Skip to main content

Why the one-game playoff for two Wild Card teams is bad for baseball

I heard from the special guest on ESPN's Pardon the Interruption the other day that "everybody" loves the new playoff format, where there are two Wild Card teams at season's end who play in a one-game playoff. However, I know this statement is inaccurate, for I do not feel this way. Just like with rewarding the league winner of the All-Star Game with home-field advantage in the World Series was a bad idea in my opinion, this is as well.

I'm fine with changes being made to the playoff-format in Major League Baseball. I was in favor of adding a Wild Card team initially for a best-of-five series. I'd be fine with the addition of a second Wild Card team in each league, but not in the current format. As far as I see it, there were only four teams in each league that made the playoffs this year: New York, Detroit, Oakland and Baltimore from the American League and Washington, Cincinnati, San Francisco and St. Louis from the National League. Texas and Atlanta played in a one game tie-breaker to determine who would make the playoffs and unfortunately for them, they both lost.

I'm sorry, but a single game "series" in baseball can't be seen as the playoffs. This is something we'd see in college basketball or football, but not Major League Baseball. Now, it worked out fairly well in the American League this year, as the two Wild Cards teams - Baltimore and Texas - finished the regular season with identical records, and the one-game playoff could have ultimately been viewed as a tie-breaker. However, that wasn't the case in the National League, where Atlanta finished the season six games ahead of St. Louis. Before this year, Atlanta would have clinched the one Wild Card spot almost a week before the season ended, which would have vaulted them into a best-of-five National League Division Series. But instead, the team was almost penalized by being forced to play in a one-game playoff against a squad of which they finished six games ahead in a 162-game regular season.

If "everyone" is at least semi-pleased with this new format, I suggest altering it slightly and make the two Wild Card teams play in a best-of-three series. It won't take away any of the added excitement across the country of the two-team Wild Card race in both leagues and it won't penalize the Wild Card who finished with a better regular-season record. I think it's a fair compromise. Also, if it were altered in this manner, teams like Texas and Atlanta wouldn't be traveling home after a one-game playoff, thinking, "Wait...that's it? What just happened? Is the season over? I thought this was the playoffs!"
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more