Someone in the NL West will probably do it next year... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989
And if the 1994 season had played out, then the Rangers might've won with like 78 wins.
Printable View
Someone in the NL West will probably do it next year... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989
And if the 1994 season had played out, then the Rangers might've won with like 78 wins.
Cardinals in 2006 for example. baybe the teams in the division just beat the crap out of each other and thats why records are so crummy.
And also... the idea is not to shoot to get the division... its to get the woldcard... there was even talk of giving the team with the wildcard only 1 home game just to force teams to REALLY push for the division. I am not for or against the that idea...
However I am STRONGLY opposed to giving a WC team a home field advantage.
we've been saying that for 2 years... :pQuote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
unless they are the "Braves" :DQuote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
:p even then mr smarty pants :p.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
My only thought on that then is that it does not give an advantage to the best team if they dont play the wild card winner... you would have to make it so ALWAYS the best team got the 4 home games
Why so much hate for the Wild Card teams here?
I think the Wild Card team being penalized makes sense, in an ideal structure, where all three divisions were equal and balanced. But they aren't. Some have 6 teams, some have 4. Some are big-budget, others microscopic. So it's an ideal solution, that works in theory...and may be the best thing going.
The problem is when a team owns its division, and has 100 wins...but is in a very weak division, say a 4-team division, with one bad team, one sub-par team with bad GMing, and one low-cost team that sells off their big pieces and gives up on the season (::cough:: AL West ::cough::). It's unfair, if the wid card comes out of a tougher division, with a few less wins.
Or even MORE wins, via wildcard, in a tougher division. That is truly a shame. Times like those, I don't know if the rules make sense; but the way they currently are, every division winner is first-class, and wild card squeezes in coach. Perhaps when divisions are evenly aligned it will be more fair.
Looking at the wildcard WS wins, and appearances, it doesn't appear to set them back all that much, however.
What is far, far more unfair than the WC "mistreatment", is the division alignment, as AOW alluded to. In most divisions, a team has to compete against 4 opponents for the division crown. Yet, in the AL West, any team has to compete against just 3 opponents. Further, in the NL Central, you would have to compete against 5 other teams. Clearly, the deck is stacked against all NL Central teams, and the AL West is somewhat of a joke. This is extremely unfair, and there is really no good reason for it.
If the wild card winner were 25 games better than the division winner (like some people are saying) than the Wild Card winner should win the series even if they don't have home field.
Exactly. It might still be "unfair" that they don't get home field, but a team that much better than the division winner should easily win the series, and if they don't, the lack of home field would probably be the last reason they lost it.Quote:
Originally Posted by skudplayr
Good point. The home field advantage is smaller in MLB than in the other major sports 9football, basketball), much smaller, historically. If one team is so much better, they should win the series anyway.
WC appearances in WS
2007 COL
2006 DET
2005 HOU
2004 BOS
2003 FLA
2002 ANA + SFG
2001 none
2000 NYM
Bold indicates WS Champ
It DEFINATLY has not hurt them as it is now
It's pretty incredible that each of the last 6 World Series, and all but one this decade, featured a Wild Card team.
They should really realign to 4 divisions in each league, anyway...
and what add 2 more teams???