Who out there thinks that there should be 2 divisions in each league rather than the three now and all this wildcard stuff? Winner takes the division and only one playoff series then off to the World Series???
2007-08-27 18:58:05 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
The addition of the expansion teams didn't work as proof with the Expos. There are still a lot of teams who could potentially win any division. I realize that it creates a larger fan base, but i truly believe it's a bad idea. I liked the old way. If they're going to keep it as is, at least shorten the season and go to 142 games.
2007-08-27 19:11:23 · update #1
I agree with you.
I don't understand when people try to defend the WC by pointing out that WC teams have won however many world series. To me, that's the argument AGAINST the Wild Card. A Wild Card team is manifestly inferior, over a 162 game grind, to its division winner. I don't want to see them get a shot at a title...they can't legitimately lay claim to being the best team.
The point of having such a long schedule is that the result of any single baseball game is somewhat dependent on luck...which is why winning more than 60% of your games is considered a real accomplishment. The long schedule flattens out the effect of luck and lets the superior team show itself. A short playoff series negates that. If baseball were to expand the playoffs to 16 teams, you would occasionally have a lousy team get hot and win it all. That differs from the current situation only by degree.
But as someone else pointed out, the current system makes more money. Therefore, it will never go back.
2007-08-27 20:54:32 · answer #1 · answered by A J 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm one of the people that will disagree. I think 162 games is long enough to decide who is worthy. I think a better solution to getting the teams with the best records into the playoffs is to have two divisions in each league - the two division winners qualify plus two wild cards. That will stop teams that play poorly most of the season, but happen to get hot at the right time from squeaking into the playoffs (sorry Dodger fans). Second, having a bye week can hurt a baseball team more than it helps it. Hitting is all about timing, and having a week off can really mess up a player's timing. Arguably, it would create an advantage to avoid the bye week.
2016-03-17 07:18:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why not go totally old-school and only have two leagues and the winner of each goes to the World Series, no playoffs at all?
More divisions and more playoff teams = more excitement at the end of the season and more meaningful games. Unfortunately, it also means longer playoffs and a World Series that can be postponed due to snow.
What they should do is get rid of interleage games and shorten the season a week on each end. How many early April games are played in sub-freezing weather? If not, at least open the season in domed parks, the south, and California so we don't have to clear the snow off of Fenway for opening day.
2007-08-27 20:11:17 · answer #3 · answered by Rob B 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'd rather have 2 teams added 1 to NL and 1 to AL and switch Brewers back to an AL team, so the 2 expansion teams wouldn't both be in the AL to make it so easy for AL teams to dominate them each, and have same kinda divisions as NFL then AL and NL can each have equal amount of teams in there leagues, and have all 4 of the division winners make the playoffs, and maybe add 2 Wild Card teams after a few years of it
2007-08-27 21:08:37 · answer #4 · answered by Bo 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nah, they already tried that.
It's all about the munny, youngsters. Having six pennant races sells more tickets than merely four. Having the wildcard berth, which cuts across divisional lines, keeps many more teams in the hunt (at least mathematically) deeper into September, keeps those teams selling tickets and getting decent TV ratings. More eyes on more teams for more days of the season == profit!
Plus the wildcard gives teams a second chance, if one or two is really good but stuck in a division with a genuine juggernaut (say, the 1998 Yankees or 2001 Mariners). Drama captures attention.
Despite being totally mercenary, it has worked out rather well so far.
2007-08-27 19:18:47 · answer #5 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope.
Why do that? I like the Wild Card idea.
TWO divisions in each league?
That would be about SEVEN teams in each league!
If we had a playoff series and a World Series, then their would be no feeling of October baseball.
2007-08-28 00:45:49 · answer #6 · answered by #1 New York Yankees Fan 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Count me in. Two divisions in each league and no wild cards. Make the regular season games important. Win your division or go home.
Six divisions, two wild card races and 8 post-season teams are all about the $$$$. Fan-interest is highest when the games mean the most, so the owners want to cash in. I don't like it but that's the nature of pro sports.
2007-08-27 22:12:59 · answer #7 · answered by harmonv 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
WHY on earth did they change anyway? TO me that made the most sense. Baseball was way more exciting back then. I hate the wildcard chase I hate three divisions. GO back to the two division system. It worked for how many years. WHY mess with it?
2007-08-27 19:05:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Thats the way it used to be, and MLB will never go back to it.
If anything, I believe that they will ADD more games to the playoff schedule.
2007-08-28 01:20:06 · answer #9 · answered by samdugan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i like it because my tigers won the wild card then went to the series last year.. werent the red sox wild card winners a couple of years ago and won the series????
2007-08-27 19:53:14 · answer #10 · answered by the bison 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋