I Hate The Wild Card - Page 2

Ben E Lou · 10-05-2003, 05:11 PM

As much as I hate to say it, the Wild Card adds late-season drama for more teams. However, the Division Series needs to move to seven games, so that the odds are increased of the team that is truly the better team winning.

oykib · 10-05-2003, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SkyDog
As much as I hate to say it, the Wild Card adds late-season drama for more teams. However, the Division Series needs to move to seven games, so that the odds are increased of the team that is truly the better team winning.

Where is this drama that everyone keeps talking about? Did the Marlins play in front of packed houses all through September? It seems to me that we had a few threads in the past few weeks that detailed how no one was showing up until the last week or so of the season.

Was Marlins/Phillies better drama than we would've had with Yankees/Red Sox if the Sox hadn't known that the WC was in the bag this year.

Last year, it was even worse. Giants/D-Backs would have been a classic race. But the Giants winning the wildcard took all the drama out. Angels/A's also would have been amazing. But we didn't get that pennant race either.

Someone please point out this great drama that we didn't have in baseball before the wildcard. I'm still waiting for the evidence.

Chief Rum · 10-05-2003, 05:56 PM

Well, I'm still waiting for an actual good reason why traditional setups that don't get the best teams in the postseason are preferred "because that's how we have always done them."

Traditional-based arguments are some of the worst arguments I have seen in arguing for anything, baseball ro otherwise.

So I guess we can wait together, oykib.

CR

Suicane75 · 10-05-2003, 06:00 PM

1 more thing Sack, You and I have been focused on the Giants and Marlins, but lets say the Braves beat the Cubs, then what happens? The Braves have to beat the Marlins in a 7 game series, after already proving over 162 games that they were much better than them.

With the WC there will very often be a team that has to beat a team they already proved they were soundly better than. It's just not right.

SunDancer · 10-05-2003, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oykib

Maybe it's just me. But it seems the true baseball fans (I mean those of us for whom baseball is number one) hate the Wildcard.

T

So because baseball isn't our favorite sport, we aren't ture baseball fans?

The sad truth though, is it is 99% about money. We live in a corporate world where businesses are about making money. Interleague play, wild card, new stadiums are all about making MLB and its teams more money.

What are your thoughs on college football and the bowl system? SHould tradition be sacrificed for a playoff?

Chief Rum · 10-05-2003, 06:09 PM

I am and always have been a baseball fan first. And I love the wildcard, interleague play and even the designated hitter. Sue me.

CR

Suicane75 · 10-05-2003, 06:09 PM

Dola.

Chief, your argument is flawed, because if you finish second in your division you havn't won anything. It's not as if suddenly at some point in July they tell you you're in a division. From the start of the year your in a group of teams, you have to be the best in that group to advance, its very fair, some years your in a bad divsion, some years your in a good divsion.

I don't see how you can argue on hand that divisions shouldn't mean anything and then argue that the Marlins have a right to face the Braves whom had a better record than them by 9 games.

The Wild Card was instituted 10 years ago to create interest and give Baseball a spark, check the ratings, check attendance, it hasn't worked.

lynchjm24 · 10-05-2003, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SunDancer
So because baseball isn't our favorite sport, we aren't ture baseball fans?

The sad truth though, is it is 99% about money. We live in a corporate world where businesses are about making money. Interleague play, wild card, new stadiums are all about making MLB and its teams more money.

What are your thoughs on college football and the bowl system? SHould tradition be sacrificed for a playoff?

Well baseball is my favorite sport. I think the Wild Card is a necessary evil. There are just to many teams in the league to only send 4 to the playoffs. I'd like to see the series moved to 7, but it's really not the end of the world to me.

Suicane75 · 10-05-2003, 06:13 PM

Quote:

I am and always have been a baseball fan first. And I love the wildcard, interleague play and even the designated hitter. Sue me.

Im drawing up the papers as we speak.

oykib · 10-05-2003, 06:16 PM

The problem is that Interleague play doesn't really make much money. It does for the Yankees and Cubs. But neither team is exactly hurting in the wallet.

The traditional setup gives you division races that have been proven to raise attendance. They raise atttendance everyday that the teams race, too. the '93 Braves/Giants race saw packed houses in Candlestick and Fulton County all through August and September. Neither stadium was used to seeing even 60% capacity, at the time.

No wildcard has produced that kind of fan support. Like I posted earlier, fans show up for playoff games when their team wins the wildcard. So that means they go to one to nine games. Of course, no regular fans can go to those games anyway since they are overpriced playoff games.

But in the traditional playoff race, you get to have playoff caliber experiences (for normal prices) all through August and into September (until the team is possibly knocked out). When the wildcard is a consolation prize, it's been demonstrated that the fans don't come out like in the more traditional pennant race.

The wildcard is just about money. The owners want more playoff series because it means that they will have more games with revenue that they won't have to share with the players.

Chief Rum · 10-05-2003, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Suicane75
Dola.

Chief, your argument is flawed, because if you finish second in your division you havn't won anything. It's not as if suddenly at some point in July they tell you you're in a division. From the start of the year your in a group of teams, you have to be the best in that group to advance, its very fair, some years your in a bad divsion, some years your in a good divsion.

Which argument, Suicane? I am merely stating that the system that gets the best teams into the postseason is the fairest, and pointing out that, for all the other good that they do, divisions actually detract from fairness.

And if you win the wildcard you have won something--the wildcard.

Just because you know what you're up against doesn't mean it's fair. Try to tell BYU or Tulane or TCU before the season begins that they likely don't have a chance to get into the BCS because they aren't in BCS conferences. Does their knowledge of that fact change whether or not the system is fair. Knowledge of a systemic setup has absolutely nothing to do with the inherent fairness of that system.

Quote:

I don't see how you can argue on hand that divisions shouldn't mean anything and then argue that the Marlins have a right to face the Braves whom had a better record than them by 9 games.

I never did argue the second part. I think you have me confused with someone else there.

I do think the best team in the postseason should play the worst team in the postseason, regardless of divisional placement, and I also think the LDS's should go to seven games to better ensure the best team really wins. I think the best team playing the worst team (record-wise) is a perk it deserves to receive for being the best team in the league.

Quote:

The Wild Card was instituted 10 years ago to create interest and give Baseball a spark, check the ratings, check attendance, it hasn't worked.

Do you really think that the ratings and the attendance can be directly linked to the wildcard? Don't you think that other factors might be involved here? Such as the impression that only the richest teams can win? Or that baseball is a slow sport that doesn't appeal to many of the younger generations? I do think the wildcard has created interest. I know I pay attention to the wildcard. I have no idea, though, if it has worked to increase attendance and ratings or not. And quite frankly, neither do you--we both know nothing essentially. There are too many other things going on to make that call. How do you know that the institution of the wildcard hasn't actually kept the ratings and attendnace from going even lower than they have?

CR

Chief Rum · 10-05-2003, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Suicane75
Im drawing up the papers as we speak.

I'll have my lawyer call your lawyer.

I'm gonna hire John Galt and have him debate you to death. Or maybe KSyrup.

CR

SackAttack · 10-05-2003, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Suicane75
1 more thing Sack, You and I have been focused on the Giants and Marlins, but lets say the Braves beat the Cubs, then what happens? The Braves have to beat the Marlins in a 7 game series, after already proving over 162 games that they were much better than them.

With the WC there will very often be a team that has to beat a team they already proved they were soundly better than. It's just not right.

And again I ask you, what's wrong with that? The Marlins pulled their shit together, they made the playoffs, and they dumped the reigning NL champ to the sidewalk in four games. That isn't exactly an easy thing to do under any circumstances - let alone facing down a team that's been there before when most of your team was in the minors the last time you won anything.

The Braves, hell, they can take that a step further - they've been to the playoffs every year for 12 years in a row. They should have this down cold by now. If they beat the Cubs, they'll be facing a Marlins team that might just be the most balanced team in the National League right now. Defensively they're sound, offensively they're sound, and their pitching is, when you match it up, better nearly everywhere except closer than the Braves.

This isn't the same team that struggled for the first two months. They made adjustments, they made changes, they made the playoffs, and despite those two months, they finished just nine games behind the Braves. Why shouldn't they have that opportunity?

Suicane75 · 10-05-2003, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Or that baseball is a slow sport that doesn't appeal to many of the younger generations?

Ding, Ding, Ding. I feel like they're trying to repackage a sport that can't be repackaged, it just doesn't lend itself to a quick dash of excitement. Baseball in it's nature is a slow game, with a slow build. The way I feel is that they've alienated a large chunk of their fan base (myself included) to attract a newer one that is alot more fickle. I would of been a die hard fan of MLB as an entity till the day I died, the guy who gets into the Marlins cause their the story of the moment will have forgotten about them by the time the Dolphins are collapsing in December.

Suicane75 · 10-05-2003, 06:57 PM

Quote:

they finished just nine games behind the Braves. Why shouldn't they have that opportunity?

EagleFan · 10-05-2003, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Suicane75
1 more thing Sack, You and I have been focused on the Giants and Marlins, but lets say the Braves beat the Cubs, then what happens? The Braves have to beat the Marlins in a 7 game series, after already proving over 162 games that they were much better than them.

With the WC there will very often be a team that has to beat a team they already proved they were soundly better than. It's just not right.

What if the Braves lose to the Cubs? A team they have proven themselves better than over 162 games?

Oh, and the Marlins were 10-8 against the Braves. The Braves only proved they were better against the rest of the league than against the Marlins.

Suicane75 · 10-05-2003, 07:16 PM

Quote:

What if the Braves lose to the Cubs? A team they have proven themselves better than over 162 games?

They are 2 distinct Champions of distinct divsions, I don't have a problem with that.

Quote:

Oh, and the Marlins were 10-8 against the Braves. The Braves only proved they were better against the rest of the league than against the Marlins.

Thats a silly argument, A team that goes 120-40 will probably have a losing record against someone, doesn't make the other team more deserving of being the Champion.

GrantDawg · 10-05-2003, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chief Rum

I'll have my lawyer call your lawyer.

I'm gonna hire John Galt and have him debate you to death. Or maybe KSyrup.

CR

Represent yourself. No lawyer could out talk you.

ISiddiqui · 10-05-2003, 11:48 PM

Hmmm... interesting points here on the basis of tradition and having the better team win. I wonder how this would compare to the College Football debate. What I mean is how many people here pro-Wildcard are anti-Playoffs in College Football and how many anti-Wildcard are pro-Playoffs in College Football. I think that's an interesting question, whether or not this argument is different for different sports.

Chief Rum · 10-06-2003, 02:09 AM

Well, I'm glad to say that I'm not different with different sports (at least not with these two examples). I am pro-wildcard and pro-college football playoff.

CR

oykib · 10-06-2003, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ISiddiqui
Hmmm... interesting points here on the basis of tradition and having the better team win. I wonder how this would compare to the College Football debate. What I mean is how many people here pro-Wildcard are anti-Playoffs in College Football and how many anti-Wildcard are pro-Playoffs in College Football. I think that's an interesting question, whether or not this argument is different for different sports.

The arguments don't correlate that well. In college football (and to an extent the NFL) there is a legitimate question as to which teams are the best. So the wildcard makes sense. But in baseball there is no real mystery. The team that wins the division has really proven that they are better.

The NBA and NHL are jokes.

SunDancer · 10-06-2003, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oykib
The arguments don't correlate that well. In college football (and to an extent the NFL) there is a legitimate question as to which teams are the best. So the wildcard makes sense. But in baseball there is no real mystery. The team that wins the division has really proven that they are better.

The NBA and NHL are jokes.

Not sure what you mean? I think the issue is more over the tradition of the college football.

dacman · 10-06-2003, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chief Rum
Which argument, Suicane? I am merely stating that the system that gets the best teams into the postseason is the fairest, and pointing out that, for all the other good that they do, divisions actually detract from fairness.

Example #1 (of many):

Code:

1993 National League
East Division
Team           W   L  WL%  GB
Phildlpa PHI  97  65 .599  --  
Montreal MON  94  68 .580  3.0
...
West Division
Team           W   L  WL%  GB
Atlanta  ATL 104  58 .642  --  
SanFranc SFG 103  59 .636  1.0
...

I'm sure your beloved Giants were less deserving, eh, Suicane?

Ksyrup · 10-06-2003, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Suicane75
I would of been a die hard fan of MLB as an entity till the day I died, the guy who gets into the Marlins cause their the story of the moment will have forgotten about them by the time the Dolphins are collapsing in December.

Um....the Marlins wouldn't have been a story without the wild card, now would they? They would have been just another team with a double-digit deficit in their division behind the Braves. There wouldn't have been much, if any, excitement over the Marlins unless the wild card existed.

I feel much the same way you do about the game. I don't want baseball changing the nature of the game just to make it more appealing to people who don't like it. I just don't see that the wild card has changed the nature of the game. It's still a long, 162-game grueling race to the finish line, whether that finish line is the division championship or the wild card.

KevinNU7 · 10-06-2003, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oykib
The arguments don't correlate that well. In college football (and to an extent the NFL) there is a legitimate question as to which teams are the best. So the wildcard makes sense. But in baseball there is no real mystery. The team that wins the division has really proven that they are better.

Obviously not if Wildcard teams are avancing in the palyoffs and occasionally winning the World Series

clintl · 10-06-2003, 01:36 PM

I'm a big Giants fan, but if you want to know the truth, they won the NL West almost exclusively by killing every team in it. Playing outside the division, they did not have as much success this year, and I think that was a big warning sign going into the playoffs. With an unbalanced schedule (which I like), you can't really assume that division winners are really the best teams.

I never at any point in the season had a feeling that this Giants team was as good as last year's team, and I am still trying to figure out how they won 100 games with as many players having subpar seasons as the Giants had. Only Bonds, Schmidt, Jerome Williams, and a few members of the bullpen really had seasons that met or exceeded what was expected of them.

Suicane75 · 10-06-2003, 02:33 PM

Quote:

I'm sure your beloved Giants were less deserving, eh, Suicane?

Im not a giants fans, nor do I belove them.

ISiddiqui · 10-07-2003, 12:50 AM

Quote:

I think the issue is more over the tradition of the college football.

Yep, that's what I meant. Tradition in college football vs. tradition in baseball.

oykib · 10-07-2003, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by KevinNU7
Obviously not if Wildcard teams are avancing in the palyoffs and occasionally winning the World Series

Anything can happen in short series. There is no real home field advantage in baseball. And one player has a disproportionate impact on the series as compared to the regular season.

The season takes depth and consistency. The playoffs take impact perfomances and luck. There's a big difference between the regular season and the playoffs.

One extra home game in baseball is no big deal. If your dealing with percentage points of difference between teams, the odds say that the wildcard is going to win 35-45% of the time.

That doesn't make them better teams. It means that they are lucky.

John Galt · 10-07-2003, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chief Rum

I'll have my lawyer call your lawyer.

I'm gonna hire John Galt and have him debate you to death. Or maybe KSyrup.

CR

I'm sorry - I don't debate to the death - only to the pain.

GrantDawg · 10-07-2003, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by John Galt
I'm sorry - I don't debate to the death - only to the pain.

To the pain?

SackAttack · 10-07-2003, 04:06 PM

To the pain means the first thing you lose will be your feet, below the ankles, followed by your hands at the wrists...next your nose.

GrantDawg · 10-07-2003, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SackAttack
To the pain means the first thing you lose will be your feet, below the ankles, followed by your hands at the wrists...next your nose.

yes, yes, I know. Then the eyes and the ears....

John Galt · 10-07-2003, 04:43 PM

WRONG! Your ears you keep and I'll tell you why. So that every shriek of every child in seeing your hideousness will be yours to cherish. Every babe that weeps at your approach, every woman who cries out dear god what is that thing, will echo in your perfect ears. That is what to the pain means. It means I leave you in anguish, wallowing in freakish misery forever.

alterra · 10-07-2003, 04:45 PM

My name is Pedro Martinez. You killed my center fielder. Prepare to die.

GrantDawg · 10-07-2003, 04:45 PM

I love that movie.

SirFozzie · 09-29-2004, 07:34 PM

Home Field has no advantage in Baseball? You GOTTA be kidding me. Ever hear of Last Ups? Of the Sox record Home v Away?

Baseball might have the BIGGEST homefield advantage of the Big 3.

ISiddiqui · 09-29-2004, 07:35 PM

The stats don't lie, SirFozzie. Baseball's home field advantage isn't that much of an advantage at all.

SackAttack · 09-29-2004, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alterra

My name is Pedro Martinez. You killed my center fielder. Prepare to die.

I don't know how I missed that line last year. That's awesome.

rkmsuf · 09-30-2004, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Home Field has no advantage in Baseball? You GOTTA be kidding me. Ever hear of Last Ups? Of the Sox record Home v Away?

Baseball might have the BIGGEST homefield advantage of the Big 3.

Surely you jest unless the big three are baseball, table tennis and swimming.

Chief Rum · 09-30-2004, 10:07 AM

I think I didf a better job arguing this last year than I did this year.

CR

SirFozzie · 09-30-2004, 10:08 AM

I think the whole argument sucked and was a broken record

10-05-2003, 05:56 PM	#53
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	Well, I'm still waiting for an actual good reason why traditional setups that don't get the best teams in the postseason are preferred "because that's how we have always done them." Traditional-based arguments are some of the worst arguments I have seen in arguing for anything, baseball ro otherwise. So I guess we can wait together, oykib. CR __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

10-05-2003, 06:09 PM	#56
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	I am and always have been a baseball fan first. And I love the wildcard, interleague play and even the designated hitter. Sue me. CR __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

10-05-2003, 11:48 PM	#69
ISiddiqui Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Decatur, GA	Hmmm... interesting points here on the basis of tradition and having the better team win. I wonder how this would compare to the College Football debate. What I mean is how many people here pro-Wildcard are anti-Playoffs in College Football and how many anti-Wildcard are pro-Playoffs in College Football. I think that's an interesting question, whether or not this argument is different for different sports. __________________ "A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages" -Tennessee Williams

10-06-2003, 02:09 AM	#70
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	Well, I'm glad to say that I'm not different with different sports (at least not with these two examples). I am pro-wildcard and pro-college football playoff. CR __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

10-07-2003, 04:43 PM	#84
John Galt Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: The Internets	WRONG! Your ears you keep and I'll tell you why. So that every shriek of every child in seeing your hideousness will be yours to cherish. Every babe that weeps at your approach, every woman who cries out dear god what is that thing, will echo in your perfect ears. That is what to the pain means. It means I leave you in anguish, wallowing in freakish misery forever. __________________ I do mind, the Dude minds. This will not stand, ya know, this aggression will not stand, man. - The Dude

10-05-2003, 06:00 PM	#54
Suicane75 Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: NJ	1 more thing Sack, You and I have been focused on the Giants and Marlins, but lets say the Braves beat the Cubs, then what happens? The Braves have to beat the Marlins in a 7 game series, after already proving over 162 games that they were much better than them. With the WC there will very often be a team that has to beat a team they already proved they were soundly better than. It's just not right.

10-05-2003, 06:16 PM	#60
oykib College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000	The problem is that Interleague play doesn't really make much money. It does for the Yankees and Cubs. But neither team is exactly hurting in the wallet. The traditional setup gives you division races that have been proven to raise attendance. They raise atttendance everyday that the teams race, too. the '93 Braves/Giants race saw packed houses in Candlestick and Fulton County all through August and September. Neither stadium was used to seeing even 60% capacity, at the time. No wildcard has produced that kind of fan support. Like I posted earlier, fans show up for playoff games when their team wins the wildcard. So that means they go to one to nine games. Of course, no regular fans can go to those games anyway since they are overpriced playoff games. But in the traditional playoff race, you get to have playoff caliber experiences (for normal prices) all through August and into September (until the team is possibly knocked out). When the wildcard is a consolation prize, it's been demonstrated that the fans don't come out like in the more traditional pennant race. The wildcard is just about money. The owners want more playoff series because it means that they will have more games with revenue that they won't have to share with the players.

10-06-2003, 01:36 PM	#76
clintl College Starter Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Davis, CA	I'm a big Giants fan, but if you want to know the truth, they won the NL West almost exclusively by killing every team in it. Playing outside the division, they did not have as much success this year, and I think that was a big warning sign going into the playoffs. With an unbalanced schedule (which I like), you can't really assume that division winners are really the best teams. I never at any point in the season had a feeling that this Giants team was as good as last year's team, and I am still trying to figure out how they won 100 games with as many players having subpar seasons as the Giants had. Only Bonds, Schmidt, Jerome Williams, and a few members of the bullpen really had seasons that met or exceeded what was expected of them.

10-07-2003, 04:06 PM	#82
SackAttack Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Green Bay, WI	To the pain means the first thing you lose will be your feet, below the ankles, followed by your hands at the wrists...next your nose.

10-07-2003, 04:45 PM	#85
alterra Mascot Join Date: Jul 2003	My name is Pedro Martinez. You killed my center fielder. Prepare to die.

10-07-2003, 04:45 PM	#86
GrantDawg World Champion Mis-speller Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Covington, Ga.	I love that movie.

09-29-2004, 07:34 PM	#87
SirFozzie Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: The State of Insanity	Home Field has no advantage in Baseball? You GOTTA be kidding me. Ever hear of Last Ups? Of the Sox record Home v Away? Baseball might have the BIGGEST homefield advantage of the Big 3. __________________ Check out Foz's New Video Game Site, An 8-bit Mind in an 8GB world! http://an8bitmind.com

09-29-2004, 07:35 PM	#88
ISiddiqui Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Decatur, GA	The stats don't lie, SirFozzie. Baseball's home field advantage isn't that much of an advantage at all. __________________ "A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages" -Tennessee Williams

09-30-2004, 10:07 AM	#91
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	I think I didf a better job arguing this last year than I did this year. CR __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

09-30-2004, 10:08 AM	#92
SirFozzie Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: The State of Insanity	I think the whole argument sucked and was a broken record __________________ Check out Foz's New Video Game Site, An 8-bit Mind in an 8GB world! http://an8bitmind.com

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)