Are You Wild About Another Wild Card?

21 Comments + Add Comment

• jessep January 31, 2012 at 2:12 pm

  You bring up a valid point. I don’t think a 3rd place team should be let in. I think if you are having a division-centric schedule rather than balanced, then allowing 3 teams from 1 division in could be favoring a bottom-weak division too much.

  If the extra wildcard is inevitable I think you should have to finish in 2nd place in your division to qualify, and it shouldn’t be a 1 game playoff. I don’t like the idea of turning MLB Playoffs into MORE of a crapshoot than they already are.

  I know the 2nd/3rd place thing won’t happen, but it’s a nice point by you.

  I hate the idea of 1 game, I think it cheapens the playoff berth.

  I think if they want a better playoff do Best of 3 between the 2 wildcards with all 3 played at the better of the 2 teams home park

  Then do best of 7 from that point on.

  But I doubt it’d ever happen
  • XtreemIcon January 31, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    “I hate the idea of 1 game, I think it cheapens the playoff berth.”

    Disagree, J. I think it strengthens winning the division.
    • jessep January 31, 2012 at 2:39 pm

      It’s a catch 22 though

      If a team finishes in 2nd place with 97 wins and the other 2 division winners have 85 and 90 wins, the team who played better over 162 games now has 1 game to continue their journey.

      What if a wildcard team loses the division by 1 game? Maybe they go for it on Game 162 and don’t have their best SP pitching for their 1 chance?

      Ideally I’d like to see the teams ranked in order regardless of division. So if an NL West team wins going 82-80, they don’t get an advantage over say a 94 win NL East team that finishes 4 games out
      • XtreemIcon January 31, 2012 at 2:45 pm

        In that case, forget about divisions entirely. The only problem is, try selling a 13th place team to your fanbase.
        • jessep January 31, 2012 at 2:50 pm

          haha yeah I hear ya. There really is no perfect system, I just hate the idea of putting a 162 game season on the line in 1 game and 1 game only.

          I mean there are people (like me) that want the LDS to be a best of 7 and not 5, so I don’t see how making a 1 game playoff matches that mindset.

          I think Best of 3 with the worst of the 2 teams getting 0 home games is more fair, and then from that point do a best of 7.

          The goal has to be to find the best team, not the luckiest right while giving an advantage to the more successful teams over 162.
• srt January 31, 2012 at 2:10 pm

  Are You Wild About Another Wild Card?

  No.
  But like it or not, it’s a reality now. Should be interesting indeed.
  - Big push to win the division now more so that in the past.
  - Disadvantage for these WC teams and trying to jockey their SP for post season – as well it should be.
  - We’ll either be watching baseball longer in the fall or built in travel days for these post season playoffs will be limited.
• Bayonne Mets Fan January 31, 2012 at 2:23 pm

  At first I was against it but if this makes teams work hard to finish first in their leagues again than I’m all for it
• XtreemIcon January 31, 2012 at 2:29 pm

  I’ve been on this bandwagon since they first gassed it up. It puts a ton of pressure on the teams to actually fight for their division, which has been lost since 1995, and it also opens the field to more teams, meaning more meaningful and competitive games down the stretch.
• trs86 January 31, 2012 at 2:39 pm

  I am not a big fan of it as it currently is.

  I think they should have 2 divisions, East and West. Then from that you have 2 winners that get a bye and then 4 wild card spots. 1 guaranteed WC from each division and the other 2 based on record. Forget the idea that you play your division more. Everyone plays everyone the same.

  The first round games would be a 3 game series all played at the team that was the guaranteed pick. No off days.
  • any January 31, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    I would vote for this.
• Des January 31, 2012 at 3:03 pm

  It’s just another revenue ploy by the used car salesman who is sitting in the Commish’s chair. Wait ’til a really good team loses a playoff game to a weak team on a bad call by an umpire. The owners won’t care until it happens to them. And the Commish won’t tolerate dissension.

  It’s all about bringing in the fans and the quality of the game takes a back seat. What Selig is cooking up reminds me of the old Roller Derby. Welcome back Toughie Brasuhn and Gerry Murray. Keep the turnstiles churning!!!
• any January 31, 2012 at 3:09 pm

  I’m intrigued by the idea. May work, may not, but will be interesting to see what happens.

  the biggest benefit I see is winning the division is suddenly much more important. No more cases where 2 teams have the 2 spots locked up (like the yanks and Sox at least 1 year recently) where they just coast in, not caring that much if they get the division or just WC (at least not enough to say burn out their pitching to get the top spot).
• D.C. January 31, 2012 at 3:21 pm

  Let this new format play out this year and I’ll give you my answer next offseason.
• Alex in CT January 31, 2012 at 3:50 pm

  I love post season baseball so for me this is a win.
• USMF January 31, 2012 at 4:00 pm

  I don’t mind it…it gives more value to winning the division and all that stuff..

  Just as long as it’s not considered making the playoffs when you lose the one game playoff.

  I know it’s all semantics, but they should have only one “Wild Card” team in each league. The two teams with the best records who don’t win their division should be awarded the play-in-game. The winner of that game is the “wildcard” team and then they go into the playoffs. The losing team just played 163 games and lost the last one.

  I’d hate to see teams hanging banners for finishing making, but losing the one game play off.
• HogWild January 31, 2012 at 4:52 pm

  It was ridiculous that the Wild Card team did not get punished for losing the division. They were pretty much on equal footing as the division winner. At least with this system, winning the division really matters again because no one wants to risk their season in a 1 game playoff.

  And the 1 game playoff will be exciting. I love when managers go all out to win a game. It will be a Game 7 atmosphere with starters coming in to relieve and so on.

  I just hope that MLB stops here and doesn’t expand the playoffs further making the regular season as meaningless as a Kim Kardashian marriage. HA! ZINGER! haha
• Chuck January 31, 2012 at 5:55 pm

  I like it but not a one game playoff. 162 game season for one game is silly.
• MetsMan86 January 31, 2012 at 8:27 pm

  Yes. No. Maybe. I don’t know how to feel about it.
• theonlymaskman February 1, 2012 at 8:50 am

  No, it’s ridiculous. It negates the outcome of an entire season on the basis of one game between also rans. It makes a travesty of the game. Why should a 3rd place team have a shot at winning the WS? Doesn’t the regular season mean anything? No, I am firmly against this and Selig should have his brains examined for this lame idea.
• Joe February 1, 2012 at 8:35 am

  I think it will give an advntage to the division winners….as it should….It also makes winning the division a higher priority…which it should….Now if we could only get rid of the DH and go back to a nine man game as is stated in the rule book……Oh yeah, whileyou’re at it make inter league play once every three years as originally proposed…or…do away with it all together.
  • trs86 February 1, 2012 at 8:44 am

    Can’t happen now. The leagues are odd and not only will there still be inter-league but there will be a game going on every night.