Should MLB Add Another Wild Card?

[People's Champ]

This question stems from an interesting piece written by Tom Verducci of SI. Here the article he wrote.

http://m.si.com/news/to/to/detail/2829231;jsessionid=93564D181CB1F2CD9EB2B77CF24E4E4B.cnnsi1

If you don't feel like reading it then I'll summarize what he wrote. This idea stems from the lack of excitment seen in baseball during September. The fact that teams don't care if they win the division because they have the wildcard locked. (See the Yankees and Rays who are battling for the East but will both make the playoffs). Here is his idea.

Add a 2nd wild card and have a Wild Card Elimination Game. The two wild cards play one game. Win and you move on, lose and you go home. Here are a few benefits he sees by doing this:
1. More teams in the race. If this happened this year, the Red Sox and Blue Jays would be chasing the White Sox, and the Cardinals, Rockies, Marlins, and Dodgers would be chasing the Giants. More meaningful games huh?

2. 2nd place teams face a tougher road to the World Series. That doesn't happen now. And using the argument that the wild card now has to go on the road doesn't work because 83 percent of the series don't make it that far. Using this system, more focus is put on winning your division, as you will be penalized for finsihing 2nd in your division.

3. 2 guaranteed win-or-go home postseason games. Last year's Tigers-Twins game wasn't a playoff game but was a win-or-go home game. It ended up being the most watched game all season. America loves these type of game and baseball lacks that. This can provide some of that and boost ratings.

Now I encourage you to read the article, as I know I didn't do it justice. I know that a lot of hardcore baseball fans turn their heads right away at the idea of any change. But as baseball continues to slide in ratings with meaningless races and a majority of teams out it causing a lackluster September, this could shake things up. This could draw more people and make things interesting down the stretch.

So do you like/agree with the idea of adding a 2nd wild card, thus having a Wild Card Elimination Game? Is there something you would tweak to it? If you don't like it, explain why.

 

[Dressler]

Well, with my favorite team being the Boston Red Sox, I'd love this idea for obvious reasons, but other then that, yes I wouldn't mind seeing this implemented. I mean, like you said, it adds a little extra to the season, makes a 2nd place Wild Card Team (especially in the AL East, like the Red Sox, Yankees, Rays) want to win the last few games a bit more because them they have to play a winner goes home game if they don't.

Its an interesting concept I must say.

 

[The Brain]

I don’t care for the idea simply because I don’t feel it is necessary. This year we don’t have many exciting races, but that is not usually the case. If memory serves me we often see a couple races come down right to the wire. The last three years in a row have each featured a play in game. It’s too bad this September seems a little lackluster, but I think more times than not there are some great races down the stretch. I like that baseball has fewer teams make the playoffs than the other sports. It puts more emphasis on the regular season. If this was expanded I think it would only be fair to make the extra game a series and that would prolong an already too long postseason. This is the first I’ve heard of this kind of suggestion. If there were more compelling races this would not be an issue so I suggest everyone just suck it up this year and I’m sure next year we’ll get a better September.

 

[hatehabsforever]

I hate the idea of adding a second wild card team to the equation. To be honest with you, I wasn't a big fan of the first wild-card concept at first; I liked two divisions per league, with an eastern winner and a western winner (no central division), with the winners appearing in the World Series. Granted the wild card scenario as it is has grown on me over the years, but I do tend to be somewhat old school and I don't tend to like changes of this nature.

As a lifelong Jays fan, it would be nice to see them still in the playoff hunt (although even with this change being implemented it would be a daunting task at this point for them to make the playoffs this year). But I feel that if you're not a successful enough team to win your division, and your not successful enough to get in the playoffs by your second chance (ie, wild card), then you really don't belong there this year anyway.

In my opinion the baseball season is arguably too long now. Pre-season starts in February, and the post-season is nearly completed with snow on the ground (slight exaggeration I know). Even though the suggestion mentioned in this thread is just one game, it still drags things on more so than it should. The problem with a scenario like this as well is that it potentially rewards teams which are not as good and by default punished those which are. For example , it looks like, barring a miracle, the AL playoffs teams will be Yankees, Twins (outside possibility of White Sox), Rangers, and wild card Rays. If this scenario came about either BoSox or ChiSox (outside possibility of Twins) would become the second wild card team. Neither of these teams has had the year that the Rays have had, so why should they get a shot at upsetting them in a one game showdown. One bad performance in one game by the Rays, or one good performance by, say, the Sox, and the more deserving Rays are out. After being the better team for 162 games, out after one bad day. Hardly seems fair.

I feel that if a team is not good enough to make the playoffs under the current arrangement, they shouldn't be there. The days of only big market teams being competitive are over, as the Rays have been showing us. So if, for example, the Jays cannot build a team to compete with the Yankees, Rays, and even the Sox, then they don't deserve to be there, and shouldn't be able to sneak in the back door.

 

[klunderbunker]

No.

Baseball is arguably the only sport where making the playoffs is legitimately hard to do. In basketball and hockey you can make it in with an under .500 record. In football it's still hard but with 6 teams a conference and 4 divisions it isn't as difficult. Baseball has things just right with their divisional system etc. There's no need to switch that up and get teams in there that simply haven't qualified. When you get teams in there with 85 wins or so, you water down the playoffs which is never a good thing unless you're a TV executive. Leave it as is.

 

[Yuridius]

No

Reasoning:

I don't believe this is a good idea for the sport itself. I mean if you look at the wild card standings now (12:02 AM 9/9) the AL wild card is you'd have three teams from the AL East in the playoffs (Yankees, Tampa Bay, Red Soxs. In that order). Given two of these teams have arguably the biggest baseball markets in all of America in the Yankees and the Red Soxs, it still wouldn't be fair to other teams.

By not being fair I mean other play off teams would not know who they were facing until after that game was decided (Given, in either cause this year, the Yankees would be playing the Rangers, and the Twins would be playing either the Rays or Soxs). In a game which is so reliant on match-ups, not being able to scout the team and then having only two days to learn who you would be facing and come with a plan for the opposing pitch.

However, like the OP said last year the 1 game playoff between the Tigers and Twins was the most watch game in baseball, it would give two games (At least) of high revenue. I remember back in 2004 when the Yankees face the Boston Red soxs in the ALCS, those rating destroyed the World Series between the Cardinals and Red Soxs. So from a finical and money making stand point it makes a little bit more sense.

Another problem I see arising from this is ties. I mean they might not happen a lot, but there will eventually be a chance of this second wild-card team tying with another team. That would mean there would be another 1 game playoff between those two, doesn't that sort of ruin the point of a win and your in scenario that this suggestion would want.

Solution:

I believe there are a couple of ways to fix this.

One way would be for the division and leagues to be realigned. I mean if you look at the divisions now some are pretty lopsided. The AL East, currently has three teams that could legitimately make the place off in other leagues. There are teams, such as the Pirates, Orioles, Nationals (Though I do see them being really good soon), and even in most cases Toronto that don't really stand a chance in the current division they are in. You could always create two more divisions (One within both leagues) and put teams in there with them. That would make a play off bracket with the least (division) winning team playing the Wildcard team. This would give the team with the respective best record a week or two off before they have to play again. This would be a smilier format to what the NFL uses now.

Another answer would be to shorten the playoffs. I know I personally watch every game 5 or game 7 there is. However, most of the other games feel well like regular games. If you were to shorten the series to lets say a 3-3-5 format than you would get more game 3's and game 5s which should increase profits and viewership of the games.

Sorry for the wall of text. xD

 

[Dressler]

In basketball and hockey you can make it in with an under .500 record

Actually, just saying but you should take hockey out of that sentence there KB. An under .500 record in hockey means having at least a 41-41 record, which is 82 pts. In the NHL, over the past 4 seasons at least, the average minimum pts to make it to the playoffs in somewhere around 92-95 points, which means at least a plus .500 record with at least 46 wins, leaving only 36 loses.

However basketball is just pathetic.

 

[Davi323]

umm, not true. sticking to your 92 points limit, an NHL team can finish with a 10-0-72 record, and get 92 points. Think about that for a second. A team get get only 10 wins all season, worth 20 points, and manage to lose every other game, but as long as the loss came in OT, they would still pick up a point, or 72 points for 72 overtime or shootout losses. 20+72=92.

You can get to 100 points exactly by winning 18 games (36 points), losing 2 games in regulation, and losing the remaining 64 in OT. 36+0+64=100. The points system in the NHL is ridiculous. You could lose far more games than you win, but depending on how you lose, you could still not only be a playoff team, but mathematically, you could win your division. Granted that scenario has never happened, but theoretically, it could.

 

[adum0626]

I'm not really for or against this. I'm a Phillies fan. In years past I would have been all for it. They couldn't quite win the division and always just came up short in the wild card. Now that my team is doing great I really don't see the need for it. Although I would like to see other teams that just missed the playoffs have a shot, such as the Padres or Rockies. I also think that the divisions should be realigned. I also think that instant replay needs to be expanded. I have seen so many bad calls cost teams games over the past few years.

 

[Megatron]

No.

Baseball is arguably the only sport where making the playoffs is legitimately hard to do. In basketball and hockey you can make it in with an under .500 record. In football it's still hard but with 6 teams a conference and 4 divisions it isn't as difficult. Baseball has things just right with their divisional system etc. There's no need to switch that up and get teams in there that simply haven't qualified. When you get teams in there with 85 wins or so, you water down the playoffs which is never a good thing unless you're a TV executive. Leave it as is.

KB hit the nail on the head.

MLB has it right. You should have to earn your spot in the playoffs, not be able to be average and get in. The postseason is for the best of the best. I don't wanna see some 85 win team get hot at the right time and upset a team that has finished 10 or more games better then them in the regular season (barring them being the first WC, which I don't ever see happening). You have 162 games to try and get one of the best records. If you can't qualify after that, you're just going to have to be out of luck, and try again next year. The only gain would be for TV executives who would get some big ratings out of the format.

Leave it alone.