Get rid of the wild card....there, I said it! Remember a couple of years back when the Mets and Braves had a bunch of games against each other at the end of the year....the Braves beat the crap out of them. but it didn't matter...the urgency wasn't there...the Mets knew they could back into the playoffs in the wild card spot...and they did. Baseball, like football, places importance on the regular season. Baseball does that by playing a ton of games and saying, "ok...if you don't win your division, you don't move on." They stopped saying that when they added the wild card, and subsequently contributed to devaluing the importance of those regular season games. There is no injustice in telling a very good team, "you weren't good enough," if some other team finished better. That's what I always loved about baseball...the Giants could finish with over 100 wins and still miss the playoffs (as they did in 1993, I think...because the Braves won one more game than they did). Call me a purist if you want...I just like to see exciting games...and when you place urgency on top tier teams to beat one another, that creates excitement.
I'd prefer George Will. Regarding the "independent commissioner" talk earlier, the Commissioner of Major League Baseball has always been selected and paid by, and thus an employee of, the owners. Ne'er a one has been independent. I will agree that Bud, as a "former" owner is less independent than most others.
Max-- We agree on most baseball issues because we are both baseball purists. The problem here is that we are in a time when baseball is on the decline. A lot of that is due to the fact that the majority of team (even good ones) can't compete with the Yankees of the world. Having the wild card gives fans in more cities a reason to stick with baseball later into the season. Once competitive balance is restored, I could seriously live without the wild card.
Remember a couple of years back when the Mets and Braves had a bunch of games against each other at the end of the year....the Braves beat the crap out of them. but it didn't matter...the urgency wasn't there...the Mets knew they could back into the playoffs in the wild card spot...and they did. On the other hand, an army of games that wouldn't matter otherwise do because of the wildcard. For example, Houston ends the season at San Fran this year. If there was no wild card, this series wouldn't matter at all. However, if one or both of these teams is still in wild-card contention, it becomes huge. Any Mets vs. scrubs games would be irrelevent already since ATL has won that division, but by having the wild card, every game the Mets play matters to them, us, the Giants, Dodgers, and Reds. Personally, I think the wild-card adds more than it takes away.
I understand this argument...I really do. I just think that after the end of 162 games you ought to know who the best teams are...and those best teams should be in the playoffs. That was what was great about having a long season. That's a mistake I think the NBA has made...they tried to capitalize on the success of the tourney format the NCAA has...but who gives a damn about MOST first round matchups other than hard core fans. You create drama when you force the very best to play each for purpose. And you don't have to wait until the championship game or series to do that. Refman -- fine...fix the labor situation...and then nix the wild card. I think it takes away more than it adds.
Plus it would take him away from his Day Job and part time Jobs Sicking MJ's and Kobie's Ducks Rocket River [Switch the i and the U ;-) ]
Cool...we agree. So how do we reconcile 3 teams from each league in the playoffs? I'm not saying I disagree, I just want to know what you would propose.
You go back to the old 2 division format. Can't split into 4 without expanding, and we all know the likelihood of that happening; you also can't give 1 team a bye in the first round.
I would argue that Kennisaw Mountain Landis was an independent commissioner. The fact that the owners hired him didn't diminish his power. But in regards to today, I would define independent as someone who isn't of either side and who can be trusted to be truthful despite being an employee of Major League Baseball.
The only problem with that is the sheer number of teams per division. The last time we had a 2 division format there were 6 teams per division. The NL West was Astros, Dodgers, Reds, Braves, Giants and Padres. We'd have 8 teams in some divisions in MLB if we did it now. I don't think that is what we want to do at a time where competitve imbalance is killing the game.
Exactly my point. No solution makes sense without expansion or contraction, and I think neither will (or should) happen.
Landis saved the game. He is widely thought of as the best commish ever. Great example. We do need another Mountain Landis right now. Thanks for the contribution.
I had devised a plan where 6 teams would be contracted and the 2 division format reinstated. The people I shared it with thought it was a good plan but will never happen.
Very good point. But, if the owners hadn't agreed with at least a bit of what he was doing, he would have been replaced in a hearbeat. That's something the players have no control over.
That does not negate the fact that he saved baseball from the brink of implosion. Now we need somebody to step up and do it again.
