Oakland owner: Make 1st round of playoffs 1 game
by kaseyi on Nov 20, 2008 9:33 AM CST
70 comments
Linky
Lew Wolff has a way to shorten baseball’s postseason: Make the first round best-of-one. "I’d make it one-game-and-you’re-out for the first series," the Oakland Athletics owner said Wednesday. "It would be exciting. It would be great."
"I’ve always thought a one-game wild card (playoff) would be a pretty good idea," said Bob DuPuy, MLB’s chief operating officer. "Lew is an imaginative fellow and has a lot of good ideas."
The playoffs are a crapshoot as it is, to make the 1st round only 1 game is unthinkable in my mind.
Kasey
See what old Cubs scorecards looked like at http://cubsbythenumbers.com/scorecards.html
Also, see the Cubs 2009 schedule at http://cubsbythenumbers.com/sched2009.html
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
0 recs |
70 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Well, there's a ridiculous idea.
One game? I can hear the TV networks screaming from here.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
by Al on Nov 20, 2008 9:40 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Not to mention owners to covet
the extra gate of making the playoffs.
But the wind blew me back via Chicago, In the middle of the night
by N Oakley on Nov 20, 2008 9:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
One-Game Wild Card Playoff?
I say no. The playoffs are long enough as they are now. We’ve had one-game wild card playoffs to break ties between the Cubs and Giants in 1998 and the Rockies and Padres in 2007. Having a wild card playoff game when there’s no tie for the wild card is too much. I’ve lost interest in the World Series in recent years because of playoff baseball fatigue. The Cubs’ early exits in the last two postseasons have had a little something to do with that, too.
"The big possum walks late." - Harry Caray
by memphiscub on Nov 20, 2008 11:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is the stupidest thing I've heard this week.
Compared to the NFL and NBA, baseball allows the fewest percentage of teams in its playoffs, plays the most number of regular season games, and plays the fewest percentage of postseason to regular season games. And this idiot wants to SHORTEN the first round? Even Mark Cuban would say something this silly.
Dan
Evey Hammond: Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici. V: By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.
by dtpollitt on Nov 20, 2008 10:00 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
In all fairness (heading OT)...
…I think the percentage of teams that make the playoffs in the NBA is ridiculous. When you have sub-.500 teams making it on a consistent basis, maybe it’s time to raise the bar a bit.
by Flatley on Nov 20, 2008 10:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
There was an Onion piece about this. I may be wrong but it went something along the lines of, “NBA post-season overlaps with beginning of next season.”
NBA playoffs are the only NBA I really watch, so I do enjoy them. However, they also take like a 4 months to complete.
"Prince Fielder Dies Of Inside-The-Park Homerun" - The Onion
by DTJchris on Nov 20, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The biggest problem for me...
is the switch they made to 7 game series in the first round. That’s just too much.
Disagree with Flatley…Sub-.500 teams don’t make the playoffs often; it’s just been recently with the weak East and the powerful West. If anything, I’d forget any conference bias and just take 16 teams with the best records and seed them 1-16.
The 7 game first round series are disgusting. I’d even take two rounds of 5 game series to shorten things up.
Free Ronny Cedeno
by Kansas25 on Nov 20, 2008 11:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you think that's bad... for awhile there in the NHL, 16 out of 21 teams made the playoffs
you really had to suck in order to not make the playoffs back then.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Nov 20, 2008 1:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Too much money involved...
…this won’t go past being a simple suggestion.
by TheHawkRules on Nov 20, 2008 10:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Ridiculous
If shortening the length of time is the issue then why not go back to double headers? Obviously this will not happen, but it would definitely cut the season back into October if managed properly.
by Chuck12570 on Nov 20, 2008 10:09 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think it's an AWESOME idea...
Only I’d tweak it.
5 teams from each league. Two wild cards. Those two teams play in a one-game playoff that takes place IMMEDIATELY after the regular season. Ratings for those games would be fantastic.
Winner gets the team with the best record, regardless of division, for a three-game series.
I’m so sick of this “crapshoot” whining. You play better than the other team, you win. If your pitching isn’t as deep as the other team, then you ain’t better than the other team.
Winner take all gets ratings. Game 7s do better than Game 1s. Duh.
People, you have to understand that playoff baseball is dying. Something has to be done. I’m sick of the whole, “THA—-THAT’S CHANGE! RUN!”
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:14 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
You're right, it is dying and your idea would put the
dirt right on the coffin. Try again.
"Hats for bats.....keep bats warm." - Pedro Cerrano
"Hey bartender, Jobu needs a refill !!!!!!!" - Eddie Harris
by willie mays hayes' gloves on Nov 20, 2008 10:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fine...
Then come up with something else. Status quo is not an option. If ratings continue to tank, baseball will be lucky if the National Geographic Channel offers $10 for the rights.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
A sport that plays 162 games can't eliminate a team in 1 game. It basically renders
the season useless. Anything can happen in one game. A bad bounce or a fluke play. You’re trying to identify a champion and a 1-game playoff is too random. If anything, the first round of playoff should be seven games, not five. Eliminate some of the regular season if you like, but give the teams a chance to let their pitchers pitch at least one game.
"Hats for bats.....keep bats warm." - Pedro Cerrano
"Hey bartender, Jobu needs a refill !!!!!!!" - Eddie Harris
by willie mays hayes' gloves on Nov 20, 2008 10:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The 1998 Giants
And every other team that has been eliminated in a one-game playoff would like to disagree with you.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It was a tie situation
not some team that “qualified” for a one game playoff, different situation.
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
by Grockcubs on Nov 20, 2008 10:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No it's not
By the logic of this board, teams that tie after 162 should play at least a three-game series to determine a winner.
And they want all rounds to be 7 games.
Let’s see if baseball can compete with NFL Thanksgiving for ratings!
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Before 1969 in NL; Best of 3 Playoff Tie Breakers
I think people forget that Bobby Thomson’s famous home run in 1951 was in game 3 of that playoff between the NY Giants and the Brooklyn Dodgers. That was not a one-game playoff.
The SF Giants beat the LA Dodgers 2 games to 1 in a 3-game playoff in 1962 for the NL pennant. In 1959, the LA Dodgers beat the Milwaukee Braves 2 games to 0 in a NL tie break. The Cardinals swept both games of a playoff with the Dodgers in 1946.
In the College World Series, there is now a best of 3 series between the winners of the two separate 4-team double elimination brackets to determine the champion.
"The big possum walks late." - Harry Caray
by memphiscub on Nov 20, 2008 11:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And at some point...
Namely 1969, baseball moved it to a one-game playoff!
Thank God the Internet was only a gleam in Al Gore’s eye back then.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 11:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I am just glad baseball
is different than Football. Nothing else to say.
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
by Grockcubs on Nov 20, 2008 10:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes...the ratings
Are FAR different
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 22, 2008 11:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How Is This Different...
… from game #163? All-or-nothing in one game there, too.
In Hendry We Trust
by initram on Nov 20, 2008 10:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So after
162 game schedule your season boils down to one game, Try again. MLB would rather have so-so ratings in 5 games than good ratings for one. This is all about money, and one game playoff won’t fly.
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
by Grockcubs on Nov 20, 2008 10:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That happens already
If teams are tied after 162, they have a playoff. One pitcher. One game. Fluke, bounce, whatever.
What are the two highest rated sports. The Super Bowl and the Final Four.
Win or go home. That’s what people like. That’s what people want to see.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your examples...
Super Bowl stems from a 16 game regular season. Final Four from a 35 game season. Not comparable.
Free Ronny Cedeno
by Kansas25 on Nov 20, 2008 11:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Also...
Baseball is a very different sport from those others. Imagine if Michael Jordan could only play one of every five games. The Cubs on a Z day are a very different team than the Cubs on a Marquis day. So a single game is not a true measure of a team.
Eamus Ursuli!
by WGNstatic on Nov 20, 2008 1:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Let's fix basketball, too
All games should only be 2 minutes long. Whoever is leading, wins.
For the playoffs, the first team to score a basket wins and it should be a Round Robin tournament where all the playoff teams are present. We could knock out the whole process in about 30 minutes, let the players take a short break, then have the finals, which would revert to the previous 2 minute length.
I mean, if you can’t play good basketball for 2 minutes and score a basket first in the playoffs, then you aren’t better than the other team, right?
by ScottT on Nov 20, 2008 11:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Anybody Remember George Carlin's
idea for a 2-second shot clock in basketball on an HBO special from the mid-1980’s? That was the same special in which he suggested batters should only get one swing and there should be randomly placed landmines in the outfield.
"The big possum walks late." - Harry Caray
by memphiscub on Nov 20, 2008 12:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, you really are DaBard.
Welcome back, buddy.
"I see I'm not the only one around here who can't hold his water." - Last words of the leaky pipe in the visiting team dugout, Dodger Stadium, October 4, 2008.
by dat cubfan daver on Nov 20, 2008 2:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Lew...
… you want to make things more exciting? Maybe you should spend a few bucks to keep your top notch players rather than shipping them off when they get too expensive.
by dmlichte on Nov 20, 2008 10:32 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
He's a nut...
Reduce six months of games to 3 hours of simple dumb luck?
Makes sense for them, as they are rarely competitive enough to beat playoff teams in a regular series. But the rest of the stakeholders would hate it.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 20, 2008 10:35 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Wow...
All it takes is simple dumb luck to win a baseball game.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes Worf...
The likelihood of winning a single baseball game played between two competitive teams is as much luck as talent; maybe more so.
Getting to the playoff isn’t. Winning an extended series isn’t. A game played between a couple of 90 win teams. Yeah.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 20, 2008 10:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So, why do we allow 163rd games?
At some point, teams have to quit their fricking whining and win. Shut up about luck. Shut up about bounces. Shut up about slumps.
Win. And preferably, do it with your mouth shut.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I have no idea what you're talking about..
But it sounds like you’re heading off on a tangent, so I’m going to end this.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 20, 2008 10:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm so sick of teams that lose
Talking about luck.
Screw that. Hit the freaking ball once in a while. It’s amazing how lucky you’ll look when you do.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
is this where we talk about the cubs
having 97 wins, a huge number of runs, five guys who hit more than 20 HRs…
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on Nov 21, 2008 3:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's for ties after 162 games
What do you suggest then, disqualifying both teams? That’s not even remotely the same thing.
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 20, 2008 10:48 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, I LIKE a one-game playoff
But it sounds like, by the logic of this board, we should have a seven-game series between those two teams, to go to another seven-game series in the first round… blah, blah blah BORING!
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Who is even implying that, let alone saying it?
There is sentiment for the first round being best of 7, that’s true. That’s got nothing to do with a tie-breaker scenario.
Wolff’s idea is absurd. You play 162 games over six months to win a playoff spot, which means that it’s a proverbial marathon. Then, you’re out in one game?
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 20, 2008 11:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I will concede
That I am in favor of it for a wild-card round. That rewards the division winners and punishes the teams that win the wild card.
Hence, I’m in favor of a fifth team. Two wild cards play one-game playoffs and screw up their rotations while the division winners get rewarded with rest. At some point, you DON’T deserve to have your rotation in order. Teams that clinch early should get a benefit.
No one has said it, but the implication is there. Somehow, a 163rd game is OK, but a one-game playoff is bad? That doesn’t jibe.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 11:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Where is the implcation?
Where?
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 20, 2008 11:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Here
162 game schedule your season boils down to one game, Try again.
Anything can happen in one game. A bad bounce or a fluke play. You’re trying to identify a champion and a 1-game playoff is too random.
Reduce six months of games to 3 hours of simple dumb luck?
You done haggling?
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 11:31 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
For some reason
You’ve made the choice to not separate the opinions about the actual playoffs from those of tiebreaker games to see who gets into the playoffs.
I haven’t seen anyone here indicate a desire to have a regular season tie end with a series to determine who gets into the playoffs.
The 163rd game is an extension of the regular season and does not count as a post season game.
by ScottT on Nov 20, 2008 11:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's just semantics
You have to win that game to get into the playoffs, right? It’s winner move on, loser go home, correct?
You are still boiling down the entire season to one game. Wouldn’t it be more fair to make it a three-game series?
Of course it would be more fair, but it wouldn’t draw as well.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 11:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm done talking to you, that's for sure
Your combative attitude sucks.
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 21, 2008 8:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Is that what he meant?
Worf, we don’t allow anything. I was confused by what you meant.
Listen, baseball plays 162 games — yes, probably too many — with the understanding that a group of dominant teams will surface by the end of the season. Because yes, over the course of a season it’s more a function of talent. Luck may go your way, or against you at various points, but your talent will tell the tale over a six month campaign.
If teams haven’t been able to do that at the end of the season, then you’re forced into very short playoffs, where yes, luck is going to play a MUCH bigger role in your success.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 20, 2008 10:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But that's the way in every single sport...
Well, except pro basketball.
In football, you play 16 games to enter a single-elimination tournament. In college basketball, you play 35-40 games to enter a single-elimination tournament.
At some point, you have to win over the longhaul AND the shorthaul. It’s been like that for more than 100 years.
I’m also a believer that luck doesn’t just happen. Only injuries and bad ump calls can be considered out of a team’s control. Everything else, I argue, is success or failure.
Wind blown pop-ups can still be caught. So can tricky ground balls. Field conditions are the same for both teams.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 10:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, football is 16 games. Baseball is 162.
I trust you can see the difference —
The NFL playoffs mirror the season much more closely than the MLB playoffs. A one-game playoff round would increase that disparity even more.
If you want to make the MLB season 80 games over the same span, then a one-game round makes more sense — because a team is more likely to use it’s ace more often.
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 20, 2008 11:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Where is it written?
That a team has the right to use its ace? If you don’t clinch until the last day of the regular season and you have to use your ace to do it, then you didn’t have a good enough marathon.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 11:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The RIGHT?!?!
Why don’t they have the RIGHT? They can use whoever they please!
What I said was, they would be more LIKELY to use their ace. I’d assumed you’d be able to infer that my statement about the off days made that possible. However, seeing how you twisted what I said, I realize that I should have assumed nothing.
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 20, 2008 11:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Stop screaming
You look shrill
A team earns the right to use its ace by clinching early. I’d rather reward those teams.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 11:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Evidently...
You’ve never ran a marathon, as yes, it takes just about everything that you’ve left in the tank to finish the last quarter or so. You’re just trying to suck it up, and make it to the line. Any race you finish is good enough.
But back to baseball..what can I say? College sports is 30 games played once or twice a week over a four-month season. Football is 16 games played once a week over four months. For them, single game playoffs may make sense.
For baseball — basically played daily for six months — no one is interested in having it decided by a single game. You won’t find one stakeholder seriously discussing it. Not the fans. Not the networks. Not the owners. Not the MLBPA. Just one kooky owner, who probably threw it out there tongue in cheek.
And for the record, the other sports that you’ve mentioned have a much more significant space between the best and the worst playoff teams, especially in the early rounds. I think you’d find LDS opponents to be much more closely matched generally, which takes us back to the luck part, at least in a single game playoff as you describe.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 20, 2008 11:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The Kenyans would disagree
They want to win. Isn’t that the point? I don’t give credit to the Royals or Pirates for finishing their season. They don’t get cookies. The point is to win, not to finish.
No one is saying decide “it” by a single game. They are saying decide the first round by a single game. The LCS and World Series are still seven-gamers.
The more I think about this, the more I like it.
162-game season — Marathon
One-game playoff — Sprint
Win 8 of 14 to finish — Medium race
The team that survives that is the best all-around team. They can win long, short and medium
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 11:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I never thought...
Blue Mike would become the second most belligerent and opinionated poster on BCB.
Free Ronny Cedeno
by Kansas25 on Nov 20, 2008 11:23 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Haven't you heard?
I AM BlueMike. And DaBard. And every other poster you disagree with.
The worst beer I had was pretty good.
by Worf on Nov 20, 2008 11:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Of course Oakland would want this
When you aren’t willing/able to spend the same amount of dough as other teams, of course you would want to keep the series as short as possible. The longer a series goes, the better chance a deeper team has to prove they are better.
Also to be fair, Wolff went on to say that he hadn’t mentioned it to Bud and was quote as laughing as he said it. I’m not sure how serious he was about this proposal, remember print media can’t be trusted anymore.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
by cubswynn on Nov 20, 2008 11:45 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
That's about what I figured...
thanks.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 20, 2008 12:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Want to reduce the postseason schedule?
Stop kowtowing to Fox. Play day games. Put the emphasis on the games, not the TV. People will find a way to watch the games they want to watch. The number of people who watch every single playoff game is probably minimal, so there is really no reason to stretch them out so much.
In the middle of a good time, Truth gave me her icy kiss. Look around, you must be joking. All that way, all that way for this? -Oysterband
by Ross on Nov 20, 2008 11:59 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
They won't play too many day games.
But I do suspect that the schedule will be tightened up next year — Bud heard too many complaints about all the off days, and with the season ending later, the chance of bad weather in early November is heightened.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
by Al on Nov 20, 2008 1:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
JFTR I watched every single playoff game.
Tommie Agee was out.
"This field, this game, is a part of our past. It reminds us of all that was once good, and it could be good again." TM
by Weeghman Park on Nov 23, 2008 9:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
well the A's are my second favorite team...
so normally I wouldn’t want to talk ish about them/their owner, but….what an ABSOLUTELY STUPID IDEA.
by WUSTLCubsFan on Nov 20, 2008 12:35 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
They don't want to let Mark Cuban buy a team...
…yet this DB already has one? How did that happen?!
I’d be okay with a 1 game series if we used the Olympics’ rule about extra innings, with the free baserunners and all that.
by znohitter on Nov 20, 2008 12:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think
the first round SHOULD be 7 games.
Dodgers fans might disagree, tho. :D
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on Nov 21, 2008 3:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
If the Cubs had won the first round....
… you wouldn’t be saying this.
Sounds like sour grapes when you say it that way.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
by Al on Nov 22, 2008 1:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I was listening to Sporting News Radio the night of this comment,
and they happened to have Billy Beane on the show. Even Beane did not take his owner’s comments seriously, although he was diplomatic about them.
Maybe MLB should consider expanding the rosters and getting rid of the off days during the regular season if this is such a critical issue? Who gives a rat’s behind if a game was rained out and it was cold? Maybe we should have all teams above the Mason Dixon line play all of their home games in Hawaii in April so the fans can be comfortable? Or how about telling all of the ticket holders of MLB comps at the WS to suck it up?
by DudeVf11 on Nov 22, 2008 12:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
