02:26:24 PM
Baseball doesn't lend itself to giving teams a week off, that biggest reason a longer series isn't a good idea is that the teams sitting would end up at a disadvantage. Teams are used to playing almost every day. While well rested pitching can be a good thing, usually. (sinkerballers can suffer from too much rest) hitters can easily have their timing thrown off.
 
2012-10-05 02:28:05 PM
Isn't MLB going to non-division play with year round interleague next year? Wouldn't that open up the possibility for 3 teams from the same division to make the playoffs? (sounds dumb, but a serious question to the point of 'make division matter')

I'm all for another team in the postseason mix, but nobody should be able to sit there and say that a 1 game playoff is in anyway fair. Those are tie breakers, if you play out 162 games and end up tied, then you have a 1 game tiebreaker.

Note that it's not because they 'beat' the other team that they go on to the post season, its the fact that they have a better overall record (say 101-62 v 100-63).

The Cardinals are 6 (six) games behind the Braves, in what way have they earned the right to play in a tiebreaker? Make it a full series.

This is baseball, the entire premiss of a 162 game season, broken up into series, is that a single game does not determine a true winner. 

/division should matter, just super curious
 
2012-10-05 02:30:01 PM

el_pilgrim: nobody should be able to sit there and say that a 1 game playoff is in anyway fair.


Life ain't fair, son.

The Tigers are in the playoffs despite being the 7th-best team and facing the easiest schedule of everyone in their league. Sometimes sh*t just happens.
 
2012-10-05 02:34:12 PM
Make the whole thing one and done, get the playoffs finished before the snow flies!
 
2012-10-05 02:34:27 PM

FreakinB: ...hard to argue. It's a little different in European soccer since every team has the same exact schedule (home-and-home against everyone else), while in American sports that's not going to ever be the case. But I do agree that we shouldn't be mocking the team that played the best during the regular season just because they came up short in playoffs.


it's not my fault that baseball stupidly decided to unbalance their schedule just so espn could televise 72 sox/yanks game. baseball has a huge regular season. everyone could play the same schedule and then the winner declared the best, but oh wait, that's what they used to do. and unfortunately that doesn't generate playoff baseball to that can be sold to the networks for piles of cash. and since this is america, if it doesn't print money, it's not a valid method to determine a championship.
 
2012-10-05 02:34:41 PM

IAmRight: A Fark Handle: or as a nation we could celebrate the victors of the regular season more than the winners of a small samples size knock out tournament.

No, no, clearly winning a seven-game series is much more indicative of a team's quality than 162 games worth of data.

/at least someone else is starting to realize how stupid playoffs ultimately are (though they're fun).


I think the stupid part is the 162 games and not the 7 game series.
 
2012-10-05 02:34:44 PM

Yanks_RSJ: The Bestest: No one likes the 2-3 format, but as mentioned, it's just a one-time farkup.

An unnecessary and potentially costly one that I'm not willing to excuse. The team with homefield advantage should be guaranteed to play at least twice at home in a five game series. Period.


We've had this thread. You have the same probability of winning the series in each format. The only difference is that a three game sweep by the higher seed is something like 2% less likely.
 
2012-10-05 02:34:48 PM

Daniels: Yankee fans spent weeks biatching about the missed Texeira call at first. Now you're biatching about the playoff series format? FFS, stop it. As mentioned, if you're the best team, you should be able to split a road-series and then win a series at home without the world crashing in.


So I'm not allowed to point out an asinine format because I'm a Yankees fan? Get farked, it's asinine for the Nationals too. The teams that have the best records shouldn't be sitting around waiting to find out who they play THEN have to board a plane to play two games on the road. At least the A's and Reds knew on Wednesday who they'd be playing, so they could travel Thursday and have a regular workout on Friday. The Yankees and Nationals do not have even that luxury. The Yankees won't find out their opponent until midnight tonight. Quite a reward for having the AL's best record.

I'm sorry that your life as a baseball fan is miserable, but that doesn't mean that I'm not perfectly justified in stating the obvious about this year's playoff format. It's ridiculous.
 
2012-10-05 02:37:00 PM

LemSkroob: jake_lex:

That's what I like about this new system: the division matters again.

3 teams from each league make the playoffs. Best record gets a bye. other two division winners play each other.

Now, not only does winning the division matter (only way into the playoffs), but so does winning the league (getting a 1st round pass). everything is important!


But of course this will never happen again because it keeps owner from shoving money in their pockets.


Having a bye could be a disadvantage, too. Ballplayers like their routine.
 
2012-10-05 02:37:23 PM
For the record, if I'm the Yankees and have a bottomless pit of money, I board a charter at 9pm, fly southwest towards Dallas and circle until the game is over. If the Rangers win, they land. If it's the O's, they head to Baltimore and at least they're on the ground before the Orioles are home.
 
2012-10-05 02:38:16 PM

hulk hogan meat shoes: No, it's totally valid to mock a team that dominated in the season (the 06 Wings) yet shiat the bed in the playoffs (lost in six to Edmonton.) I'm a Wings fan and I mock that team.


no it's not. it's only because you value the small tournament more. if you wanted to determine which team was the best you would value the large sample. let's not pretend random chance doesn't influence the outcome of games, it's a lot harder for a lucky team to remain lucky over the course of the season (well, except baltimore apparently) than it is for a lesser team to win a 7 game series due to some lucky breaks. this is where you tell me, you make your own luck.
 
2012-10-05 02:39:56 PM

el_pilgrim: Isn't MLB going to non-division play with year round interleague next year? Wouldn't that open up the possibility for 3 teams from the same division to make the playoffs? (sounds dumb, but a serious question to the point of 'make division matter')


I'm pretty sure its still divisional, the Astros are moving from the NL Central to the AL West. Each team will play 76 division games, 20 interleague and 66 non-divisional games. The reason interleague goes all year is with an odd number of teams in each league it has to since MLB doesn't want off days from Friday-Sunday.
 
2012-10-05 02:40:46 PM

el_pilgrim: The Cardinals are 6 (six) games behind the Braves, in what way have they earned the right to play in a tiebreaker?


It's fair because that's how the rules were at the start of the season. The Cardinals earned their way into the wild card by having a better record than all other the other non-division winners except the Braves. That's a pretty good accomplishment over a 162 game season.

At any rate, a single game wild card play off is all the calendar can handle. The other teams enjoy the couple days off and get rested. Expand the playoffs any more and we'll be well into November before the World Series concludes. No one wants snow on the ground at the ballpark.
 
2012-10-05 02:40:47 PM

MugzyBrown: I think the stupid part is the 162 games and not the 7 game series.


You and I both. If you want something fair, then play 174 games. No playoffs. Every team plays a three-game series at home and one away against every team in MLB.

Every roster gets 9 players. Every player has to play every position for one inning per game. Yes, including pitcher.

Now THERE'S an even f*cking playing field.
 
2012-10-05 02:42:27 PM
Oh. And 2+ teams end up at the same record after game 174? Co-champions. They're equally as good. I don't need some horsesh*t tournament so I can pretend one was better than the other.
 
2012-10-05 02:44:44 PM
You know what's even more fun to argue about? The designated hitter!
 
2012-10-05 02:48:06 PM
Call me the odd man out, but I don't like it for mainly one reason. You have a wild card team (Braves) who had a much better record than the next best team (Cards) Why should the Cards have that chance for not doing nearly as well throughout he whole season? Atlanta's record was like 8 games better than the Cards. In the AL, I can see it because it was close at the end and two wild cards teams could be said to equally deserve that shot. But in the NL, when the next wild card team is nowhere close, I don't understand it.

And to have it all come down to one game. As in the article, anything could happen. You could take the team with the best record in the league and the worst record in the league and the worst record team could still win with one lucky game. How is that fair?

/Not a Braves fan
//Sadly, a Cubs fan
 
2012-10-05 02:49:23 PM

MugzyBrown: Easy fix, make both of the first two rounds best of 3. No need to change the overall schedule.

The whole sport is based on 3 games series.. why change?


Interesting point. I would counterargue (though I'm not sure how strongly) that baseball is a game of (among many other things) The Long Haul, and making the final two most important series More Long and Longest adds to that element.

FreakinB: players getting healthy (Giants)


Are you talking 2010 Giants? ISTR that they were actually among the least-injured that year, and it was a huge feather in the cap of the training and medical staff. If you mean this year, yeah, it's been weird, but other than Buster, is it a case of getting healthier and healthier through the season? Given that Melky was booted and new guys came in and contributed, I'm not sure?

Dr Dreidel: Instead, a 2-game home-and-home decided by aggregate runs.


< notsureiftrollingorstupid.jpg >

el_pilgrim: year round interleague


Yet Another Monumentally Bad Decision. In addition to taking some of the drama out of the World Series, now the real teams have to play the Ladies' Leaguers more frequently. Booo! But, hey, the Dodgers can play the Angels and the Giants can play the A's! Oh, wait, no, still don't care.

Yanks_RSJ: The teams that have the best records shouldn't be sitting around waiting to find out who they play THEN have to board a plane to play two games on the road.


In theory, totally agree. Then again, I'm not entirely sure how much overall season record should really play in seeding -- Wow! You got to beat up on the Astros and the Cubs! You're *definitely* the best team in the NL! The Jays and the Red Sox were regular stops? You deserve special treatment!
 
2012-10-05 02:50:48 PM

SFSailor: Yet Another Monumentally Bad Decision. In addition to taking some of the drama out of the World Series, now the real teams have to play the Ladies' Leaguers more frequently. Booo! But, hey, the Dodgers can play the Angels and the Giants can play the A's! Oh, wait, no, still don't care.


Interleague was the worst idea ever.
 
2012-10-05 02:51:01 PM
If we were truly interested purely in finding out the single best team, we'd abolish both leagues and throw all 30 into a single league table, without even so much as a World Series.

We're not here to find purely the best team. We're here to have fun.
 
2012-10-05 02:52:15 PM

SFSailor: FreakinB: players getting healthy (Giants)

Are you talking 2010 Giants? ISTR that they were actually among the least-injured that year, and it was a huge feather in the cap of the training and medical staff. If you mean this year, yeah, it's been weird, but other than Buster, is it a case of getting healthier and healthier through the season? Given that Melky was booted and new guys came in and contributed, I'm not sure?


Wrong Giants.
 
2012-10-05 02:52:19 PM

kronicfeld: Whatever you think of the wildcard, the #1 seed going on the road to start is bogus.


Especially for Washington, whose series begins tomorrow and they don't even know where they n eed to go to play. I have had people claim that isn't a big deal and with Atlanta and St Louis not being that far away from DC in this case it probably isn't...But what if it was New York not knowing if they needed to fly to Anaheim or Tampa Bay? Then having to go out after the game tonight and get your plane to the city you start your series tomorrow in?
 
2012-10-05 02:54:41 PM

Sugarmoobs: Call me the odd man out, but I don't like it for mainly one reason. You have a wild card team (Braves) who had a much better record than the next best team (Cards) Why should the Cards have that chance for not doing nearly as well throughout he whole season?


The same could be said for all playoffs. The Nationals had the best record in baseball. Why should another team have the chance despite not doing as well as them in the regular season? If you don't like that example because they were only one game ahead of the next team, my Mariners won 116 games in the regular season in 2001. Why should any team have been allowed to play them?
 
2012-10-05 02:56:58 PM

Gosling: If we were truly interested purely in finding out the single best team, we'd abolish both leagues and throw all 30 into a single league table, without even so much as a World Series.

We're not here to find purely the best team. We're here to have fun.


I dunno, my ironman version of baseball seemed more fun.
 
2012-10-05 02:57:10 PM

srhp29: kronicfeld: Whatever you think of the wildcard, the #1 seed going on the road to start is bogus.

Especially for Washington, whose series begins tomorrow and they don't even know where they n eed to go to play. I have had people claim that isn't a big deal and with Atlanta and St Louis not being that far away from DC in this case it probably isn't...But what if it was New York not knowing if they needed to fly to Anaheim or Tampa Bay? Then having to go out after the game tonight and get your plane to the city you start your series tomorrow in?


Well I'm a Yankee fan, so I'm not allowed to complain about anything ever (apparently), even idiotic formats such as this, but you're 100% correct.

And your hypothetical for New York isn't far off. If the Rangers had won on Wednesday, the Yankees would either be playing in Oakland or Baltimore. If it was Oakland, it's a 5 hour flight while the A's sleep soundly in their own beds.
 
2012-10-05 02:59:23 PM

SFSailor: jake_lex: Then if you don't want your season to come down to a one game crapshoot, win the damn division.

You know what? I *hated* the idea of a one-game playoff as against everything fundamental to baseball... right up until I read that support of it.


It's exactly what Oakland did. They didn't want it to come down to the 163rd game, so they took the division in 162. cut it goddamn close, but they took the AL West away from Texas.
 
2012-10-05 02:59:30 PM

IAmRight: Sugarmoobs: Call me the odd man out, but I don't like it for mainly one reason. You have a wild card team (Braves) who had a much better record than the next best team (Cards) Why should the Cards have that chance for not doing nearly as well throughout he whole season?

The same could be said for all playoffs. The Nationals had the best record in baseball. Why should another team have the chance despite not doing as well as them in the regular season? If you don't like that example because they were only one game ahead of the next team, my Mariners won 116 games in the regular season in 2001. Why should any team have been allowed to play them?


Wait the "best" team doesn't always come out on top in a playoff series? Even a seven game series only mitigates the luck factor.

/Didn't the Phillies win the World Series last year? Oh that's right.
 
2012-10-05 03:01:21 PM

Yanks_RSJ: And your hypothetical for New York isn't far off. If the Rangers had won on Wednesday, the Yankees would either be playing in Oakland or Baltimore. If it was Oakland, it's a 5 hour flight while the A's sleep soundly in their own beds.


I like the idea of "league winner gets to pick who they play in the first round" - you could pick whether you wanted to face the wild card winner (team probably just used their ace) or you could choose the worst division winner (also the team with the worst record of any playoff team) and hop the flight early and be more ready.

/I think this should happen in the NBA and NHL, too - top seeds get to pick their opponent rather than trying to do it via losing games to maneuver into the proper position
 
2012-10-05 03:03:09 PM

roc6783: That is what I don't get about the WC playoff. You spend 162 games trying to 1. win the series in which you are currently playing 2. get to the postseason. Having a one game playoff series just feels like they tacked on a game 163 to the regular season that only 2 teams are eligible for. Also, I just don't see why a 3 game series vs. a one game makes it less important to win the division. Just make it 2 games at home for the team with the better record, then 1 game at home for the other team with no travel break days.


I'm guessing schedule compression had something to do with the format we got. They're at the point where they're using pretty much every usable day for baseball on the calendar- like if they stretched it any further, they'd risk being snowed in for the winter and trying to play Game 7 of the World Series in 8 inches of piled-up snow in 16-degree weather in Boston or Denver or Minnesota or wherever and trying to figure out how the hell you're going to end this damned season in an orderly fashion. The only way you expand the schedule any further than you've got it is to start scheduling doubleheaders again.
 
2012-10-05 03:05:54 PM

Yanks_RSJ: srhp29: kronicfeld: Whatever you think of the wildcard, the #1 seed going on the road to start is bogus.

Especially for Washington, whose series begins tomorrow and they don't even know where they n eed to go to play. I have had people claim that isn't a big deal and with Atlanta and St Louis not being that far away from DC in this case it probably isn't...But what if it was New York not knowing if they needed to fly to Anaheim or Tampa Bay? Then having to go out after the game tonight and get your plane to the city you start your series tomorrow in?

Well I'm a Yankee fan, so I'm not allowed to complain about anything ever (apparently), even idiotic formats such as this, but you're 100% correct.


Not 100% correct. DC doesn't play until Sunday.

If the Nats had to play in Atl or Stl tomorrow, THAT would be complete shiat.

The whole thing is a tough nut to crack. At least the top seed gets to face a somewhat depleted rotation. At least one top starter, maybe even more depending on how the WC games play out. Atlanta has Hudson and Minor on their wildcard roster. You might have the winning wildcard teams expending two starters just to win today. You never know, but it's going to be crazy.
 
2012-10-05 03:18:30 PM

SFSailor: Dr Dreidel: Instead, a 2-game home-and-home decided by aggregate runs.

< notsureiftrollingorstupid.jpg >


Could be both. Just throwing the idea out to see what "the people" think.

// that's a data point, thanks!
 
2012-10-05 03:18:56 PM

jake_lex: Then if you don't want your season to come down to a one game crapshoot, win the damn division.


Or win the wild card, like the Braves did. The tie-breaker game for the Rangers & Orioles is perfectly reasonable.
 
2012-10-05 03:19:18 PM

Dumb-Ass-Monkey: SFSailor: jake_lex: Then if you don't want your season to come down to a one game crapshoot, win the damn division.

You know what? I *hated* the idea of a one-game playoff as against everything fundamental to baseball... right up until I read that support of it.

It's exactly what Oakland did. They didn't want it to come down to the 163rd game, so they took the division in 162. cut it goddamn close, but they took the AL West away from Texas.


Rangers fan, and you are absolutely right. They outplayed us, period. Kudos to your and your team.
 
2012-10-05 03:29:06 PM
As much as I love to rag on Selig, I have to give him credit for changing the playoff format. I have also suggested that MLB shorten the season and expand the playoffs, but this is a good compromise.
 
2012-10-05 03:34:47 PM

Dr Dreidel: I chose yours to respond to, but all y'all calling for a 3-game playoff should read.

A 3-game postseason series will take 6-7 days:
Sunday: possible travel day
Monday: Game 1 (home)
Tuesday: travel day
Wednesday: Game 2 (away)
Thursday: travel day
Friday: Game 3 (home)
Saturday: possible travel day (before the *LDS)

If the teams are geographically close (NYY/BAL, LAD/SD, that kind of thing), I don't think they'd get a travel day, but it wouldn't be 3 days/3 games.

Instead, a 2-game home-and-home decided by aggregate runs. Introduce a little...anarchy, and don't take a week to do it.



First of all, it should be (for the higher seed)--- away, home, home.
 
No travel days between game 1 and 2.  Baseball doesn't *need* travel days.  Its a benefit for those who make the playoffs, so heck, this makes not winning your division even more desirable.
 
So I've added only 2 extra days to the whole thing.
 
Also, why not tighten up the division series (when it goes back to 2-2-1)... no travel day between games 2 and 3.  I mean, baseball teams can play up to 20 days in a row in the regular season.  Ain't going to hurt them.
 
2012-10-05 03:38:44 PM

Gosling: If we were truly interested purely in finding out the single best team, we'd abolish both leagues and throw all 30 into a single league table, without even so much as a World Series.

We're not here to find purely the best team. We're here to have fun.


How is this more legit than a tourney format?

There is no perfect way to determine a champion, so you look for the way that generates the most money and interest.
 
2012-10-05 03:45:47 PM

lunchinlewis: Yanks_RSJ: srhp29: kronicfeld: Whatever you think of the wildcard, the #1 seed going on the road to start is bogus.

Especially for Washington, whose series begins tomorrow and they don't even know where they n eed to go to play. I have had people claim that isn't a big deal and with Atlanta and St Louis not being that far away from DC in this case it probably isn't...But what if it was New York not knowing if they needed to fly to Anaheim or Tampa Bay? Then having to go out after the game tonight and get your plane to the city you start your series tomorrow in?

Well I'm a Yankee fan, so I'm not allowed to complain about anything ever (apparently), even idiotic formats such as this, but you're 100% correct.

Not 100% correct. DC doesn't play until Sunday.

If the Nats had to play in Atl or Stl tomorrow, THAT would be complete shiat.

The whole thing is a tough nut to crack. At least the top seed gets to face a somewhat depleted rotation. At least one top starter, maybe even more depending on how the WC games play out. Atlanta has Hudson and Minor on their wildcard roster. You might have the winning wildcard teams expending two starters just to win today. You never know, but it's going to be crazy.


Ah I could have sworn originally at least one of the wild card game winners had to play the next day. It appears either it never was set up that way or they changed it because they realized how dumb it was. If there is a full travel day in there, it isn't really concerning.
 
2012-10-05 03:46:29 PM

jake_lex: Then if you don't want your season to come down to a one game crapshoot, win the damn division.

That's what I like about this new system: the division matters again. Before, the wild card went in on the same basic footing as the divisional champs. That led to snoozers down the stretch as the Yankees and (then) the Red Sox just put it in autopilot knowing that if they didn't win the division, they had the wild card.


Excellent point, sir
 
2012-10-05 03:49:51 PM

srhp29: kronicfeld: Whatever you think of the wildcard, the #1 seed going on the road to start is bogus.

Especially for Washington, whose series begins tomorrow and they don't even know where they n eed to go to play. I have had people claim that isn't a big deal and with Atlanta and St Louis not being that far away from DC in this case it probably isn't...But what if it was New York not knowing if they needed to fly to Anaheim or Tampa Bay? Then having to go out after the game tonight and get your plane to the city you start your series tomorrow in?


Yankees are in the same boat. They don't know whether they have to go to Baltimore, MD or Arlington, TX. In fact, the Nationals will know where they are headed before the Yankees know where they have to go.

/Not a Yankees fan
//Nats fan
 
2012-10-05 03:55:59 PM
The same folks who had tantrums over sudden death in NFL games and who brought shootouts to the NHL will go apeshiat over this too and come up with something even wronger to fix it. It wont surprise me a bit when they eventually decide that if a team doesnt winn the game by five runs they keep the game score and add to it the next day using a home run derby to determine the winner. There os a vast retarded sports fanbase out there who just love tinkering with rules and dont give a shiat what they fark up with their "improvements"
 
2012-10-05 04:02:11 PM

mikaloyd: The same folks who had tantrums over sudden death in NFL games and who brought shootouts to the NHL will go apeshiat over this too and come up with something even wronger to fix it. It wont surprise me a bit when they eventually decide that if a team doesnt winn the game by five runs they keep the game score and add to it the next day using a home run derby to determine the winner. There os a vast retarded sports fanbase out there who just love tinkering with rules and dont give a shiat what they fark up with their "improvements"


You are correct, sir.
 
2012-10-05 04:04:33 PM

mikaloyd: The same folks who had tantrums over sudden death in NFL games and who brought shootouts to the NHL will go apeshiat over this too and come up with something even wronger to fix it. It wont surprise me a bit when they eventually decide that if a team doesnt winn the game by five runs they keep the game score and add to it the next day using a home run derby to determine the winner. There os a vast retarded sports fanbase out there who just love tinkering with rules and dont give a shiat what they fark up with their "improvements"


Sounds like congress
 
2012-10-05 04:06:29 PM

mikaloyd: The same folks who had tantrums over sudden death in NFL games and who brought shootouts to the NHL will go apeshiat over this too and come up with something even wronger to fix it. It wont surprise me a bit when they eventually decide that if a team doesnt winn the game by five runs they keep the game score and add to it the next day using a home run derby to determine the winner. There os a vast retarded sports fanbase out there who just love tinkering with rules and dont give a shiat what they fark up with their "improvements"


As long as everyone starts from the same point, can reach the same end point by equal means, and everything is settled on the field, ultimately you can't screw it up too badly.
 
2012-10-05 04:08:20 PM

Dr Dreidel: downstairs: Richard Sauce: Should be at least a 3 game series. But one & done is pretty exciting, I can't deny that.


To each their own.  I'm not all that excited for today's two one-and-done games.  I mean, I love playoff baseball, and will watch most likely (I no longer have a horse in the race).  But it just doesn't feel right.  Those game 163's we had for like 3 straight years were exciting as hell.  But something just feels unfair about this one game WC thing.
 
It should be best of 3.  Baseball isn't and never has been a "one game" sport.

I chose yours to respond to, but all y'all calling for a 3-game playoff should read.

A 3-game postseason series will take 6-7 days:
Sunday: possible travel day
Monday: Game 1 (home)
Tuesday: travel day
Wednesday: Game 2 (away)
Thursday: travel day
Friday: Game 3 (home)
Saturday: possible travel day (before the *LDS)

If the teams are geographically close (NYY/BAL, LAD/SD, that kind of thing), I don't think they'd get a travel day, but it wouldn't be 3 days/3 games.

Instead, a 2-game home-and-home decided by aggregate runs. Introduce a little...anarchy, and don't take a week to do it.


An aggregate in baseball would be very strange. Could lead to a home team playing the bottom of the ninth while already having won that game
 
2012-10-05 04:12:32 PM
They should go:

Wild Card: Best of 3
Division Series: Best of 5
Championship series: Best of 7

Make the wild card round more than a one game test.

Even though the strategy involved in your Wild Card roster is interesting, as you don't need as many pitchers, and can get super specialized, because its a seperate round.
 
Displayed 50 of 127 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report