6C696E68606A736E6774727F060 wrote: They should shorten the regular season and start the playoffs in September. I doubt they would even consider doing that, though.
Might depend on how much they shorten it by. The schedule used to be 156 games. If the league returned to it, or even to 158, it would make enough room for 3-game playoffs. At the same time, it should only reduce ticket revenue by about 2% for non-playoff teams.
The idea that a playoff team under the current wildcard system doesn't get a home game is unfair and absurd.
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
6D4A41622F0 wrote: The expansion part doesn't really bother me. But the "pick your opponent on live TV" aspect is far too gimmicky.
(Is there any other sport that does that?)
wrestling?
(Is there any other sport that does that?)
wrestling?
-
fjk090852-7
- Posts: 3486
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:52 pm
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
I don’t like the idea that all three wild card games are played at the venue of the team with the better record. Game #3 of the wild card series should be played at the ballpark of the lower seeded team. Games #1 and #2 can be played at the ballpark of the team with the better record, but switch for game #3. This way the fans from all the playoff teams get a chance to see a playoff game, provided the series goes to 3 games.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
I'm not sure I even like this idea but since Manfred is throwing out crazy ideas I am too 
WC two game-series, home and away, the higher seeded team only has to win one of them.
WC two game-series, home and away, the higher seeded team only has to win one of them.
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
7975742F262F272A2D32281F0 wrote: I don’t like the idea that all three wild card games are played at the venue of the team with the better record. Game #3 of the wild card series should be played at the ballpark of the lower seeded team. Games #1 and #2 can be played at the ballpark of the team with the better record, but switch for game #3. This way the fans from all the playoff teams get a chance to see a playoff game, provided the series goes to 3 games.
I'd tweak it a little bit. Play Game 1 at the lower seeded team's home, that way, the higher seed gets to host a winner-take-all Game 3.
Personally, I like the idea of expanding the playoffs. I don't like seven teams per league, however. I'd prefer to see six and do what the NFL does (two byes, four teams play in the WC round) or eight and no byes, but that's just me. Anything that gives the Pirates a better shot at the postseason is fine in my book.
I also would be opposed to shortening the season. I think too many records are based off of a 162 game schedule. Of course, dreaming on somebody hitting 74 jacks is an exercise in futility now that steroids have (more or less) been removed from the game.
To accomodate a 162 game schedule, I'd incorporate one DH per month, which would free up six days at the end of the season. With 26 man rosters, it should be doable.
The one thing I really wish MLB would get rid of is the three batter minimum rule. It messes with the fabric of the game. I hate it.
I'd tweak it a little bit. Play Game 1 at the lower seeded team's home, that way, the higher seed gets to host a winner-take-all Game 3.
Personally, I like the idea of expanding the playoffs. I don't like seven teams per league, however. I'd prefer to see six and do what the NFL does (two byes, four teams play in the WC round) or eight and no byes, but that's just me. Anything that gives the Pirates a better shot at the postseason is fine in my book.
I also would be opposed to shortening the season. I think too many records are based off of a 162 game schedule. Of course, dreaming on somebody hitting 74 jacks is an exercise in futility now that steroids have (more or less) been removed from the game.
To accomodate a 162 game schedule, I'd incorporate one DH per month, which would free up six days at the end of the season. With 26 man rosters, it should be doable.
The one thing I really wish MLB would get rid of is the three batter minimum rule. It messes with the fabric of the game. I hate it.
-
Bobster21
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
444C4F786E4B6C630D0 wrote: I don’t like the idea that all three wild card games are played at the venue of the team with the better record. Game #3 of the wild card series should be played at the ballpark of the lower seeded team. Games #1 and #2 can be played at the ballpark of the team with the better record, but switch for game #3. This way the fans from all the playoff teams get a chance to see a playoff game, provided the series goes to 3 games.
I'd tweak it a little bit. Play Game 1 at the lower seeded team's home, that way, the higher seed gets to host a winner-take-all Game 3.
Personally, I like the idea of expanding the playoffs. I don't like seven teams per league, however. I'd prefer to see six and do what the NFL does (two byes, four teams play in the WC round) or eight and no byes, but that's just me. Anything that gives the Pirates a better shot at the postseason is fine in my book.
I also would be opposed to shortening the season. I think too many records are based off of a 162 game schedule. Of course, dreaming on somebody hitting 74 jacks is an exercise in futility now that steroids have (more or less) been removed from the game.
To accomodate a 162 game schedule, I'd incorporate one DH per month, which would free up six days at the end of the season. With 26 man rosters, it should be doable.
The one thing I really wish MLB would get rid of is the three batter minimum rule. It messes with the fabric of the game. I hate it.
MLB has never distinguished between records set in 154-game seasons and those in 162-game seasons. So I don't think going back to fewer games would matter. Of the top 10 career HR hitters only Hank Aaron, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays and Frank Robinson didn't have the advantage of playing 162 games each year. Ruth never played that many. Aaron only played 8 of his 23 years in the 154 game format. Mays only played 10 of his 22 years in the 154 game format. Robinson only played 6 of his 21 years in the 154 game format. And that's just HRs. MLB has never cared whether records of any kind were based on less or more games.
MLB doesn't even distinguish between post-season and WS records. Mickey Mantle never appeared in a playoff game. But his 18 career WS HRs is still tops. MLB tells us that Mantle is 5th all time in post season HRs with 18 and that the leaders are Manny Ramirez (29), Bernie Williams (22), Derek Jeter (20) and Albert Pujols (19). But in the WS, Ramirez has 4, Williams has 5, Jeter has 3 (1 more than Mazeroski) and Pujols has 4. Imagine if Mantle had padded his post season totals with playoff games. MLB loves to cite records but doesn't care if they were set under similar circumstances to the records they broke.
I'd tweak it a little bit. Play Game 1 at the lower seeded team's home, that way, the higher seed gets to host a winner-take-all Game 3.
Personally, I like the idea of expanding the playoffs. I don't like seven teams per league, however. I'd prefer to see six and do what the NFL does (two byes, four teams play in the WC round) or eight and no byes, but that's just me. Anything that gives the Pirates a better shot at the postseason is fine in my book.
I also would be opposed to shortening the season. I think too many records are based off of a 162 game schedule. Of course, dreaming on somebody hitting 74 jacks is an exercise in futility now that steroids have (more or less) been removed from the game.
To accomodate a 162 game schedule, I'd incorporate one DH per month, which would free up six days at the end of the season. With 26 man rosters, it should be doable.
The one thing I really wish MLB would get rid of is the three batter minimum rule. It messes with the fabric of the game. I hate it.
MLB has never distinguished between records set in 154-game seasons and those in 162-game seasons. So I don't think going back to fewer games would matter. Of the top 10 career HR hitters only Hank Aaron, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays and Frank Robinson didn't have the advantage of playing 162 games each year. Ruth never played that many. Aaron only played 8 of his 23 years in the 154 game format. Mays only played 10 of his 22 years in the 154 game format. Robinson only played 6 of his 21 years in the 154 game format. And that's just HRs. MLB has never cared whether records of any kind were based on less or more games.
MLB doesn't even distinguish between post-season and WS records. Mickey Mantle never appeared in a playoff game. But his 18 career WS HRs is still tops. MLB tells us that Mantle is 5th all time in post season HRs with 18 and that the leaders are Manny Ramirez (29), Bernie Williams (22), Derek Jeter (20) and Albert Pujols (19). But in the WS, Ramirez has 4, Williams has 5, Jeter has 3 (1 more than Mazeroski) and Pujols has 4. Imagine if Mantle had padded his post season totals with playoff games. MLB loves to cite records but doesn't care if they were set under similar circumstances to the records they broke.
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
6A6F686E666C756861727479000 wrote: They should shorten the regular season and start the playoffs in September. I doubt they would even consider doing that, though.
They could play some scheduled doubleheaders during the season. Five of those probably buys you the days you need for a 3 game WC series.
They could play some scheduled doubleheaders during the season. Five of those probably buys you the days you need for a 3 game WC series.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
7067714650505C330 wrote: They should shorten the regular season and start the playoffs in September. I doubt they would even consider doing that, though.
They could play some scheduled doubleheaders during the season. Five of those probably buys you the days you need for a 3 game WC series.
A post I made in another thread but relevant here (I’m changing my opinion about material changes):
MLB needs to attract a new generation of fans. Even the Yankees will eventually peak and begin to lose value unless fundamental changes are made. Traditionalist (and I tend in that direction) are going to be faced with a decision for traditions or growing the game.
A material change to the playoffs, involving many more fans is a sure way to reengage lost fans. More teams need to be fighting for a playoff spot each year. Rebuilding an organization has to be accomplished in much less time. And there needs to be some opportunity for all teams to retain top tier talent, especially home grown.
MLB and the MLBPA can act like all is well, but they kid themselves.
NFL is a great example: all markets are considered important and all markets are making more money then they can print.
To attract new fans MLB needs to appeal to fans waaaaayyy beyond NY, Philly, DC, Chicago, and LA.
A much expanded playoff system and an enforceable ceiling and floor will go along way to reinventing the game. We might not like 14 (or 16) out of 30 teams in the playoffs, we might not like a shorter season due to the historic records, but baseball would draw a HUGE amount of interest if the month of September was all playoff baseball. Every series best of 7.
These changes would infuse a huge amt of money and fan interest. Pittsburgh would have a much greater chance even with Nutting.
They could play some scheduled doubleheaders during the season. Five of those probably buys you the days you need for a 3 game WC series.
A post I made in another thread but relevant here (I’m changing my opinion about material changes):
MLB needs to attract a new generation of fans. Even the Yankees will eventually peak and begin to lose value unless fundamental changes are made. Traditionalist (and I tend in that direction) are going to be faced with a decision for traditions or growing the game.
A material change to the playoffs, involving many more fans is a sure way to reengage lost fans. More teams need to be fighting for a playoff spot each year. Rebuilding an organization has to be accomplished in much less time. And there needs to be some opportunity for all teams to retain top tier talent, especially home grown.
MLB and the MLBPA can act like all is well, but they kid themselves.
NFL is a great example: all markets are considered important and all markets are making more money then they can print.
To attract new fans MLB needs to appeal to fans waaaaayyy beyond NY, Philly, DC, Chicago, and LA.
A much expanded playoff system and an enforceable ceiling and floor will go along way to reinventing the game. We might not like 14 (or 16) out of 30 teams in the playoffs, we might not like a shorter season due to the historic records, but baseball would draw a HUGE amount of interest if the month of September was all playoff baseball. Every series best of 7.
These changes would infuse a huge amt of money and fan interest. Pittsburgh would have a much greater chance even with Nutting.
-
WildwoodDave
- Posts: 568
- Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:19 am
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
Sorry I missed this before i duplicated your new thread. Pirates would have a greater chance even with Nutting. Did you ever hear of "one and done"?
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Major changes ahead for MLB playoffs?
1A2421293A222229092C3B284D0 wrote: Sorry I missed this before i duplicated your new thread. Pirates would have a greater chance even with Nutting. Did you ever hear of "one and done"?
Well, they'd have a greater chance, but it just gives another opportunity for MLB to point to teams making the playoffs now and then as "proof" that the economics aren't broken. Never mind this would practically guarantee that the Red Sox and Yankees make it almost every season.
Well, they'd have a greater chance, but it just gives another opportunity for MLB to point to teams making the playoffs now and then as "proof" that the economics aren't broken. Never mind this would practically guarantee that the Red Sox and Yankees make it almost every season.