Change isn’t a bad thing
Assistant News Editor
We are, by human nature, generally resistant to change.
It doesn’t have to be big things — sitting in the same seat every day (in the back of the room, if it’s an early morning class), drinking three cups of coffee every morning along with seven strips of bacon (see how long you can actually manage that).
It’s just natural to fall into habits and there’s honestly nothing wrong with that. But there’s no reason to be resistant to change just for the sake of it.
On Friday, two-time National League Cy Young award winner Tim Lincecum spoke out against Major League Baseball’s plan to add two wild-card teams to the playoffs.
And he sounded like a baby while doing it. At least, a baby well-versed in expletives.
“Nobody wants to have to worry, ‘Oh (expletive), now I’ve got another (expletive) team in the (expletive) mix,” Lincecum told the San Jose Mercury News. “Now we have to worry about what that takes and what they’re going to do. What if the [second] wild-card team is not deserving of getting in?”
Lincecum went on to add that because “the game has been this way for so long,” he can’t understand why MLB Commissioner Bud Selig would want to expand the playoffs.
Maybe because it adds some excitement for the fans? Or maybe it gives a shot to some other teams that are just at the cusp of being a playoff team?
Out of the four major American professional sports leagues, MLB is the only one to move less than 30 percent of its total teams into the playoffs. The NFL advances over 35 percent of its teams to the playoffs, while in the NHL and NBA it’s over 50 percent — which, by the way, makes the plight of the Islanders so much funnier.
It doesn’t surprise me that the two high-profile players who have spoken out against the plan, Lincecum and Yankees first baseman Mark Teixeira, were both in the playoffs last year.
Sure, the San Francisco Giants hadn’t made it to the playoffs too often recently, but Lincecum’s likely still high off the World Series win. Or off something else.
And we all know the Yankees’ record of making it to the playoffs.
I’ll admit, I’m a little biased. I’m still haunted by the Mets’ self-implosion in the last 17 games of the 2007 season. That late-season skid culminated in Tom Glavine getting shellacked for seven runs in the first inning of the final game of the season.
The Mets were knocked out of the playoffs by a single game, and while it is completely and utterly their own fault (and continues to be so), I can’t help but wonder if they might have been able to turn it around had they made it in as a wild-card team.
Though I don’t have a strong opinion about it one way or the other, I would prefer a best-of-3 series for the secondary wild-card teams. I know very well how even the best of pitchers can have that one off day.
I understand concerns about health, wear-and-tear, travel and weather conditions. They are important factors, and from what I’ve read, it sounds like the commissioner is taking them all to mind.
But please, don’t complain about changing history or about a lesser team making it into the playoffs.
Hey Tim, if those new wild-card teams really don’t belong there, you know what to do.
Beat ‘em.
It’s about the money
Sports Editor
Unlike Major League Baseball players or management, I shall stand up and defend the integrity of baseball’s playoffs.
Commissioner Bud Selig’s expanded playoff plan has been rumored for a while now, but I’d always shrugged it off. I knew baseball would never go forward with a plan for the playoffs that involved extra teams, bye-weeks and other ludicrous notions.
Little did I know that MLB would show a blatant disregard for the sanctity of the game and actually approve of such a plan.
OK, so maybe an expanded playoffs wouldn’t actually be the end of the world. I can even applaud part of the theory behind the concept. Ever since the institution of the wild card there have been complaints that there is no disadvantage for not having won the division — other than (usually) having to play the best team in the league. This actually puts the wild card team through an extra few games, theoretically either making them more tired or throwing off their pitching rotation for their second-round matchup.
It also addresses the issue of very good teams having the misfortune to be in strong divisions. The fact that the NL West gets a playoff team every year while the Blue Jays and Rays have to beat both the Yankees and Red Sox just doesn’t quite seem fair. This system still rewards division winners, but allows for more deserving teams to get in.
And yet, despite the positives, I’m not convinced that it’s necessary. There’s always been something special about the fact that only eight teams get to qualify for the playoffs, easily the fewest out of any of the Big Four major sports leagues. While the expansion is only to 10 teams, it feels like the first step in a process that ends in cheapening the value of making the postseason for the sake of money.
It makes sense that owners want to allow more teams to make the postseason. Making the playoffs potentially means more home games that are guaranteed to draw lots of fans. It also adds to a team’s prestige and excites the fan base when a team makes the playoffs, meaning more people buying jerseys and memorabilia, in addition to tickets. For owners, extra opportunities for making the postseason just makes good financial sense.
Maybe it’s naive of me to say this, but I just hate that this move is being made for the sake of making more money. I understand that the Blue Jays want to actually have a chance at the postseason, but it feels like the AL East is the only reason for making this move from a baseball perspective. Otherwise, we haven’t really seen great teams getting left out. Letting an 88-win team in is nice, but it’s hardly necessary. Worse teams qualifying over better ones isn’t ideal, but it’s one of the hazards of the division format. Plus, that’s why we had one wild card in the first place.
As for disincentivizing the wild card, I don’t think that’s all that important either. It’s hard to fault a great team for being second to an even better one. We didn’t punish the 84-win Dodgers in 2007, other than the fact that it worked out that they had to play the best team in the league. Meanwhile, Milwaukee had the second-best record in the league that year, but had to take the wild card spot. Why should they be punished?
So in the end, the only good arguments in favor of expanded playoffs are money and, on a related note, revitalizing fan bases. The thing is, the Blue Jays or Brewers making a few extra dollars just isn’t all that important to me. Is it worth it when we’re promoting mediocrity? Parity in baseball is as strong as ever, even though that side isn’t told very often. Remember, in the past 10 seasons, nine different teams have won the World Series. Everyone loves a Cinderella story, but we’re seeing that story being forced for the sake of business instead of baseball.