OnlyBucs

0E30353D2E36363D1D382F3C6B590 wrote: Of course.  Why ask?
To me rolling the dice means "Ok lets see what happens." If you pick up Scherzer, one is trying to make something happen not just roll the dice. Only one team can come in first. The Giants got Bryant which helped them maintain First Place.


I see.  No, that's not what I meant.



I meant that the game, itself, is a crapshoot.  And, I know that a lot of folks don't like crapshoots.  I don't, either.



But, they're able to avoid "the crapshoot" by coming out ahead after the 162.  To me, that's more than enough time.



The Giants won fair and square.  They get the advantages.



If we have teams thinking that "just get in" is good enough, that spells trouble. 



I could support a three-game Wild Card Round, but I don't want to cut the 162.



I'm not crying about the Dodgers.  I'm giving the G-men the credit they deserve.  Besides, I like the WOGH game that Wild Cards are.

Waino showing off the glove!

152037373C0537373C3B37520 wrote: Of course.  Why ask?
To me rolling the dice means "Ok lets see what happens." If you pick up Scherzer, one is trying to make something happen not just roll the dice. Only one team can come in first. The Giants got Bryant which helped them maintain First Place.


I see.  No, that's not what I meant.



I meant that the game, itself, is a crapshoot.  And, I know that a lot of folks don't like crapshoots.  I don't, either.



But, they're able to avoid "the crapshoot" by coming out ahead after the 162.  To me, that's more than enough time.



The Giants won fair and square.  They get the advantages.



If we have teams thinking that "just get in" is good enough, that spells trouble. 



I could support a three-game Wild Card Round, but I don't want to cut the 162.



I'm not crying about the Dodgers.  I'm giving the G-men the credit they deserve.  Besides, I like the WOGH game that Wild Cards are.




I think there are two points you are making. One I agree with and the other is more complicated.



Winning should give the advantage. I'm totally with you there. The teams that win the most games should have the advantage. No question.



But I have an issue with "just win the division." The divisions, to some degree, are arbitrary groupings. Win more games than the other teams in your division. Fine. I get that. The division winner should have an advantage. I'm good with that too. However, in the case of this year (like the Pirates previously), the Dodgers won more games than everyone else including the winners of the other arbitrary groupings called divisions. Why do they get screwed when they won more? They proved it over those 162 games.



For me, it comes back to a one game crap shoot (you nailed that one). Anything short of a series is silly considering the nature of baseball.

I'm with you on every point you make.



There are "stronger" divisions every year.  Arguments can be made to make some determinations from time to time, but in 2021, let's face it, the AL- Central was easy (my opinion) compared against the Al- East (maybe others.)



I'd like to find a fair way to allow for that, but with unbalanced schedules, I haven't been able to.



So, I shrug and say that we all know the rules.



The Dodgers "rolled the dice" by having to risk losing the game, even though they won so many more games than the Cards.  That's the tough part.  But, that hardly ever happens.  It doesn't make sense to change things just because of one fluke occurrence.  At least the Dodgers got HFA. 



I don't want to subtract from the 162, so I don't want to add to the WCG.  The season's long enough as it is, and I've grown to enjoy the tension of this one game format.



Except when we lost them, dammit all. 

6A5F4848437A48484344482D0 wrote: I'm with you on every point you make.



There are "stronger" divisions every year.  Arguments can be made to make some determinations from time to time, but in 2021, let's face it, the AL- Central was easy (my opinion) compared against the Al- East (maybe others.)



I'd like to find a fair way to allow for that, but with unbalanced schedules, I haven't been able to.



So, I shrug and say that we all know the rules.



The Dodgers "rolled the dice" by having to risk losing the game, even though they won so many more games than the Cards.  That's the tough part.  But, that hardly ever happens.  It doesn't make sense to change things just because of one fluke occurrence.  At least the Dodgers got HFA. 



I don't want to subtract from the 162, so I don't want to add to the WCG.  The season's long enough as it is, and I've grown to enjoy the tension of this one game format.



Except when we lost them, dammit all. 


Love the last sentence! When it was the Pirates, it sucked really bad. Objectively, it stands in contrast to the integrity of baseball (a long season and post season where you have to go deep). But, geez, it is really entertaining baseball!

Not that this matters any, but just for discussion:



When the Bucs won 98, the Cubs won 97. That's obviously narrow.



The "complaint" about the Dodgers facing the prospect of losing this Winner Takes All game is that they won a million games; the Cardinals won 1,000- a huge gap.



I see that point, but I still think that it's never happened before. It's not worth changing over something that's as rare.