01 Jan 2007 23:17:40
George Grapman
Playoffs against team in your division


The NFL eliminated the rule that teams in the same division can not meet
in the first round of playoffs.
Maybe baseball will take a hint. I see no reason for this rule. If
the wild card and the team with the best record are in the same division
they should meet in the first round.

--
To reply via e-mail please delete 1 c from paccbell


01 Jan 2007 18:34:41
Seapig
Re: Playoffs against team in your division

George Grapman wrote:
> The NFL eliminated the rule that teams in the same division can not meet
> in the first round of playoffs.
> Maybe baseball will take a hint. I see no reason for this rule. If
> the wild card and the team with the best record are in the same division
> they should meet in the first round.

If they change the format to put the wild card team at a greater
disadvantage (only one home game, or something like that), I'll agree
with you. As it stands now, the rule makes sense because it keeps the
two best teams in the league apart in the first round, whether or not
they're in the same division. As often as not, the wild card team is
better than the worst division winner, so playing them in the first
round is no reward for the team with the best record, absent any
enhanced home field advantage.

I believe that the only reason the NFL got rid of the rule is that they
expanded their playoffs to the point where it was impossible to always
keep teams from the same division apart until the conference
championships.



02 Jan 2007 02:39:24
George Grapman
Re: Playoffs against team in your division

Seapig wrote:
> George Grapman wrote:
>> The NFL eliminated the rule that teams in the same division can not meet
>> in the first round of playoffs.
>> Maybe baseball will take a hint. I see no reason for this rule. If
>> the wild card and the team with the best record are in the same division
>> they should meet in the first round.
>
> If they change the format to put the wild card team at a greater
> disadvantage (only one home game, or something like that), I'll agree
> with you. As it stands now, the rule makes sense because it keeps the
> two best teams in the league apart in the first round, whether or not
> they're in the same division. As often as not, the wild card team is
> better than the worst division winner, so playing them in the first
> round is no reward for the team with the best record, absent any
> enhanced home field advantage.
>
> I believe that the only reason the NFL got rid of the rule is that they
> expanded their playoffs to the point where it was impossible to always
> keep teams from the same division apart until the conference
> championships.
>
I could be wrong but I think the NFL has had 12 teams in the playoffs
for a number of years but it was only in the last few years that the
rule was changed.


--
To reply via e-mail please delete 1 c from paccbell


02 Jan 2007 02:47:24
George Grapman
Re: Playoffs against team in your division

P.S. The current baseball format does not guarantee that the team with
the best record faces the team with the worst record.
I would prefer this format:
Team with best record faces team with worst regardless of division.
Wild card only gets 1 home game in opening round and had home field
disadvantage up to and including World Series.
If both wild cards get to the Series advantage is determined by best
regular season record.


--
To reply via e-mail please delete 1 c from paccbell


02 Jan 2007 01:38:03
Seapig
Re: Playoffs against team in your division


George Grapman wrote:
> Seapig wrote:
> > George Grapman wrote:
> >> The NFL eliminated the rule that teams in the same division can not meet
> >> in the first round of playoffs.
> >> Maybe baseball will take a hint. I see no reason for this rule. If
> >> the wild card and the team with the best record are in the same division
> >> they should meet in the first round.
> >
> > If they change the format to put the wild card team at a greater
> > disadvantage (only one home game, or something like that), I'll agree
> > with you. As it stands now, the rule makes sense because it keeps the
> > two best teams in the league apart in the first round, whether or not
> > they're in the same division. As often as not, the wild card team is
> > better than the worst division winner, so playing them in the first
> > round is no reward for the team with the best record, absent any
> > enhanced home field advantage.
> >
> > I believe that the only reason the NFL got rid of the rule is that they
> > expanded their playoffs to the point where it was impossible to always
> > keep teams from the same division apart until the conference
> > championships.
> >
> I could be wrong but I think the NFL has had 12 teams in the playoffs
> for a number of years but it was only in the last few years that the
> rule was changed.

The NFL made the change at the same time they went to 12 teams - the
1990 season. Just to clarify, the rule they changed was that teams
from the same division couldn't meet in the conference semifinals - the
equivalent of the first round of the MLB playoffs, but the second round
of the NFL playoffs. Teams from the same division were always
permitted to play each other in the NFL's wild card round.



02 Jan 2007 01:50:44
Seapig
Re: Playoffs against team in your division


George Grapman wrote:

> Team with best record faces team with worst regardless of division.
> Wild card only gets 1 home game in opening round and had home field
> disadvantage up to and including World Series.

The only problem I see with this is that it could create an incentive
for teams to tank games, when the wild card has a better record than
one or two of the division winners. Unless there's a big difference in
quality between the wild card team and the worst division winner, I
think most teams would rather get the extra home game against the wild
card team than play the team with the worst record. That would give
them a reason to want to avoid having the best overall record. If the
wild card is given some disadvantage in the first round, it should
benefit the team with the best overall record.



02 Jan 2007 12:08:00
Re: Playoffs against team in your division

Seapig <[email protected] > wrote:
> George Grapman wrote:

>> Team with best record faces team with worst regardless of
>> division. Wild card only gets 1 home game in opening round and
>> had home field disadvantage up to and including World Series.

> The only problem I see with this is that it could create an incentive
> for teams to tank games, when the wild card has a better record than
> one or two of the division winners. Unless there's a big difference in
> quality between the wild card team and the worst division winner, I
> think most teams would rather get the extra home game against the wild
> card team than play the team with the worst record. That would give

Why would it matter if a team had an extra game against the wild
card team or have an extra game against the team with the worst
record?

> them a reason to want to avoid having the best overall record. If the
> wild card is given some disadvantage in the first round, it should
> benefit the team with the best overall record.

The team with the best overall record is going to have the extra
game no matter whether the face the wild card team or the last place
team. Where is your brain at today?

In any case, whether a team finishes with the wild card, in first
place, or last place, doesn't indicate in any way how well that team
is playing baseball at the end of the season. So making
generalizations about who has the advantage is silly. The teams
that win the most games, wild card or no, should have the advantage
because they have earned it.

cordially, as always,

rm
--
A statfan, who refused to fly after reading of the alarmingly
high probability that there will be a bomb on any given plane,
realized that the probability of there being two bombs on any given
flight is very low. Now, whenever he flies, he carries a bomb with
him.