Exactly my point. More teams are in the hunt when there are more spots available. With more teams in the hunt, there is a greater likelihood of your team being in the hunt, which would make you interested. Irrefutable evidence. The wild card puts a value on winning over the course of a 162 game season as well. Does it not? You see, the team with the most wins outside of the division winners is awarded the wild card. The first game of the 162 game season counts, and the last game of the 162 game season counts. Irrefutable evidence. If the division championship didn't mean something, then why did St. Louis erect a banner that says '2001 NL Central Co-Champs', when in fact they were the wild card last year? It does matter because it figures into homefield advantage and it pairs you with a different team in the first round of the playoffs. Yet another example: I don't see the Angels or A's resting players in tonight's game -- Washburn is pitching against Mulder. A battle of aces. Huh, if they weren't in a race, why not rest them? Strike 1, Strike 2, Strike 3, YOU'RE OUT! Please take a seat on the bench next to Mr. Hidalgo.
Wow..I can't believe how personally you're taking this argument...did you invent the Wild Card??? Thanks for the emphatic strike out language....oh, wait...we're talking about baseball...and you used baseball lingo to describe your "victory" in this discussion...that's funny! you're a clever guy!!! 1. As I pointed out, unless I'm in SF or LA, I don't give a flying flip about the wild card right now...having said that...I would give a flying flip about a race for a division crown among two great teams if they were actually fighting for a playoff berth with no ways out... 2. I'm not smart enough to understand your St. Louis co-division champ argument...or maybe it's just way off point. I already said that yes, it does figure into playoff pairings...no doubt...By the way..the A's aren't pitching Mulder because they are interested in the AL West championship...they're pitching Mulder because you want to keep guys in their rhthym going into the playoffs. Bottom line...I want to see the very best teams fighting for their playoff lives...I don't care about seeing second tier teams fighting for ancillary playoff spots. I think that's the whole value of having a season this long...after 162 games, you damn well know who the best teams are...putting a premium on winning a division to get into the playoffs forces the cream to rise to the top...it forces the good to be great....giving teams a "way out" and still get into the playoffs diminishes that.
no problem, mr... doesn'thaveawebsitethatiknowof.com... it's a quote from stripes, i was tryingto bring some levity to the thread, so... really, lighten up. back to the topic -- it's such a tired, non-issue -- what next? a thread about pete rose belonging in the hall of fame? it's not going to change, it's made the game better, you, i'm guessing, don't have a problem with the nba and nfl letting in so many teams... so what's the harm? besides, MM, with no wildcard, there would've been no playoff baseball in houston the past five years (insert joke here). is that preferrable? both teams don't win; one team wins (the division). and with that, they get homefield advantage and, on paper anyway, a weaker first round opponent. the fallout is that a team and its fans get at least three more games, and countless other teams/fans stay in races far longer than they would have under the old rules. but yeah, that's what baseball should do -- alienate more fans so a select few bob costas-types can preserve this long dead romanticized idea of what baseball should be... if you'd be content to fly a wildcard flag in leiu of a division flag... well, what does that say?
sorry to double post... this isn't a bad argument, except... you make it sound like anaheim and/or oaklnad will be backing into the playoffs, and that's FAR from the truth. the "loser" will finish with a better record than the twins... how is the cream rising to the top if the third best team in the league is on the sidelines? iguess i'm just completely oblivious to how anyone could still be complaining about the wildcard -- it's win-win all around.
you win, ric... that's it...no more discussions on issues that are settled or ones where we don't get a say....shut down all the iraq threads RIGHT NOW!! we'll all monitor each other... but one last comment...baseball is in trouble because it has alienated hardcore fans...not because it alienated casual fans. casual fans don't buy season tickets...casual fans don't watch much baseball on tv...wanna win an election? mobilize your core...get them out to vote..don't waste your time pandering to people who don't support you already...the same is true of baseball... either ditch the 162 game season...or give it real credence and let IT be the determining factor as to who moves on....and i do have a problem with the nba letting in so many teams...i think it's freaking stupid!!! why pay for a regular season basketball game?? where's the urgency at all to win when more teams make the playoffs than sit out of the playoffs?? but we can't discuss this anymore...apparently we can't discuss the pete rose issue anymore either....i sure hope we can find some things to talk about.
Thank you. Again, fans in SF and LA do care, and that increases the level of interest in the game. There are very few fans that tune out of a wild card race on the grounds that it is not a divisional race. There are millions of fans who will tune in to see who wins the wild card. Similarly, there are millions of fans who would be very disappointed if the A's didn't win the division. Agreed, but that's not my fault. My point was that if the division title was no less important than the wild card (a point which you are trying to make), then St. Louis would have just put up a banner that said 'NL Wild Card 2001'. Instead they put up the co-champs banner. Correct. The A's and Angels both have better records right now than the Twins, so they should both be in the playoffs. With no wild card, the better team would be at home while a team with less wins (Twins) would still be playing. Therefore, your theory of the best teams playing in the playoffs would require a wild card entry to be valid. GAME, SET, MATCH. Thanks for playing, rookie.
I bet Manny and Nomar are happy for the existence of the wildcard. Without it the Red Sux might as well cease to exist right now.
2. it's still a great race?? a great race for what??? a great race where both teams win?? that's not much of a race...consequences for not finishing first produce better races 1. loser has to play the yanks...but don't both teams have better records than the Yanks...yes, there are perks to winning...but it's not the do or die that baseball was traditionally known for Loser plays the Yankees. Winner plays the Twins. Thats the race. BTW--Who cares if they had better records? Both of them have WORSE records than the Yankees, so you are WRONG. INFACT, they both lost the season series vs. the Yankees, Also, the Yankees are the 4-time defending AL Champs...its understandable why teams don't want to face them, no? I also have to mention that the A's are most likely still shell shocked from being up 2-0 and having it taken away. I think the winner might be a LITTLE relieved.
Ric I am curious. Could you clarify the above? The Astros were division winners 4 of the past 5 years. At least 2 of those years they had the best or 2nd best record.
sure -- had they never realigned, houston would've been in the same division with atlanta; houston's never had a better record than atlanta since the realignment, and houston's never had the best record in the league; their best season (102 wins in '98), was bested by the braves (who had 106).
sure -- had they never realigned, houston would've been in the same division with atlanta; houston's never had a better record than atlanta since the realignment, and houston's never had the best record in the league; their best season (102 wins in '98), was bested by the braves (who had 106). Houston had a better record than Atlanta in '99, didn't they?
Ric, under MadMax's theory there would be 3 divisions with the winners going to the playoffs. The best record gets a bye. So the Astros still would have been there. He has a point here. The AL West crown has become moot. There are two great team within a game or so from each other and it's being met with a collective yawn. Why? Because they're going to the playoffs regardless. Two teams like that in a division race should never just be playing out the string. I also see the point that pro wild card guys are making. I just think that the anti wild card guys have a better argument. Trader Jorge...Max was being sarcastic when he called you clever. He really should lop on the sarcasm a little thicker. And your game set match references are really lame. So what we have in baseball are the 3 champs and the first loser in the playoffs...GREEEEAAAT!!! The NBA system sucks. I have actually heard people say come playoff time that "the real season is starting." That is indicative of a real problem. If the wild card is such a great idea because it gets fans interested in the affected markets, maybe EVERYBODY should make the playoffs with just playoff positioning at stake. How exciting.
Listen to the A's and Angels players themselves, you guys are just flat out wrong on this point. ''I've never been to the playoffs, but I can't imagine anything much more adrenalin-filled than this,'' said Angels closer Troy Percival, who pitched the 10th for his 250th career save. ''That was probably the best-pitched ballgame on both sides I've ever seen. Both guys didn't miss a spot all night.'' ''It's never something you wish for, to be in a battle like that, but it was a lot of fun out there,'' said Washburn, who felt no ill effects from returning early. ''I'm never dominant, but it was just about the best game I've pitched all year. It was definitely one of the highlights of my career so far.'' ''Mulder had me baffled,'' Salmon said. ''The guy had everything working. ... It feels great to get the big one in a game like this. I've played my whole career for this. I can't imagine more intensity than there was out there tonight.'' ''That was a great baseball game, almost a throwback game, like Marichal and Koufax going at it,'' Oakland manager Art Howe said.
The games between the A's and Angels are truly meaningful. First and foremost, the division winner gets the Twins at home, the loser gets the Yankees in New York. Second, these guys have a lot of pride. They want to be division winners. Look how important it was for St. Louis to consider themselves 'co-champs' last year. Sure, they both make the playoffs, but there is a significant advantage to the division winner.
I've made my points here...I don't think this is a matter of right and wrong, but rather personal opinion. Not much else to be said...or as Ric points out...maybe it should have never been said at all.
nope, don't you remember sid bream beating barry bonds' throw in the 90... 91 NLCS? well, i'll be, they sure as hell did. man, i could've sworn ATL had better records each year the astros won the division. having said that, you look at the top three teams that year... all 3 would've been in the west... not so sure it would have shaken out quite the same way if they had been playing each other down the stretch.
actually, MM, you're right: it would have been better if one team has to go home, no question -- sudden death is always better. but... to say who wins doesn't matter invalidates the very essence of sports and competition in general. you're telling me, if you were an angel or an a, you'd be content with second place? i'd like to think, were i a part of this, second place, even if it still meant a playoff spot, would suck. and by the looks of things, these two teams seem to share that sentiment. players want to win it; it might not mean anything to you, but it means a lot to them. the astros and cardinals played their starters in what you likely termed a meaningless game last year on the season's final day. pride and accomplishment are not diminsihed by consolation prizes.
