ajzepp Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 This is what I'm getting at with the regular season thing. I think people who are arguing your side are not big MLB fans, as you just admitted. It seems like a lot of people are just finding out about this now, from the way I'm reading this. I love baseball more than any sport. I am dialed into it from Opening Day to when games don't matter anymore, which for the Yankees was usually early September. Now this year, and I think most years, they mattered right till the last game. BTW, I used to just be a postseason fan - always thought it was the best thing in sports. But, for the past decade, I have really got into every game. I would have thought like you guys, and I actually did when I first heard it, if I was still that way. Traditionalists love the pennant race, and now I know why. This September was so cool - when every single night there were two games you were keenly into. Yanks and O's game. Every single game was huge! And, no Bob Costas was WAY AGAINST the wild card when it came into being in the mid 90s. He's all about the pennant race. Okay, well neither of you guys addressed my point about strength of schedule. How can you say that the division winners are clearly the most deserving when teams don't face 100% common opponents, especially with inter-league play? Seems to me the deck is stacked from the get-go. The 2nd place team in a division could have faced a tougher road along the way, and if they finish only a few games behind the division winner it could easily be argued that they were just as deserving as the 1st place team. Seems to me that the wild card format - the way it was prior to this season - accounted for that by giving a chance to offset any advantages that may exist from the start of the season d/t tougher/weaker strength of schedule.
gomper Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 awesome!!!! my Giants and the A's force the issue. Go bay area!!!!!!!!!!
bbb Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 It's baseball - not football. The Yankees had the best record in the American League with a .586 winning percentage. You know what that would give you in the NFL - 9.376 wins out of 16. Best team in the league! MLB teams play college teams in spring training. If you think strengh of schedule with a few different games (I bet at least 150 of their games are the same opponents, etc. - probably more) matters in a 162 game schedule (162 games - Jeez!), I would beg to differ.
ajzepp Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 It's baseball - not football. The Yankees had the best record in the American League with a .586 winning percentage. You know what that would give you in the NFL - 9.376 wins out of 16. Best team in the league! MLB teams play college teams in spring training. If you think strengh of schedule with a few different games (I bet at least 150 of their games are the same opponents, etc. - probably more) matters in a 162 game schedule (162 games - Jeez!), I would beg to differ. That makes no sense. You say you want the regular season to have it's importance restored, but then you say 10-12 games against potentially a stronger opponent than another team in the division wouldn't be that big of a deal? C'mon, man lol
bbb Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 How are they contradictory? You are overrating strength of schedule in baseball. How many games are we even talking about? You're the one talking all about fairness. I never even brought it up. You want perfect justice, apparently. I want a pennant race in September.
ajzepp Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) How are they contradictory? You are overrating strength of schedule in baseball. How many games are we even talking about? You're the one talking all about fairness. I never even brought it up. You want perfect justice, apparently. I want a pennant race in September. You have been saying that the division winner is more deserving than a WC team, and that the WC team should be at a disadvantage in terms of how the playoffs are carried out. I'm saying that unless you have common opponents, as there was prior to inter-league play, strength of schedule will mean that some teams will be at a disadvantage in their pursuit of that first place finish in the division. So if you have a tight divisional race that comes down to a few games, one team having to play a series, or a few series', against a stronger team could be the difference in where they finish in the end. Having the WC format the way it was prior to this year sort of accounted for that cause it gave a 2nd place team the opportunity to still earn a post season bid. I liked that, personally. So my point is that if you're wanting the regular season race to take on greater importance, it would seem to make the most sense to ensure that each team in the division will face the exact same opponents as every other team...like it used to be. If the Braves finish a couple games back of the Nats by the end of the reg season, but the braves had to play a series against the Yankees and the Orioles, whereas the Nats had to play (insert sucky team names here), that's not exactly kosher. I dunno, we can agree to disagree. I may not be as big a fan of MLB as you are, but I've watched and played the game for most of my 40 years. This is all just my opinion, but I really thought it was better the way it was. Edited October 11, 2012 by ajzepp
Maury Ballstein Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 Let's go giants. Matt Cain on the bump for the comeback please.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 What a couple days for the Bay Area, huh? How much of a shot does A's magic have against Verlander tonight?
Ramius Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 What a couple days for the Bay Area, huh? How much of a shot does A's magic have against Verlander tonight? Verlander is great and scares me, but strange things have been happening at the coliseum this year. The A's literally feel like they cant lose at home.
NoSaint Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) This is what I'm getting at with the regular season thing. I think people who are arguing your side are not big MLB fans, as you just admitted. It seems like a lot of people are just finding out about this now, from the way I'm reading this. I love baseball more than any sport. I am dialed into it from Opening Day to when games don't matter anymore, which for the Yankees was usually early September. Now this year, and I think most years, they mattered right till the last game. BTW, I used to just be a postseason fan - always thought it was the best thing in sports. But, for the past decade, I have really got into every game. I would have thought like you guys, and I actually did when I first heard it, if I was still that way. Traditionalists love the pennant race, and now I know why. This September was so cool - when every single night there were two games you were keenly into. Yanks and O's game. Every single game was huge! And, no Bob Costas was WAY AGAINST the wild card when it came into being in the mid 90s. He's all about the pennant race. Unbelievable - with what he did the last few weeks of the season, he's as clutch as anybody I've seen. And, more clutch than any pitch hitter I can ever remember. honestly, im not a huge, watch every game fan of baseball - but generally i dont mind teams earning the right to coast a bit. i know this is an issue hotly discussed in the nfl too (how to make late december games matter more) and i dont really buy into the manufacturing of drama for tv ratings. which this ultimately is. baseball is a long haul sport - its a huge regular season with long series in the playoffs. i like to keep that spirit of it being a marathon not a sprint as thats what teams are built for - even if it can cause some weeks that could be dull at the end of the season. i get the flip side of the argument, just not one i personally side with. definitely not upset about it either way. as a casual fan, it doesnt effect me much. Edited October 11, 2012 by NoSaint
Chef Jim Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 Verlander is great and scares me, but strange things have been happening at the coliseum this year. The A's literally feel like they cant lose at home. Strange things? Kind of like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-PC35GGXh0
Mark Vader Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 WOOHOO!!! Giants Advance! What a comeback after being down 2-0 in the series.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 WOOHOO!!! Giants Advance! What a comeback after being down 2-0 in the series. If you were to build a franchise around one player, Buster Posey would have to be in the conversation. I'd personally pick Trout, but Posey is just a stud.
Maury Ballstein Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 Posey has been amazing this year.....I don't think postseason factors into the regular season MVP but wow, that grand slam was crucial MVPosey as the SFG social media says. Honorable mention to Brandon Crawford looking like Ozzie or a young Jeter with the glove at SS.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) Girardi will manage tonight after the death of his father earlier today. EDIT: Apparently he died on Saturday. Edited October 11, 2012 by SageAgainstTheMachine
bbb Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 You have been saying that the division winner is more deserving than a WC team, and that the WC team should be at a disadvantage in terms of how the playoffs are carried out. I'm saying that unless you have common opponents, as there was prior to inter-league play, strength of schedule will mean that some teams will be at a disadvantage in their pursuit of that first place finish in the division. So if you have a tight divisional race that comes down to a few games, one team having to play a series, or a few series', against a stronger team could be the difference in where they finish in the end. Having the WC format the way it was prior to this year sort of accounted for that cause it gave a 2nd place team the opportunity to still earn a post season bid. I liked that, personally. So my point is that if you're wanting the regular season race to take on greater importance, it would seem to make the most sense to ensure that each team in the division will face the exact same opponents as every other team...like it used to be. If the Braves finish a couple games back of the Nats by the end of the reg season, but the braves had to play a series against the Yankees and the Orioles, whereas the Nats had to play (insert sucky team names here), that's not exactly kosher. I dunno, we can agree to disagree. I may not be as big a fan of MLB as you are, but I've watched and played the game for most of my 40 years. This is all just my opinion, but I really thought it was better the way it was. I don't think you understand anything that I'm saying. I don't care about all this equality that you do. I care that the regular season matters a lot. They shouldn't play 162 games without the stakes being very high. The stakes were so much higher this year - win your division or face a game elimination game. I love college football for the same reason. The regular season means so much. Don't lose a game! And, none of them have equal schedules. Do I care? No. I used to love college basketball. Now, there are only 3-4 weeks that matter and they are in March. The regular season means nothing - for any of the big programs - they'll all be in the tourney. Ticket sales are through the roof in March and they are so light now for the regular season. There is no device made that can measure how little I care about regular season hockey and NBA games. 82 games and 16 teams make the playoffs. Give me a break! To sum up - I don't care about the fairness that you seem to - I care about making all the games matter. For the same reason, I have given away my preseason Bills tickets to all but 5 games in 27 years as a season ticket holder. I will not watch games that don't matter.
ajzepp Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 I don't think you understand anything that I'm saying. I don't care about all this equality that you do. I care that the regular season matters a lot. They shouldn't play 162 games without the stakes being very high. The stakes were so much higher this year - win your division or face a game elimination game. I love college football for the same reason. The regular season means so much. Don't lose a game! And, none of them have equal schedules. Do I care? No. I used to love college basketball. Now, there are only 3-4 weeks that matter and they are in March. The regular season means nothing - for any of the big programs - they'll all be in the tourney. Ticket sales are through the roof in March and they are so light now for the regular season. There is no device made that can measure how little I care about regular season hockey and NBA games. 82 games and 16 teams make the playoffs. Give me a break! To sum up - I don't care about the fairness that you seem to - I care about making all the games matter. For the same reason, I have given away my preseason Bills tickets to all but 5 games in 27 years as a season ticket holder. I will not watch games that don't matter. I understand exactly what you're saying....we just see it differently. The part I took you to task on specifically was when you said on the one hand you wanted the regular season to take on greater meaning again, and then when responding to my point about the unbalanced schedule you say that the 10-12 games that are different don't really matter. That sort of seems like a disconnect for me. As for college football, most people I know hate the way it's structured...that's exactly why there has been so much push for a playoff. Either way, we just see it differently...
Chef Jim Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 I don't think you understand anything that I'm saying. I don't care about all this equality that you do. I care that the regular season matters a lot. They shouldn't play 162 games without the stakes being very high. The stakes were so much higher this year - win your division or face a game elimination game. So win your division or the one wild card or you're playing golf isn't high stakes?? Sounds like higher stakes to me. How can allowing more teams into the playoffs raise the stakes?
bbb Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) How many times do I have to explain it. Almost every year in the last decade or so, the Sox and Yanks were both going to make the playoffs. There wasn't enough of a difference between the div winner and the WC, so nobody cared what they actually got.........And, the Yanks were even accused of trying to get the wild card instead of the division championship because they matched up better with whoever was the #1 seed. Now it really does matter who is a CHAMPION and who is a wild card. Regular season matters - you should be a champion! But, even if you're not, it kept a lot more people interested because their teams had a shot at the wild card. You still would want that over not being in the playoffs, just ask the Cards and O's who are still playing, despite being the 2nd wild cards. The NFL had the same format for years. 3 division CHAMPIONS got a rest while the two wild card teams had to play. I still like that better than today's format. Just admit you're wrong, bbb. You love that ridiculous sport of soccer. I have heard that the regular season champs in those Euro leagues are celebrated as much, if not more, than the playoff champions. Is that true? If so, I would think you'd give more creedance to winning a regular season championship Edited October 11, 2012 by bbb
Recommended Posts