Traditions to be Axed & Kept

[Matthias]

So are you in favor of the wildcard or not? I understand and agree with your statement that more teams don't necessarily make it more exciting, but too few (i.e. pre-wildcard) penalizes worthy teams that did in fact do well enough in the regular season to qualify (e.g. a 97 win team in one division being excluded while an 81 win team from the other division makes it in). I think the wild-card is the perfect mix - 25% of the teams make it in and the wildcard chase is very exciting. Obviously the division races are not always as important, but its a worthwhile sacrifice.

Not really. I like the divisions to mean something. Given that there are three divisions, the options become:
(1) Give one team a bye the first round of the playoffs.
Analysis: Not going to happen. Too much of complications of impact of layoffs and forfeits a money-making playoff series for the MLB.
(2) Reorganize the divisions back into two: East and West. Maybe I'm a curmudgeon (well, I am), but I like this one. It's simple, it's clean, and it makes the divisions interesting again. But, it won't happen: eliminates all the WC speculation and a playoff round.
(3) Reorganize the divisions into four ala' the NFL: May as well. Try to make some more geographic sense out of the divisions that exist. Maintains the # of playoff rounds which would keep MLB and the networks happy. Puts the importance back on your division and not pulling for an out-of-division game b/c it puts your divisional rival in or out of the playoffs.

But even if you're for it, the argument that you should have it b/c some teams are deserving isn't a good one for the reason I pointed out above.

[arsxfc]

It can be nice to watch teams you haven't seen before but I'd rather avoid actually playing the Angels, Sox, Tigers, Indians, or Yankees until the World Series. Having 9 games against any of the 5 AL powerhouses affecting my team's NL standings when the competition had a easier luck of the draw would be frustrating.

That statement above is exactly why interleague play has no validity to being a part of scheduling...if you are the National League team that crosses over and has to play the yankees and Red Sox, then end up losing the WILD CARD by one game to a team from the other division...it can't be equitable,; therefore it should be eliminated...it served its purpose by getting people interested in baseball again...last I looked, interest level is pretty high...

I hate the DH rule, I like the strategy involved with Pitchers hitting or not. Just call me old school, plus I hate that strictly DHs get all star votes....

[bigh0rt]

Welcome to the Cafe -- we just recently rehashed the DH discussion... probably back a few pages in this very forum. check it out.

[moochman]

On wild cards: Can't put the genie back into the bottle. The wild card has been a huge success and has kept post season dreams alive for many cities that would have otherwise called up rookies to look at for next season. Which would you rather see: a team in a playoff push, or one that has thrown in the towel?

On Interleague play: I would love to see the amount of interleague play pared back. In Detroit we have no real national league rivalry..well except for the D-Backs , but I could live with playing the Reds or Cards. Problem is that cross-town rivals like the Sox/Cubs or Mets/Yanks are too easy a sell, so I can't see this gimmick being eliminated altogether. But they could reduce the number of games.

On the DH: it's not a tradition and it's not going anywhere. Being from an AL town I sure don't relish the idea of watching some pitcher try and lay down a bunt between Ks.

On the all-star game: They need a change. I think the best thing they could do would be to forget about going to northern outdoor stadiums and play in domes or warm weather sites. This is needed becuase they need to move the all-star game to just before opening day. Think about it. Who wouldn't be thirsting for baseball and seeing the best in the game? It would work out for the players as well, since they only have to play a few innings, and pitchers only have to throw an inning or two. Would be a great tune up for players and a great way to kick off the season. You can always stage another mid-season party to have the HR contest and other crap, but I love the idea of the all-star game meaning something becuase people want to watch it. And do away from letting the game decide home field advantage. Silly. Every team representation needs to go away too. Let the teams who refuse to scout, draft, and sign great talent suffer the slings from their frustrated fan bases.

On trading draft picks: Yes. Make them tradable and set up a salary structure. Deal with the PA on this, but git er done. We cannot continue to see teams fail to compete becuase they can't afford to stock their team.

On post-season starting times: When they expanded the playoffs they should have shortened the season. Playing your most important ball in weather that is least conductive to better play isn't the best way to determine champs.

[Grounded Polo]

What baseball does right, and the NBA does wrong, is make it very difficult to make the post-season. More teams making the playoffs doesn't make it more exciting: it just makes it more dilutive. More teams have a chance? They all have a chance: they all play in the regular season. The only thing more playoff series does is put more $$ in the MLB coffers (which is why it was a Bud idea) and make it so that almost all of the, "post-season" counting records are owned by modern-day players.

The problem with basketball is the playoffs drag on for way too long. Of course, it could be shortened by cutting it down to 6 teams each but making every series 5 games until the finals would make more sense. It's hard to say any of the 10 teams in the West don't deserve a shot at the playoffs but there probably hasn't been a year when one conference was so dominant.

I don't have a problem with baseball's playoff structure because it's not a 10 week odyssey, it's only takes around a month to decide a champion, same with football. It doesn't drag out long enough for fans to lose interest after the first round until the finals.

[MTUCache]

The problem with basketball is the playoffs drag on for way too long. Of course, it could be shortened by cutting it down to 6 teams each but making every series 5 games until the finals would make more sense. It's hard to say any of the 10 teams in the West don't deserve a shot at the playoffs but there probably hasn't been a year when one conference was so dominant.

I don't have a problem with baseball's playoff structure because it's not a 10 week odyssey, it's only takes around a month to decide a champion, same with football. It doesn't drag out long enough for fans to lose interest after the first round until the finals.

Actually the lengthy hockey/basketball playoffs make it quite easy for Detroit sports fans... everybody buys their season tickets and gives them away/sells them to clients, friends, and kids, and just waits around for the post-season to start before they even start caring. I can honestly tell you that I haven't watched more than a dozen regular season Redwings games in the past five years combined. Probably less than 20 for the Pistons. It became obvious in those two sports about a decade ago that the regular season means absolutely nothing, and they're not even worth paying attention to until spring.

Don't know how it works in other winter-sports cities, where they don't know if they're team is going to get into the playoffs or not, but here in Detroit we don't even care what seed we end up with anymore... half the "fans" don't even start watching until we make it to the Conference Finals.