MLB expands playoff format from 8 teams to 10
 

Did this get missed here at CP? Apologize if its a repost.......Thoughts?




http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slu...pandedplayoffs



NEW YORK (AP)—With less than a month to go before opening day, baseball at last decided who’s in and who’s out come October.

Now, even a third-place team can win the World Series.

Major League Baseball made it official Friday, expanding the playoff format to 10 teams by adding a wild-card club to each league.

“I hope we get that extra spot,” said new Houston Astros general manager Jeff Luhnow, whose team is coming off a 56-106 finish that was the worst in the majors. “I think it’s great any time you have more markets involved.”

Who knows, maybe a rookie such as Bryce Harper will get that shot this year.

“Cool,” the 19-year-old Washington sensation said after a game against college kids. “It’s great. Hopefully, we’re that playoff team.”

Boston and Atlanta sure could’ve used this setup last year. They went through awful collapses in September that eventually cost them playoff spots on the final day of the season.

“I think the more, the merrier,” new Red Sox manager Bobby Valentine said. “I think for the fans, the players, the energy at the end of the season, I don’t mind. What would it be, a third of the teams? I think it’ll be good.”

This is the first switch in MLB’s postseason format since the 1995 season, when wild cards were first added. The move creates a new one-game, wild-card round in the AL and NL between the teams with the best records who are not division winners.

“It’s a good thing for baseball. That seems to be what the people want,” Detroit manager Jim Leyland said.

“There are a lot of mixed emotions but as long as the playoffs don’t get watered down, it’s fine, but that won’t happen in baseball,” he said.

The additions mean 10 of the 30 MLB teams will get into the playoffs. That’s still fewer than in the other pro leagues—12 of 32 make it in the NFL, and 16 of 30 advance in the NBA and NHL.

The long-expected decision was announced less than an hour before Seattle and Oakland started the exhibition season. On March 28, the Mariners and Athletics will play the big league opener in Tokyo.

“This change increases the rewards of a division championship and allows two additional markets to experience playoff baseball each year,” Commissioner Bud Selig said in a statement.

Also, a tweak: For the 2012 postseason, the five-game division series will begin with two home games for lower seeds, followed by home games for the higher seed. After that, it will return to the 2-2-1 format previously used.

MLB said that with schedules already drawn for this season, the postseason had to be compressed to fit in the extra games. Hence, fewer off-days for travel.

“I don’t think it really changes the way you look at this season. You really have to fight to win your division,” New York Yankees manager Joe Girardi said. “It is kind of strange to start on the road. That doesn’t quite seem right, but it’s a one-year thing. I understand why they’re doing it.”

If the World Series goes to Game 7 this year—as it did last season, when the wild-card St. Louis Cardinals won the championship—it would be played Nov. 1.

“I like the extra playoff spot. I like the one-game playoff because it really gives the advantages to the division winner,” Los Angeles Dodgers manager Don Mattingly said this week.

As in, it’ll be real dicey for the wild-card contenders to immediately jump into a winner-take-all game, then quickly turn around to start the division series.

Starting this year, too, there’s no restriction on teams from the same division meeting in that best-of-five division series.

Baseball players’ union head Michael Weiner said there had been internal discussions way back about possibly having six playoff teams from each league. He said that once bargaining began with owners on a new labor deal, it was clear MLB only wanted five.

“The players were in favor of expanding the playoffs,” Weiner said.

In particular, he said, the players wanted to put more emphasis on winning a division, especially when MLB goes to a pair of 15-team leagues next year with three divisions each. The Astros are switching from the NL to the AL to make that possible.

A portion of the money generated by the one-game playoffs will go in the players’ pool that is split among the postseason participants.

In 1999, Valentine and the New York Mets won a one-game tiebreaker for the NL wild-card spot.

“I didn’t think that entering the playoffs in ’99 when I had to play a one-game playoff against Cincinnati that the next round was cheapened,” he said. “It seems to be similar to that. I don’t know if it’s the same thing, but it seems.”

TO THE SHIP!!!

What does this have to do with Peyton Manning?

"well it's about time!....wait, wut"? / Carl Peterson

A one game play-in?

Weak.

Peyton Manning?

Royals need a middle reliever.

SportsRacer....I thought you can't say anything but "Peyton Manning" GTFO bro.

If we don't sign Peyton Manning I won't say anything but Peyton Manning for a month. Or should it be if we DO sign Peyton Manning?

I would love to see more 1 game and you are out situations. That is what makes the NCAA and NFL tourny so special.

best 22 of 43.
that should settle it.

Why even play 162 games then??

Oh thats right, to maximize owners revenue.

If they want to add another round, they should just shorten the regular season by a week and start the playoffs in September. This is just more Selig fail, IMO. What a ****ing clown.

I've never really watched or played baseball at all.
but, I do think I could get into it if the season, and playoffs were shorter.

162 games, then the best of 7......I just can't get into it.

Yea its bullshit.

Win the division and you don't have to worry about it. This doesn't add an extra playoff team; all it does is create a play-in game and slow down the WC winner a bit.

This actually makes those 162 games more important. If you're a WC team, you now have to burn your ace starting pitcher in a play-in game. Now those teams with the depth and overall quality to win their division over 162 games have a far greater advantage than merely having home field in a 2-2-1 series.

This is a good thing for the value of the regular season. This makes winning your division more critical than it has been during the advent of the WC era. It also helps level the playing field for division winners that locked their division up weeks before the playoffs began and need an extra day or two to knock the rust off. Now they don't have to go up against the #1 of the WC squad that was busting its ass just to get in.

The Cardinals run was unprecedented, but we did it via Carpenter and a bunch of scrubs. If we had to burn Carp in a play-in game, it would've been a hell of a lot harder for us to pull that championship off.

And rightfully so, IMO.

Good move, Bud.

So if understand it.

3 division winners.
Wc has to play another team in a 1game playoff, winner gets to advance?
What if the wc has 10+ more wins? That is dumb.

Fine before.

Its been discussed a bit in the Royals thread, but hasn't had its own post, so... technically not a re-post.

Dumb.

No, it wasn't fine before. The Wild Card was pretty much on equal footing with the division winners. One extra home game doesn't make much of a difference.

A couple years ago, the Yankees actually admitted that during their race with the Rays, near the end of the season they decided to rest some players and basically concede the AL East to the Rays. As the GM said, winning the division would have been just another hat and a T-shirt. That is damning more than anything else.

The wild card with more wins gets to host the knockout game, and the 3 division winners now get a real, huge reward over the Wild Cards. (The Wild Cards will likely have to use their best pitcher, and by doing so they probably wont be able to set things up to pitch him twice in the divisional round. So, a Wild Card team will be less able to ride on the back of one elite pitcher to glory)

Don't like it? Win your damned division.

Exactly.

The division championship matters again.

There's absolutely nothing dumb about that. And no, this doesn't help the large market squads. Now the Red Sox, Yankees, Angels or Rangers may end up having to go up against the D-Backs and Price/Moore/Shields in a 1-game playoff to decide if they make the dance. And even if they manage to win, they've now burned Lester, CC, Haren or Darvish just to make it in.

I'd eliminate the WC altogether, but this is a great approach to helping level the playing field and reward teams for winning their division.

Well, I saw where somebody said that a team has all season to win the division instead of getting put in a do, or die. They should be grateful to be in. Makes sense to me, they get a shot.

Didn't read page two before quoting....haha

LMAO

I wouldn't, 2 or 3 out of 15 is way, way too few, fans of 20-25 teams would tune out every August. However, I wouldn't expand it any more. 5 is perfect, we're done on playoff expansion.

I had thought they were discussing doing away with the divisions totally by having the Astros switch leagues. This is simply a move by MLB to bring in more money and giving more of an advantage to the big market teams. Its simply too much of a disadvantage to a WC team to have them burn their ace before they really even get into the playoffs.

That trial balloon was popped almost immediately, though the Astros are moving next season (player's union demanded it, if the division is going to be important, then they need to become equal).

There was a huge fan backlash against doing away with divisions, and the owners weren't thrilled with the idea either. Plenty of people still think we ought to have less-unbalanced schedules, but no one really wants to go away from divisions.

To say that the 2nd WC benefits large-market teams is just flat-out silly.

Ok Alnorth. U have me convinced for now. I'll give it a fair shot. I do miss the old division pennant races pre 1995 though.

Heh remember when the playoffs used to be best 3 out of 5 just to get to the World Series? Times have Changed...
Posted via Mobile Device

I don't know what's silly about it. Baseball sees their large market teams getting beat in the playoffs by wild cards who are in smaller markets. They're also seeing the wild card team win a fair share of the time. Since 2000 there has only been three seasons where a wild card didn't make the World Series. 2002 had both teams come from the wild card. If you have teams like the Phillies and the Yankees who can outspend their competition each year to get a divsional crown, anything baseball can do to make sure those teams beat the smaller market WC helps out the networks.

Yeah, I don't get this at all. It's a remarkably stupid idea. Imagine a team like the Royals or the Pirates that is just playoff-starved actually works their asses off and makes it into a one-game playoff, only to lose. So much hard work disappears in one night? Lame.

If 5 teams is what they want I'd rather see a best-of-three series where the 4th seed team would get all 3 games of the series at home in 3 consecutive days.

Explain to me the advantage that this gives large market teams over small market teams.

Yeah sure, this may help a large-market team make the playoffs and win a WS that it otherwise may not have. Then again, it provides the exact same opportunity to a small market team. Last year it would've put the Braves and the Red Sox in; one a large market team and the other a mid-market team.

The argument that this is just driven by a need to let more big-market teams in simply does not make sense; there's just no logic or reason to it.

Well, first the Wild Card *SHOULD* have a tremendously harder road. Give them a shot? Sure, but they need a handicap. Same thing as the NFL, they basically have 2 play-in games instead of one, with the unfortunate drawback of forcing 2 division champs to play-in, since they have 2 wild cards.

Second, at least in the AL, this change is far more likely to screw a large market than not. Unless the AL East has their rare down year, the 1st AL Wild card often goes to the Yankees or Red Sox. Now they get yanked off from standing on the same tier as the division champs, and get told "hey, you, here's the 2nd-place AL Central team. You must beat them first in a wild high-drama do-or-die elimination game, have fun"

Not a huge fan of the one game playoff idea. Especially after a 162 game season, it all comes down to one game. Although if it gets the Royals deep in the playoffs eventually, I reserve the right to change my opinion.

WHYYYYYY
ISN'T BASEBALL SEASON LONG ENOUGH?

why does the NFL and march madness rule

one and done
limited season

Baseball can't do that. The game is so crazily random, much more so than football and college basketball, that if you win 40% of your games, you are a really bad, awful, terrible team but if you win 60% of your games, you are one of the best in the league. If every round was one and done, the playoffs in baseball would lose almost all meaning, it would be a stupid crapshoot coinflip to see who wins the championship. (For similar reasons, baseball's seasons need to be very, very long.) You don't have to go to every flippin' game, just read the box score every morning, watch a few here and there, and go to 4 or 5 games if you want, and you are still a decent fan.

Wild Card teams, since they failed to win their division, do not deserve the same consideration. Let them fight a knockout round for our amusement.

The Royals still won't make it.

Expanded postseason is lame as hell.

This year? Its possible, but yeah, probably not. The Royals offense is going to rock, but we don't have the pitching to beat Detroit. Between the AL East juggernaut, and Rangers/Angels, the Wild Cards look dicey too.

2013-14 is when things should start to get more interesting.

Atlanta is nowhere near a mid-market.