We need a facepalm smilie here.
MLB Pseudo-Season 2020: Roger, Dodgers
- Thread starter Timby
- Start date
- Status
We need a facepalm smilie here.
Oh, for fuck's sake.
I don’t understand what he’s trying to do by expanding the playoff format. Baseball doesn’t need to be like other sports.
Postseason baseball is basically free money to the owners, because the players' annual salary has already been paid out during the course of the regular season.
I've been thinking about this MLB postseason proposal and I'm not sure I hate it. How many teams' seasons are over by June nowadays? Increasing the number of teams in the playoffs increases the likelihood that a team with a mediocre record can, with a move or two, get into the postseason. That might turn some sellers into buyers which is good for the players, too. Increase the number of buyers and you increase demand and we all know what increased demand does to price. At a minimum, I like the part of the proposal that gets rid of the 1-game wild card play-in. Baseball is a year-long season of 3- game series in one park and this proposal would honor that precedent. Not sure about the rest of the proposal with high seeds getting a bye or getting to pick their opponent. That picking process would certainly make for must-see TV.
I agree. I hate the idea of changing the playoffs. Pretty much destroys the regular season or needing to win your division. I actually love that the wild card game is a win or go home scenario.
Jason
I respectfully disagree. All season long baseball is played in 3-game series. The playoffs should be the same with the better team at home for all th three games. If a team had to burn their best starter(s) and reliever(s) to get into postseason, the 3-game series gives them half a chance to recover. One-game winner take all is for American football. Even in European football, they play two, a home-and-home series, in tournaments like UEFA Champions league.
How many owners are going to increase payroll to get a shot at the what sixth slot in the playoffs? Where they will be on the road for the entirety of the series. This is about more TV money, and the only was I would go along with it as players, is if I'm getting my per game salary for every playoff game I'm on the roster for.
Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. Never, never, never will I ever find myself missing that asshole.
Remember, the current world champions had one of the worst records to make last year's postseason. Some owners are never going to change. To steal a quote about George Halas - "He throws nickels around like they're manhole covers." They are not interested in making the postseason as much as they are interested in their bottom line. Halas was at least ultra-competetive.
They also had a $200 million dollar payroll and had been underperformers for the past five years.
A team's record can be deceiving.
Good point..
I was just trying to show that 2 additional wild card slots in each league might be incentive enough to get a few more teams to try to get better instead of raising a white flag. And wild card teams can win the World Series. It's been done five times - the Marlins have done it twice.
Will it though? It will still be a money decision for most clubs. Will those three on-the-road games generate enough revenue to offset the payroll that they have to take on, or keep? The assets I have to give up?
Both times, the Marlins immediately slashed payroll with fire sales.
You make my point for me. They can win the World Series and then get their money back plus some young prospects. There are a few cheapskate owners who are also competitive. Maybe a couple extra postseason slots will trigger that competitive itch.
One thing all leagues need to get rid of is giving automatic passes to the playoffs for division winners. Why should two superior teams play a one game Wild Card game just because they were in a tougher division?
Being that MLB is unlikely to budge from a 162 game season, how about seeding the eight best teams per league one through eight (1/8 2/7, 3/6, 4/5) and then move to a three game DS and then the regular seven game Championship Series and World Series.
The incentive to win has to come from owners and if you have owners who are just looking to do the bare minimum and collect whatever revenue they can, you aren't going to change that.
Being that MLB is unlikely to budge from a 162 game season, how about seeding the eight best teams per league one through eight (1/8 2/7, 3/6, 4/5) and then move to a three game DS and then the regular seven game Championship Series and World Series.
The incentive to win has to come from owners and if you have owners who are just looking to do the bare minimum and collect whatever revenue they can, you aren't going to change that.
^I might agree with that if baseball used a balanced schedule, but as long as teams are going to play roughly half their games against teams in their own division, they should be rewarded for winning said division.
I agree with both of these. If such a seeding were to happen, then the schedule needs to rebalanced.
- Status