Pages

▼

January 29, 2012

Selig: Second Wild Card Likely for 2012

Bud Selig is confident that the introduction of two additional wild card teams will take effect this season, though a final decision is not expected for a few weeks.
I really believe we'll have the [extra] wild card for this year. Clubs really want it. I don't think I've ever seen an issue that the clubs want more than to have the extra wild card. ... It looks to me like we'll have it, because I've told everybody we have to have it. It will be exciting. A one-game playoff and it will start the playoffs in a very exciting manner.
The two wild card teams in each league would play a one-game playoff. (If teams tie for first place in a division, they would play a one-game playoff to determine playoff position.) The winner of the wild card playoff would then play the team with the best record in the league. That would likely mean the end of the rule stating that the wild card team cannot play the first place team in its division, regardless of record (Red Sox/Yankees ALDS, anyone?).

Having two wild cards could mean that a third-place team from a particularly strong division could win the World Series.
at

16 comments:

  1. laura kJanuary 29, 2012 at 7:05 AM

    Argh. Leave it to MLB, they always get it wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  2. JereJanuary 29, 2012 at 10:07 AM

    Bud, all the teams would love it if every team made the playoffs. Doesn't mean you do it.

    (I also don't like how all one-game playoffs have been between teams with identical records, but now you could have one between teams ten games apart.)

    ReplyDelete
  3. ZenslingerJanuary 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM

    I think it kind of sucked a few years back when our final game vs. the Yankees didn't matter because we would have been the WC even if we had won and tied them. So this will fix that.

    Jere, at least the game wouldn't be an elimination game -- i.e., you lose, you still have a WC playoff.

    I don't hate it. But no more playoff teams than this, for sure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JereJanuary 29, 2012 at 8:23 PM

      I'm not talking about the division one-game playoff (which WOULD be between teams with identical records), I'm talking about the one-game playoff between the two wild card teams, who could have wildly different records, and IS an elimination game.

      Delete
  4. allanJanuary 29, 2012 at 11:48 AM

    but now you could have one between teams ten games apart.)

    Ten seems like a stretch (maybe you've looked at past years to see what would have happened), but right now we have DS and CS and WS games with teams with potentially vastly different records. (Not one-gamers, though, admittedly.) The stupid Cardinals won the WS with the same record the Red Sox had for 3rd place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JereJanuary 29, 2012 at 8:26 PM

      "(Not one-gamers, though, admittedly.)"

      Right--I'm just sayin', no one-game playoff has ever been between teams who didn't have the same record. And I didn't check the past, but the difference could potentially be huge.

      Delete
  5. allanJanuary 29, 2012 at 11:51 AM

    2011 - TB 91 vs BOS 90
    2010 - NYY 85 vs BOS 89
    2009 - BOS 95 vs TEX 87
    2008 - BOS 95 vs NYY 89
    2007 - NYY 95 vs winner of DET 88 vs SEA 88
    2006 - DET 95 vs CWS 90

    Of those 6 years, a third place team was involved 4 times!

    And BOS/MFY games for the WC in 2 of 3 years!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. allanJanuary 29, 2012 at 12:08 PM

      you can now reply to a specific comment and have your reply be indented under that comment. so no more copying a bit of someone's post to note who you are talking to.

      Delete
    2. KathrynJanuary 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM

      Well look at that! Fancy.

      Delete
    3. JereJanuary 29, 2012 at 8:29 PM

      Okay, so in 2007, it would have been a one-game playoff to figure out the second WC, and then the winner would play the first WC in another one-game playoff?

      Delete
  6. allanJanuary 29, 2012 at 12:09 PM

    if your comment is general, then just type in the comment box

    ReplyDelete
  7. FenFanJanuary 30, 2012 at 5:33 AM

    How soon after this are there going to be six teams from each league in the post-season? Or eight? Are we going to turn into the NBA and NHL and see the post-season last two months?

    ReplyDelete
  8. lougorman'slunchJanuary 30, 2012 at 8:21 AM

    To my mind this is such a bad idea for a league that plays 162 games. It de-legitimizes that long haul when a good season can be undone by one bad game. At least in a five game series there is both drama and a sense that the depth of a roster's quality is likely to win out (even if a hot team can clearly win despite a weaker regular season). Now it seems like a much weaker team that has a single, dominant starter is in great shape.

    ReplyDelete
  9. allanJanuary 30, 2012 at 8:58 AM

    I'll bet a best-of-3, -5 or -7 is as much of a crap shoot as a one-game playoff. Or much more of a roll of the dice than we think it is.

    ReplyDelete
  10. allanJanuary 30, 2012 at 1:30 PM

    Changed the comment format back - it wasn't as neat as I thought.

    Carry on.

    ReplyDelete
  11. timJanuary 31, 2012 at 6:38 PM

    2011 - TB 91 vs BOS 90
    2010 - NYY 85 vs BOS 89
    2009 - BOS 95 vs TEX 87
    2008 - BOS 95 vs NYY 89
    2007 - NYY 95 vs winner of DET 88 vs SEA 88
    2006 - DET 95 vs CWS 90


    I get it. The Blue Jays still don't make the playoffs.

    Well done, sir.

    ReplyDelete