First of all, no that's not why it was made. It was made because there were actual ties at the end of the season so they had one game tiebreakers to see who made the playoffs. People liked the drama so they came up with a way to do it every year even when there wasn't a tie.

Second, you shouldn't be punished for being the wildcard team. The wild card often has a better record than at least one of the division winners so why should they be punished? Winning your division doesn't really mean shite besides saying you're the best team in that division. The division winner already gets home field. That's enough advantage.

If you feel like you need to put a disadvantage in for the wildcard team, then you probably shouldn't even have the wildcard team in the playoffs to begin with.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Adam Banks

District 5

Member since Sep 2009

32237 posts

Posted on 10/4/17 at 12:19 pm to Weagle25

quote:
First of all, no that's not why it was made. It was made because there were actual ties at the end of the season so they had one game tiebreakers to see who made the playoffs. People liked the drama so they came up with a way to do it every year even when there wasn't a tie.

Actually it was. You can think what you want but the stated reason from selig was that he wanted to make both late season races more interesting by making the division championship more valuable I.E. there needed to be a downside to being the wild card. The WC had won 3 straight WS in the early to mid 2000s+ teams had started resting players rather than going for the division win because "hey there's really no big downside to being the WC"

You can believe what you want but this is the stated reasoning and even if it was for ratings who cares? They didn't win the division so they don't deserve special treatment and it is a really fun game.

This post was edited on 10/4/17 at 12:21 pm

0 ...

Report Post

More Sports - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board