Two More Wild Card Teams? Nip That Idea in the Bud.
The baseball season is too long. Emotionally, I wish the season were year-round, but intellectually, I have a real problem with major leaguers continuing to play in November. (That’s partly because I’m a purist, and partly because, as I wrote on my old blog, I’d rather that November be reserved for the occasional World Baseball Classic.) So I’m completely unsympathetic to Bud Selig’s suggestion that baseball add two additional wild card teams in 2012.
Under this proposal, each league would have three divisional champs and two wild cards; the two wild card teams would play each other in a one-game playoff or best-of-three series, for the right to advance further in the postseason. The other six playoff teams would presumably simply take that half-week off, making the playoffs even longer, and reversing baseball’s previous efforts to ensure that the 2011 playoffs would not spill over into November.
This is a bad idea for a number of reasons. Selig’s stated rationale is fairness, and his likely rationale is money, and both justifications are suspect. What’s more, though it’s hardly as much of a concern as with the current NFL proposal to extend the football season to 18 games, player health should be a consideration.
Selig’s first justification, that having ten playoff teams is “more fair than eight,” is hard to credit, as Rob Neyer demonstrates ad absurdem:
By that “logic,” isn’t 12 playoff teams more than 10? And 14 more fair than 12? No major professional sport in history — not in recent history, anyway — has been concerned with fairness. Not when it comes to playoffs.
Moreover, from at least one notion of fairness, adding more playoff teams and more playoff series is actually unfair to the teams that had the best regular seasons, as it makes it more likely that they’ll get beaten in a short series by an inferior team. (Also, if fairness were truly at issue, then expanded playoffs would be accompanied by a discussing of video replay and other electronic methods of ensuring that the right calls get made on the field. That hasn’t happened yet, and it’s quite clear that Bud Selig is much more comfortable with expanding the playoffs than with expanding replay — or with any technology designed to make calls more accurate.)
Of course, points out Neyer, the real motivation for this is not fairness but money. However, baseball can’t simply automatically make more money just by scheduling more games. On Slate, Tom Scocca points out that around 14 million people watched the World Series this year, compared with 25-35 million people in the early 1990s, before Selig’s tenure. And the longer the playoffs goes, the less exciting each individual game becomes. That became abundantly clear this past Sunday, when a regular season Steelers-Saints game had higher ratings than Game Four of the World Series. The baseball playoffs already feel diluted to viewers, and that’s not good for business.
The thing about Selig’s plan is that his premise — that fans want to see a fairer game — may be flawed, but it isn’t outrageous. The problem is that his solution doesn’t actually make anything fairer. As a baseball fan, I want to see the best team win, and at the end of a long and lengthening season, the two half-crippled teams that reach the World Series are rarely the two that actually played the best over the course of the year; usually, they’re the ones who got hot at the right time, picked the right mix of midseason pickups and rookie callups, and the playoff roster is usually a far cry from the Opening Day roster. Another week of games in cold weather is a step in the wrong direction. The last thing that baseball needs is an even longer season.
0
Postseasons are weird (note: analysis is pure conjecture–I have no data to back me up):
MLB: Hard to reach the postseason. Upsets common.
NBA: Easy to reach the postseason. Upsets uncommon.
NHL: Easy to reach the postseason. Upsets common.
NFL: Medium to reach the postseason. Upsets common.
Which is more fair? Which is more interesting? Which is “better?”
Heck, what is the goal of a postseason? If you’re trying to determine the “best” team, don’t you want large sample sizes (ie, regular season results)?
Soccer leagues all over the world go without playoffs, and they’re still exciting. Then they also have a “cup”, for those who enjoy the Cinderella stories.
Actually, many soccer regular seasons are an unbearable snooze with only a tiny handful of teams having any realistic shot at the title.
Admittedly, it varies from league to league.
It’s funny. I know soccer fans who whine about how overpaid baseball players are, and how a team (read: Yankees) can just buy championships. Aren’t there multiple soccer teams with higher payrolls than the Yankees?
a one game playoff on the off-day before the post season starts doesn’t make the playoffs longer and burning your #1 starter in a one game playoff makes it harder for a team to beat a division champion in a 5 game series. I’m not advocating this idea but your rebuttal is kinda retarded.
Your rebuttal, on the other hand, is well-supported, erudite and apt. Thank you for that pearl.
no problem holmes
Your use of “retarded” is kinda disappointing.
Absolutely disagree with the proposal. “More fair” is a nonsensical phrase. If MLB was looking for fairness, ditching interleague play and the unbalance schedule would do that more effectively. Since they’re not, let’s not beat around the bush.
I can’t remember where I read this, but some reputable MSM MLB site pointed out that if we added a second wildcard to each league, we would be getting, on average, the 5th best team in each league (according to standings dating back to 1995).
The wildcard is “fair” (if we want to use that term and give it some meaning) because, on average, it produces somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd best team in each league (according to standings dating back to 1995). It is “fair” for that team to get in because they had a better record than one of the division champions. I’m not feeling the same sense for a 2nd wildcard, especially if that 2nd wildcard comes from the same division as the 1st. That’s a THIRD PLACE TEAM.
No thanks.
” can’t remember where I read this, but some reputable MSM MLB site pointed out that if we added a second wildcard to each league, we would be getting, on average, the 5th best team in each league (according to standings dating back to 1995). ”
I didn’t go that far back– but for the last 10 years, here are the average wins for the three divisions, plus the next four teams:
Div1 99.4 wins
Div2 94.6
Div3 89.9
WC1 93.7
WC2 89.4
WC3 86.9
WC4 84.2
So, the WC is generally just slightly worse than the second best divisional team and the proposed second WC team is just slightly worse than the third divisional team. Sounds fair to me– if you’re going to let in that ‘lousy’ division winner, you might as well include a second wild card team that would be pretty comparable.
If any games are added, they should be to make the first round 7 games. The current setup is otherwise fine.
this
Ditto.
Baseball seems to want the highest probability of playoff races going down to the wire. In my view I think that is where they see the ‘excitement’ and value and why they are trying to tweak the playoffs.
While they are trying to fix the Rays/Yanks lack of effort trying to win the division… has Selig, et al even considered what would that same system have done to the NL this year? ATL/SD/SF were playing for 2 spots… what if they were all going to make the playoffs under the new system? Atlanta at that point would be a certain wildcard so they could setup their rotation and rest their pen while SD/SF would be fighting it at with the loser being at a disadvantage against the Braves.
Given the variability in baseball do you want a 1 game playoff for teams that could be 5-10 reg season wins apart or a team that has to come into that game with their 3rd or 4th starter?
Exactly. It’s just a horrible idea.
The fact is, it has nothing to do with being “more fair.” It has everything to do with “more money.” The playoffs are a gold mine for the teams that make it…not just with tickets, but with merchandise, and brand recognition.
Bud Selig and the owners could care less about “more fair” and doing what is right for the game, they are a typical business operation that is looking for the next way to make more money…and this is it. Unfortunately, it is more more step towards baseball becoming completely irrelevant as opposed to largely irrelevant like it is today.
Good article.
If MLB wants to increase interest in the playoffs, as many games as possible within a series have to be on consecutive days. There is no sustained drama or momentum (as a viewer) from game to game when three games are spread over five days. Particularly when one game is decided by a large margin, and the next game is interrupted by a travel day. Do away with the travel days within a series. The players have to play tired? Then they will all play tired. BFD. Be the big strong men that you like to be seen as. If there are going to be day games, have the day game precede a travel night, and play the next game in the other city on the following night.
I’m less concerned with what happens between series, as long as it doesn’t drag into November.
Get rid of the divisions. Top 4 teams in each league make the playoffs. Maintain current structure. /Pie.
Balanced schedule solves everything.
Win.
Good idea, but too much travel. It’s already a grueling schedule.
NO. Just no.
27!!! BITCHES!!!!
I think when a lot of discussion about tinkering with the playoffs gets brought up, it misses the core issue. The core issues aren’t whether the 1st best team has a better chance winning the WS than the 3rd best team, or whether a 7 game divisional series is best, the core issue (or at least the core issue as I’m defining it) is baseball’s declining audience interest.
Baseball needs to figure out a way to engage as many people as possible. Someone earlier brought up the unbalanced schedule – by having the Yankees and Red Sox play within their divisions so many times, you’re missing the opportunity to have the Yankees and Red Sox play all across America. Say what you will about both of those teams, but they both bring in a tremendous amount of money for hosting ball clubs and do engage audiences – whether it be displaced New Yorkers and Bostonites, or local fans who want to see their team top the evil empires. Additionally, them playing so much leads to more BoSox v. Yankee games on ESPN which 1. Are getting old, and 2. Further prohibit engaging other audiences. ESPN will air Yanks/Sox games regardless of whether they play 18 times or 5 times a year so there’s no real loss from that perspective, but it might be better to air Yankees vs. Indians more, or Red Sox vs. Mariners to expose people to other teams, to help them give a crap about these teams so that next time the Giants and Rangers make the world series, people are less likely to say, oh crap, the Giants and Rangers made the world series.
I don’t mean to present this as a perfect solution, but if baseball were to take a long-term solution to increasing interest in baseball as a whole, which includes all the teams, it needs to do much more to promote all of the teams and more importantly engage younger viewers as baseball tends to have an older-generation stigma associated with it.
Perhaps everyone around the internet could focus on how to better market and improve baseball this way, rather than focus on more minor player evaluation (wOBA vs OPS, FIP vs. xFIP), which I don’t mean as a snub but rather propose as a thought exercise. After all, it’s not the structure of the playoff’s fault that people aren’t more into the Giants and Rangers.
Your points are well taken about ways that MLB could improve it’s audience, but it leads me to this question: Why, as baseball fans, do we care if baseball reaches a larger audience and brings in more money?
Because we shouldn’t take baseball’s existence for granted. I study a lot of organizational psychology and a lot of organizational collapse is due to them thinking they’re invincible.
As fans we’re not trying to help baseball make more money in a strict sense, we’re trying to make baseball more popular and strong so that 1. future generations can enjoy its awesomeness, and 2. Once football season starts, baseball doesn’t just take a back seat.
I guess we can ask WHY should we work to help baseball reach more audience. I’d be more interested in hearing why NOT.
Well put.
Yep I agree whole heartedly, instead of trying to push more teams into the playoffs perhaps baseball would be better served by trying to create a larger audience in all markets.
For the quality of the play on the field.
This current proposal is a ridiculous gimmick.
If you can’t find the 8 teams most deserving of playing for a World Championship after a 162 game qualifier… sheesh.
If MLB only had a 16 or 82 game regular season, then I’d say fine, let more into the playoffs to make sure we get it right.
I’m still waiting for Selig to figure out a way to get 15 teams in each league. Let’s sort out some of the obvious flaws to this framework first, please.
If you define fair as “the best team being crowned champion” then the fairest system would be that which relies least on a post-season. The sample size of an entire regular season exposes which teams are the best far better than the limited sample size of the playoffs does.
Playoffs aren’t about fairness; they’re about excitement, and they’re only exciting because inferior teams have an opportunity to win. I personally think the excitement justifies the trade-off you have to make in terms of fairness, but adding a one or three game play-in round adds far too much randomness to justify the excitement. A team that has fought for 162 games to earn a better record than another team doesn’t deserve to be knocked out of the post-season because of the outcome of one game.
I suppose this is why people didn’t like the Temple Cup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Cup
What about making October a month long playoff among the top X teams in each league? Each team plays one series against every other team and the one with the best record at the end of the month wins it all.
Interesting idea. That might address the “fairness” concern a little better than conventional playoffs, but I’m not sure that it would spark any more interest in baseball as a whole. I think we’ve figured out at this point that fairness is not the true aim of Bud Selig.
This is a great idea and could certainly work were MLB to have an open mind. In fact, I’d tweak it like this:
Top six teams in each league make the playoffs (similar to NFL). All play against each other in a round-robin tournament, with each playing a three-game series. The three division winners each get three home series; the three wild card teams each get two home series, to give an advantage to the teams that were the best during the regular season (and even if division winners weren’t the best, there should be some reward for winning a divsion). Then, the two teams with the best record in each league play against each other in a best-of-seven World Series.
Using this year’s post-season calendar, and giving each team an off day after each series, this preliminary round would take 19 days.
That runs from Oct. 7 to Oct. 24.
After two days off (leaving a day for a potential 3-way tiebreaker; any two-way tiebreakers would be settled by best head-to-head record), you’d start the World Series on the 27th (same as this season). In future seasons, with the regular season ending earlier, this could end earlier as well.
This proposal would raise the fairness quotient (fewer complaints about small sample size in the playoffs because each team plays 15 games), lead to more excitement during the regular season to get into those six spots, lead to more excitement in the playoffs because of fewer momentum-killing off days and more teams with a chance, and wouldn’t actually force the players to play substantially more games (probably about five more, on average, for a team that makes it to World Series).
Also you could take away a couple of the off-days from this scenario to further reduce the length of time and force teams to use their fifth starters if you want to.
I totally agree that the playoffs are diluted. I made a point to watch as many games as I could this post-season, and by Game 2 of the WS I was having to look up the boxscores in the morning because I kept falling asleep during the games
I disagree that we want the best team to win. If the best team always wins, there is neither a reason for the playoffs nor a lot of interest in them. The memorable World Series are the ones that feature teams that we have had a reason to have our interest piqued about them during the season and then find them do well in the playoffs. However, the way the networks schedule national games, we’re just seeing the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs and Dodgers and to hell with the rest of the teams. Thus, there was no interest in this year’s World Series because neither team was familiar to anyone. Bottom line: if there’s a problem, this isn’t the fix for it, but I disagree about the definition of the problem.
Make the road teams wear five pound weights around their ankles.
First off the playoffs are fine where they are at with four teams in each league. If they are expanded they are diluted to include inferior teams and make making the playoffs less exciting. Second, the ALDS should be expanded to a 7 game series. It is too often when a really bad team sweeps a really good team in a three game series let alone two very good teams playing each other in a five game series. Thirdly, the series should be played everyday. Baseball in the regular season is a marathon in which all 25 players are utilized the same cannot be said about baseball in October. The Yankees won with three starters in 2009 and most teams never go to their fifth starters. If the series goes everyday then it will allow the better teams with better depth to advance deeper in the playoffs. Finally, more day games. If baseball is trying to appeal to a younger audience which is should it should be starting more playoff games between 3-5 ET when the majority of school kids are getting out. So what if the West Coast workers can’t watch the first game they are sparsely populated compared to the east coast and even the central time zone. Also WS games should be starting at 7 or 730 ET to allow kids to at least have a chance to watch the game later in the game when the magic happens.
The top two wild card teams play each other, but only if they’re within 2 games of each other. The team that’s down by 2 has to win 3 games in a row; if they’re down by 1, they have to win 2 games in a row. Essentially, this would be an extension of the regular season that would allow for potentially more end-of-season drama and ensure that two teams in a tight race finish the season playing each other. Also, under this scenario, the DS wouldn’t have to move back, because the wild-card team could just start playing on Thursday.
Extend the Division Series to seven games.
Change the format of each series to a first-two-games-on-the-road, last 5 at home for the higher seeds.
The only off day of each series is the travel day between game 2 and game 3. This means that each series takes place over eight days, max.
This format ensures that every playoff team gets at least two home games (this year, the Reds only got one).
This format also gives the higher seed a slightly better chance of winning the series. They get the fifth home game, and they get the privilege of closing out the series on their home field.
Eight days for the DS…one off-day after game 7…followed by eight days for the CS…one off-day after game 7…followed by an eight-day WS (max). The entire playoffs is done in 27 days, despite adding additional games to Round 1. The season could end on Oct. 1 and still be done by Halloween, even with a seven-game WS.
I’m in favor of another WC team in each league. I’m not concerned with fairness, but I think there needs to be more incentive to win the division. This year the season ended on Sunday and the LDS started on Wednesday. If you schedule the one game playoff for Monday then the playoffs wouldn’t be extended.
I’d also be okay with adding 2 teams to the league and creating 4 divisions each. Then the playoffs would stay as is and there would be no WC.
Their problem is that young adults and younger now have the attention span of a 4 year old. With youtube, facebook and twitter, it is only going to get worse.
This problem is not going away. We’re getting dumber, and we didn’t exactly have many brain cells to spare. Baseball is too “complicated”. The difference between brilliance and mediocrity is too subtle for the common person to appreciate.
Wrestling and Jersey Shore are outperforming baseball and the History channel. We’re fucking dumb.
this is the worst argument about this topic ive seen yet.
History Channel might not be the best example of an exponent of “smart” entertainment in the world.
The season ended on the Sunday, and the playoffs started on Wednesday and Thursday. I think there’s space to fit in a one game playoff without extending the season.
If it’s just a one-game playoff, then yes, probably. But Selig seemed to indicate that he was inclined toward a best-of-three, again for the sake of “fairness.” It’s a cliche to invoke a slippery slope, but that’s what this is. Eight playoff teams and a monthlong postseason is plenty. Baseball has plenty of problems, but this ain’t a solution.
Yeah, I agree it can’t be a 3 game series, but I think after even one year of single game playoffs no-one will want to change that.
The other point is that it’s a good way of penalising the wild card team by making them burn a starter, whichever one wins. At the end of the day, this year the Braves and the Yankees didn’t win their divisions yet all they had to do was win one game away (which they both did, in the Yankees case two) and they had home field advantage. People scream about how unfair it would be if the Red Sox had gotten into the playoffs this year despite being 6 games behind the Yankees, but the Marlins have won the World Series despite being 9 and 10 games out of first at the end of the regular season.
You can’t have the wild card playing 2 of 7 games at home only, because there are many occasions when the wild card comes from the same division as the team with the best record. In these instances the team with the best record wouldn’t benefit, but the team with the second best record would.
“The baseball playoffs already feel diluted to viewers, and that’s not good for business.”
To be fair, you don’t know that this is the reason behind the ratings drop, you’re really just assuming. It’s just as likely that people simply weren’t interested in watching the Giants and Rangers.
The World Series had much, much higher ratings before the Division Series era — around twice as many viewers. Now, when you add all the games and advertising time, baseball is still probably making more money. But fewer and fewer people are watching each game.
Look, obviously they aren’t looking for money in October, they are looking for interest in the AL East race in September (specifically, MLB wants the NYY and red sox to be in a pennant race that goes to the wire).
I think what they don’t realize is that this means the AL East wildcard winner will end up playing the second best team in the West/Central and that a little over 1/3 of the time they will lose and the odd ball team will be the new wildcard. It would be really awful (in terms of cash flow for MLB) to lose Boston or New York in a wildcard vs a mid market team.
The fact is that the wild card gives them two AL East teams in the playoffs but costs them the AL East pennant race. There is no way to have it both ways.
Just want to say this is the most intelligent comments section I have ever seen, and I appreciate that even though I am not even a baseball fan (A friend who loves baseball sent me this).
From an outside perspective:
-The season is just too long
However you just can’t tamper with it because statistics are sacro-sanct in baseball.
I’d rather have the division series expanded from 5 to 7 games and the NL/AL CS /World Series expanded to 9 games than add more playoff teams. The regular season is so long that it needs to be difficult to enter the playoffs to maintain a competitive season. 26.6% of the teams already make the postseason. If 50% of the teams make the postseason like in basketball or hockey I think the regular season becomes less interesting because more teams are almost guaranteed to get into the playoffs before the season starts.
Removing travel days and extending playoff series would also tilt the games towards offense because some teams would use 5th starters, or #1s on short rest. This could make the game more interesting to the common fan who likes offense.
Add 1 WC, two WC teams play a 1 game ‘play-in’ on Tuesday after season ends. Keeps another couple teams in the postseason race at the end of the season, probably, and makes winning the division something worth fighting for. Also, starts the postseason with two very exciting games.
Start the regular season one week earlier (lop one week off spring training).
Schedule one offday per postseason series. Force teams to use their 4th and 5th starters and entire roster.
Problems solved.
The problem is that Selig has expanded the big matchups to such an extent that there is no excitement left in the LDS, Red Sox-Yankees, etc. Personally I think it would make more sense if you just got rid of divisions, had the two leagues, and perhaps went back to an LCS-WS format only. Of course people would not like the idea at the outset, but I’m sure you’d see much better ratings for those games… decreased total revenue maybe, but more interest in the sport… thoughts?
Hello People! Just wanted to tell you that I found tickets to the Jersey Boys concert on Mar 22nd 2012. In this place you can find tickets for other dates too. It’s wonderful their performance on stage, this is my third time and I’m still so excited about listening them live! On this page you can see the section where you’re buying the ticket, so it’s very recommended!