Saw this tweet. Apparently a large majority of owners have asked Manfred to keep the 16 game playoffs.

I would not like that, for 60 games the expanded playoffs are great but 162 games are going to be awfully long. Also it makes winning the division worthless, maybe at least you can give the top seeds a bye week like in football. Or you do away with divisions and do it  like in nba.

 

 

Gross. If they go this route, they better make the season 140 games. And they HAVE to make it 3 division winners get top 3 seeds and everyone else is based on W/L. This top 2 of each division makes every playoffs a potential disaster for the higher seeds. Unfortunately the TV revenue is going to drive this decision. 

Ugh. They just can’t leave well enough alone, can they?

Its not up to them. CBA expires after 2021 and union agreed to it just for 2020 only to preserve negotiating leverage.

3 minutes ago, asindc said:

Ugh. They just can’t leave well enough alone, can they?

In case you haven't seen the ratings for baseball compared to the NFL and NBA, there is no well enough to leave alone.

This was inevitable; not even sure why people thought otherwise. Once they made the change, they were never going back.

I hope they make a change to the first round obviously. It would be laughable to play 162 games and then lose to an under .500 team in a 3 game series.

I think it's likely they make that change and give some kind of reward to the division winners or top seeds but I just don't know how.

Edited September 16, 20205 yr by Look at Ray Ray Run

I like it if they make it “Pick your opponent” before each round.  That selection show would be the most-watched thing every time...and all the shit talking that stems from every pick, every round, every year.   And that turns into REAL rivalries carrying over into the following year.  Potential for greatness. 
 

 

Edited September 16, 20205 yr by Jerksticks

I could get on board with 12 playoff teams.  Three division winners, then the next three best records regardless of division.  And you can't play a team in your division in the first round.

But yeah, 16 is too many.

Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

This was inevitable; not even sure why people thought otherwise. Once they made the change, they were never going back.

I hope they make a change to the first round obviously. It would be laughable to play 162 games and then lose to an under .500 team in a 3 game series.

 

Many times it's whose playing best at the time. Especially in baseball where the under .500 team may have been missing a TOR starter for part of the year.

In order to fit this in, won't they have to shorten the season a bit?  I can't imagine they want to be going into November every year with some of the weather in certain cities (like ours), but they can't play every October with zero days off.  

Seems like a no brainer from an ownership standpoint

 

Although, from an ownership standpoint, the best options are 

1) No playoffs

2) Playoffs with everyone in

Edited September 16, 20205 yr by Madrigal Mystery Tour

Already posted about this in the other thread, but hopefully the players realize this is bad for them other than getting a postseason participation ribbon more often. Hope it doesn’t happen. 

7 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

In order to fit this in, won't they have to shorten the season a bit?  I can't imagine they want to be going into November every year with some of the weather in certain cities (like ours), but they can't play every October with zero days off.  

You would think so.

Just want to say that many of us called this when the expanded playoffs was announced for this season. I even said that in a vacuum I was fine with it for 2020 but I was against it because it wasn't going to go away.

The owners are nothing if not predictable - if it makes them more money, they'll do it. They might not do it right away if its bad for the sport, but they'll always get there in the end. 

3 minutes ago, flavum said:

Already posted about this in the other thread, but hopefully the players realize this is bad for them other than getting a postseason participation ribbon more often. Hope it doesn’t happen. 

I don't see how its bad for players. If they shorten the season, the ones who don't make the playoffs get paid for less work. Those hat makes the playoffs get a share of playoff money.

8 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I don't see how its bad for players. If they shorten the season, the ones who don't make the playoffs get paid for less work. Those hat makes the playoffs get a share of playoff money.

Less pay for more games is what it boils down to for most players on the pay scale.

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Less pay for more games is what it boils down to for most players on the pay scale.

Where would the more games come from? Unless they dont shorten the season.

Just now, ptatc said:

Where would the more games come from? Unless they dont shorten the season.

Most players make less for the playoffs than the do the regular season, especially as you get deeper into the playoffs.  it is just more money for the owners who are paying their star players a fraction of what they usually make.

Just now, southsider2k5 said:

Most players make less for the playoffs than the do the regular season, especially as you get deeper into the playoffs.  it is just more money for the owners who are paying their star players a fraction of what they usually make.

Right but if they shorten the season,  the players will make more for fewer games. Only the players who advance to the world series will actually play more games than the current system.

If you look at the standings, teams are actually trying and there isn't this large amount of under .500 unworthy teams. The quality of baseball has improved significantly. Now, if you do this, top 3 seeds should get byes and the other seeds play a winner takes all tournament for the 4th seed.  

1 hour ago, Dominikk85 said:

Saw this tweet. Apparently a large majority of owners have asked Manfred to keep the 16 game playoffs.

I would not like that, for 60 games the expanded playoffs are great but 162 games are going to be awfully long. Also it makes winning the division worthless, maybe at least you can give the top seeds a bye week like in football. Or you do away with divisions and do it  like in nba.

 

 

16 seems like a lot - I think an in-between approach between the old and new would make more sense, however in general expanded playoffs with shorter regular season is what I would like to see. 

7 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

If you look at the standings, teams are actually trying and there isn't this large amount of under .500 unworthy teams. The quality of baseball has improved significantly. Now, if you do this, top 3 seeds should get byes and the other seeds play a winner takes all tournament for the 4th seed.  

This is really a key point.  

12 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Most players make less for the playoffs than the do the regular season, especially as you get deeper into the playoffs.  it is just more money for the owners who are paying their star players a fraction of what they usually make.

The owners are just switching out regular season money for post-season money.  Net net same money to go around to players with potentially slightly less average games.  Now I'm sure there will be a massive discussion between owners & union on this exact point - but eventually that is how it should work out.  

9 minutes ago, SonofaRoache said:

If you look at the standings, teams are actually trying and there isn't this large amount of under .500 unworthy teams. The quality of baseball has improved significantly. Now, if you do this, top 3 seeds should get byes and the other seeds play a winner takes all tournament for the 4th seed.  

You could do it where you have as many as 8 teams - but if you don't hit .500 or this or that - than only 6 teams get in and the top 2 teams get automatic byes because 7/8 seeds don't qualify.  

3 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

This is really a key point.  

Dan Szymborski argues otherwise. 

He claims Front offices will only put together 80-85 win teams from this point forward, because now that it's so easy to get in, there's no incentive to improve from an 80-85 win team to a 90 win team. 

Not only does he claim it, he has claimed that front offices contact him for his analysis just for things like this. He's an industry insider and he knows how it thinks as a sabr guy. 

Edited September 16, 20205 yr by Jack Parkman