The Wild Card Playoff Needs to Change
Since the new wild card one game playoff format began in 2012, we knew this would happen sooner or later. Sure, having two automatic game 7s to start off the season is awesome…if your team isn’t in the game. Or, if your team is the second wild card and otherwise wouldn’t even have a shot at the playoffs. But what if your team is the first wild card? Or what about, in what is starting to look like a great possibility this year, your team has over 100 WINS and has to play in a one game playoff to decide the season? Suddenly, this new system is incredibly flawed.
The first issue with the Wild Card game in general, is having to use your ace, thus taking him out of consideration for game one of the ALDS, which is a severe disadvantage. Suddenly, instead of your best guy going twice in the series, you’re HOPING he gets to go once. More importantly, this year, at the pace we’re going at, both the Yankees and Red Sox are poised to have over 100 wins this season. Yet, the Cleveland Indians are sittin’ pretty at 9 games above .500. The Yankees, currently in the lead for the wild card at 26 games above .500. One of these teams would definitely make the playoffs. Hmmmmmm, makes ya think. Since people are already talking about this, if it does happen that either the Yanks or Sox play in the one game playoff with over 100 wins, I think there will be pushback to change the system. As someone who is a self-proclaimed baseball addict, as well as someone who at roughly a 50% chance to be one of the affected fans, I have several ideas on how to fix this issue. Here we go.
- Go back to the old rules. One wild card. No one game playoff. How much money do they ACTUALLY make in those two extra games? No one that hates baseball puts on the wild card game and goes “yup, look at me, the game I used to find slow and boring had one not slow and boring game, so I am now a fan for life!!!!” The added games just add a little extra fun and money for one game. The benefit of the games will be outweighed by the absolute shit storm coming from the two most volatile fan bases in sports if one of their teams wins 100 games and gets eliminated in a one game playoff because they have to face Verlander or James Paxton. Additionally, in this situation, you still have the divisions mattering. They “say” that with only one wild card, teams don’t care once they clinch a playoff spot, as there’s no incentive. Uhhhh, how about home field advantage and I don’t know, pride? You think the Sox or Yanks will ever just nonchalantly stop caring about the division once they both clinch? It also affects which team you play in the first round. If you have a choice between the Indians and the Astros, personally, I’d like the Indians there.
- Go to the NBA format. Top four teams get in. This is the most fair route but it’ll never happen. The only incentive is really the top spot for home field advantage. If the teams are close, you can’t really try and predict who you’ll play to use that as incentive, the same way you can with divisions. And let’s be real, they’d never eliminate division races, (which by the way, do and HAVE existed since before the wild card playoff! I know, it’s crazy!). It would make divisions moot all together. Rivalries would stick around, I’m sure, but a big part of what makes baseball, baseball, would be gone. Is it the most fair option, with the four truly best teams given a chance for the World Series? Yes. Will it ever happen? Noooooooooooo chance.
- Now for my lil genius idea (my dad said it was smart and he is always unbiased when it comes to his beloved daughter). What if, there was only a wild card playoff if the two teams were within a certain number of games of each other? If the first wild card team is 10 games ahead of the second, it’s a flat out injustice to make them play each other. One of those teams clearly belongs in the playoffs, and one does not. Pick a number, let’s say, 3 games, and if the two teams are within 3 games or less of each other, then the game is played. That will make the wild card race between the top two teams INSANITY. Tell me I’m wrong, you can’t. You get extra excitement between the contending wild card teams, you still get a high likelihood of your lil money maker games, but you add a dose of fairness to the mix, so you don’t punish teams that have had really great seasons.
The thing with baseball is, anything can happen. You can have a shit team make the second wild card, and if they have one ace, they have a shot. Look at the Mets and Degrom. He could easily put up a 0 spot, and all you need is one pitch for Sevy to slip up and give up a bomb. Obviously, the Yanks can’t play the Mets, but I’m just using this as an example of why it shouldn’t come down to one game in baseball. It’s not the same as other sports where the lineup or roster is the same every day.
Out of the three options, my personal choice would be to go back to #1, but in likelihood, the most plausible is probably #3, although with the way the league is currently going, I see Manfred not giving a shit and refusing to change anything.
P.S. The Yankees and Red Sox finally have a common enemy: the wild card game as a potential 100 win team. Will this bond us together? I mean I doubt the league wants to take on the two franchises that a) probably make them the most money and b) have the most insane fans in sports. If there’s anyone I’d want on my side for something like this, it’s Sox fans, because they are absolutely nuts and ruthless. You saw how they acted for deflategate. But that doesn’t mean I like it. Reminds me of how I have to side with people I hate against Trump, like LeBron. STOP MAKING ME SIDE WITH LEBRON, YOU CHEETO CRUSTED OBESITY RIDDEN MARSHMALLOW OF A MAN.
