PDA

View Full Version : Is this real a "wildcard?"



thawv
10-05-2012, 11:17 PM
Why are they still calling it the wildcard, when it's really not. To me, it's more of a play in game to get into the playoffs.

This new format could really screw a team that really deserves to be in the playoffs. I mean, after a full season, one and done? That's just so wrong.

The playoffs essentially don't start until tomorrow. These two matchups are really not the "playoffs." The winner is in the playoffs.

koreancabbage
10-05-2012, 11:19 PM
Why are they still calling it the wildcard, when it's really not. To me, it's more of a play in game to get into the playoffs.

This new format could really screw a team that really deserves to be in the playoffs. I mean, after a full season, one and done? That's just so wrong.

The playoffs essentially don't start until tomorrow. These two matchups are really not the "playoffs." The winner is in the playoffs.

may the best team win.

jonnydanger1
10-05-2012, 11:29 PM
It feels weird watching these teams play 162 games, then watching it come down one measly game.

1903
10-05-2012, 11:31 PM
All playoff games should be 1 game. Team needs to win three games to win the WS.

nirvana235
10-05-2012, 11:34 PM
Teams should just flip a coin to see who moves on, won't be much less of a crap shoot.

TrueYankee
10-05-2012, 11:35 PM
Why are they still calling it the wildcard, when it's really not. To me, it's more of a play in game to get into the playoffs.

This new format could really screw a team that really deserves to be in the playoffs. I mean, after a full season, one and done? That's just so wrong.

The playoffs essentially don't start until tomorrow. These two matchups are really not the "playoffs." The winner is in the playoffs.

No, if your team was good, they would win the division and not have to worry about this 1-game showdown. I like it. You get MLB fans watching this game, not just fans that root for their team.

It gives teams an incentive to win their division as well.

It actually makes too much sense, that some people are trying to find a way to make it look like it doesn't.

jonnydanger1
10-05-2012, 11:36 PM
Baseball teams simply can't be defined in one game. Anything can happen.

nirvana235
10-05-2012, 11:36 PM
Baseball teams simply can't be defined inonegame. Anything can happen.

Same as a seven game series.

jonnydanger1
10-05-2012, 11:50 PM
Same as a seven game series.

While not perfect it is definitely better than a single game. 7 game series requires you to show more starting pitchers which is the biggest difference between a 7 and 1 game series. It also more accurately depicts what you're offense can do. 7 and 1 game series are massively different.

metswon69
10-05-2012, 11:51 PM
Puts emphasis on winning the division.

WC teams had the same luxuries division winning teams did with the exception of one extra home game.

If people want to ***** about it being one game, then fine make it three but either way the extra WC is a good idea.

NY_Heartbreak
10-05-2012, 11:52 PM
The problem with the "incentive to win your division" argument is that not all divisions are created equal. If you win 100 games but your division winner wins 101, you're a wildcard team. You may be playing a team which has only won 85 games.

Anything can happen in any particular baseball game. Is it right that a team which fought to 100 wins be bounced by a team which won 85 games? What if there was a blown call or fan interference? What if injuries play a role? There are too many variables that go into the situation for it to be decided by one game. Make it 3 games and that's it. Regular season series. It seems to me that there really isn't an incentive to win the division, but play to make the wild card and then throw everything you have into winning that game.

You can pass on bigger FA's because you're not trying to win the most games, just squeak into the postseason and win that final game. You can save money and prospects and still have a shot at a WS. It's much easier and cheaper to win 85 games than 100, and you'll still have a significant shot at a title.

Also, the winner of the wild card game has the first two games of the Division Series at home. So tell me, what's the real incentive to win your division?

metswon69
10-05-2012, 11:56 PM
Also, the winner of the wild card game has the first two games of the Division Series at home. So tell me,what's the real incentive to win your division?

That is only going to be the case this year..

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120229&content_id=26927024&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb


Next year, the Division Series will return to the 2-2-1 format used from 1998 through this past postseason. Details on the scheduling of the new playoff games between each league's Wild Cards will be announced in the near future as will be the television partner who will carry the games.

Texas Holders
10-06-2012, 12:07 AM
They should add one more WC to avoid teams like the Tigers from coasting through a weak division.

NY_Heartbreak
10-06-2012, 12:09 AM
That is only going to be the case this year..

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120229&content_id=26927024&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

Oh alright that's good then.

NY_Heartbreak
10-06-2012, 12:11 AM
If you're going to have 3 games to win the WS, then the regular season needs to be shortened. There is too much of a difference between a marathon 162 game season and a 1 game playoff. Baseball is about series and adjustments. You fix what you did wrong yesterday, today.

metswon69
10-06-2012, 12:13 AM
If you're going to have 3 games to win the WS, then the regular season needs to be shortened. There is too much of a difference between a marathon 162 game season and a 1 game playoff. Baseball is about series and adjustments. You fix what you did wrong yesterday, today.

Or start the season earlier.

There is not much difference between the end of March and the beginning of April weather wise.

ciaban
10-06-2012, 12:15 AM
to me all this crap is just a bougus game 163, i personally can't stand this crap it's just dumb.

utahjazzno12fan
10-06-2012, 12:16 AM
No, if your team was good, they would win the division and not have to worry about this 1-game showdown. I like it. You get MLB fans watching this game, not just fans that root for their team.

It gives teams an incentive to win their division as well.

It actually makes too much sense, that some people are trying to find a way to make it look like it doesn't.

Not quite so correct. It comes down to one game and Detroit is the team with the worst record in the AL, but they are a division winner and so they don't have to worry about the 1 game while Baltimore with the 3rd best record in the AL does.

Then look at the NL where the Braves have the 4th best record in all of baseball yet have to play a team like the Cardinals who has the worst record in the playoffs (tied with Tigers).

koreancabbage
10-06-2012, 12:22 AM
i'm indifferet- obviously I would like to see more games but in essense


in one game- your best pitcher and lineup vs the other team's best pitcher and lineup

but its a team game, i digress lol

Texas Holders
10-06-2012, 12:23 AM
If you're going to have 3 games to win the WS, then the regular season needs to be shortened. There is too much of a difference between a marathon 162 game season and a 1 game playoff. Baseball is about series and adjustments. You fix what you did wrong yesterday, today.

It may come to that just due to weather. Longer playoffs means starting the season in March or the playoffs ending in November. Going back to a 154-game schedule wouldn't be a bad idea.

raidersrock99
10-06-2012, 12:25 AM
texas blew the division so they can go home and fish

Texas Holders
10-06-2012, 12:27 AM
Not quite so correct. It comes down to one game and Detroit is the team with the worst record in the AL, but they are a division winner and so they don't have to worry about the 1 game while Baltimore with the 3rd best record in the AL does.

Then look at the NL where the Braves have the 4th best record in all of baseball yet have to play a team like the Cardinals who has the worst record in the playoffs (tied with Tigers).

The Braves also have the 4th best record in the NL (SF won the season series)...so 4th vs 5th makes sense in the NL.

redbird89
10-06-2012, 12:31 AM
I'm iffy about the Wild Card, though it benefited my team. I can see Torre's point that this makes the teams try harder to win the division and it disadvantages the Wild Card. Before the Wild Card didn't really have a punishment other than facing the toughest team. Now teams try harder to win their division?

Is it fair? Probably not. One game is a crapshoot. Baseball isn't always fair, though.

We'll see how this goes over the next few years. I'm unsure how I feel about it.

metswon69
10-06-2012, 12:32 AM
The Braves also have the 4th best record in the NL (SF won the season series)...so 4th vs 5th makes sense in the NL.

But i understand his point, there is going to be years where that 2nd WC team might only win 85 or less games whereas a team might run away with the 1st WC spot.

When you could be 10+ games better than your opponent, the crapshoot that is a 1 game playoff does feel unfair to some extent.

A 3 game playoff will more often than not determine who the better team is in a more fair set of circumstances.

A one game playoff just has too many variables and things like what happened tonight between the Braves and Cardinals.

Texas Holders
10-06-2012, 12:39 AM
But i understand his point, there is going to be years where that 2nd WC team might only win 85 or less games whereas a team might run away with the 1st WC spot.

When you are 10+ games better than your opponent, the crapshoot that is a 1 game playoff does feel unfair to some extent.

A 3 game playoff will more often than not determine who the better team is in a more fair set of circumstances.

A one game playoff just has too many variables and things like what happened tonight between the Braves and Cardinals.

I agree, a three-game series wasn't possible this year anyway. There wasn't really room for a one-game series. I think a fix for that problem would be to give the top two division winners home field in the LDS, then the better record between the 3rd division winner and best wild card would get the bye and the other would host the wild card game. So this year, the NL wouldn't change, but in the AL, the Tigers would of hosted the O's and the Rangers would of had the bye to the LDS.

Captain Moroni
10-06-2012, 01:04 AM
It feels weird watching these teams play 162 games, then watching it come down one measly game.

Better than getting no chance at all.

jonnydanger1
10-06-2012, 01:24 AM
All I have to say about this "incentive to win the division" argument is....Since when have teams not had an incentive to win the division? Every ****ing team is trying their best to win the division. Incentive is not the right word. "more teams should benefit from winning the division" is what should be said.

jonnydanger1
10-06-2012, 01:25 AM
Better than getting no chance at all.

Unless you are #1 in the wildcard and instead of getting a series you get 1 game duel.