Jump to content

2012 MLB Season


GriffinM6

Recommended Posts

Its just another example of why this second Wild Card is such a bad idea. We could have a tiebreaker between two teams for the right to play another tiebreaker for the right to play yet another tiebreaker. And part of me is hoping that happens just to expose the second Wild Card for the terrible idea that it is. Probably won't make any difference and the best course of action may be to just accept the fact that this is the way its going to be, integrity of the game be dammned, but I still don't like it one bit.

The wildcard game isn't a tiebreaker. Stop calling it a tiebreaker.

I'll stop calling it a tiebreaker when its no longer a best of one. Till then its the Wild Card tiebreaker in my book, and I don't consider it part of the playoffs.

I see no difference in the structurce between this and what happened at the end of the '98 season between the Giants and Cubs for the Wild Card spot and that wasn't considered a playoff game.

Very well then. I don't consider you an expert on baseball, so I guess your opinion doesn't matter.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Its just another example of why this second Wild Card is such a bad idea. We could have a tiebreaker between two teams for the right to play another tiebreaker for the right to play yet another tiebreaker. And part of me is hoping that happens just to expose the second Wild Card for the terrible idea that it is. Probably won't make any difference and the best course of action may be to just accept the fact that this is the way its going to be, integrity of the game be dammned, but I still don't like it one bit.

The wildcard game isn't a tiebreaker. Stop calling it a tiebreaker.

How about "Play-in Game"... You good if we call it that? :upside:

6uXNWAo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its just another example of why this second Wild Card is such a bad idea. We could have a tiebreaker between two teams for the right to play another tiebreaker for the right to play yet another tiebreaker. And part of me is hoping that happens just to expose the second Wild Card for the terrible idea that it is. Probably won't make any difference and the best course of action may be to just accept the fact that this is the way its going to be, integrity of the game be dammned, but I still don't like it one bit.

The wildcard game isn't a tiebreaker. Stop calling it a tiebreaker.

I'll stop calling it a tiebreaker when its no longer a best of one. Till then its the Wild Card tiebreaker in my book, and I don't consider it part of the playoffs.

I see no difference in the structurce between this and what happened at the end of the '98 season between the Giants and Cubs for the Wild Card spot and that wasn't considered a playoff game.

Teams need to actually be tied for there to be a need for a tie-breaker.

On a slightly related note, why do people hate "play-in" games so much to the point that they say it's not part of the tournament/playoffs? People have the same reaction to the NCAA "First Four".

"In the arena of logic, I fight unarmed."

I tweet & tumble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its just another example of why this second Wild Card is such a bad idea. We could have a tiebreaker between two teams for the right to play another tiebreaker for the right to play yet another tiebreaker. And part of me is hoping that happens just to expose the second Wild Card for the terrible idea that it is. Probably won't make any difference and the best course of action may be to just accept the fact that this is the way its going to be, integrity of the game be dammned, but I still don't like it one bit.

The wildcard game isn't a tiebreaker. Stop calling it a tiebreaker.

I'll stop calling it a tiebreaker when its no longer a best of one. Till then its the Wild Card tiebreaker in my book, and I don't consider it part of the playoffs.

I see no difference in the structurce between this and what happened at the end of the '98 season between the Giants and Cubs for the Wild Card spot and that wasn't considered a playoff game.

Teams need to actually be tied for there to be a need for a tie-breaker.

On a slightly related note, why do people hate "play-in" games so much to the point that they say it's not part of the tournament/playoffs? People have the same reaction to the NCAA "First Four".

They hate it because its just a tacked on game that doesn't fit with the rest of the schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its just another example of why this second Wild Card is such a bad idea. We could have a tiebreaker between two teams for the right to play another tiebreaker for the right to play yet another tiebreaker. And part of me is hoping that happens just to expose the second Wild Card for the terrible idea that it is. Probably won't make any difference and the best course of action may be to just accept the fact that this is the way its going to be, integrity of the game be dammned, but I still don't like it one bit.

The wildcard game isn't a tiebreaker. Stop calling it a tiebreaker.

I'll stop calling it a tiebreaker when its no longer a best of one. Till then its the Wild Card tiebreaker in my book, and I don't consider it part of the playoffs.

I see no difference in the structurce between this and what happened at the end of the '98 season between the Giants and Cubs for the Wild Card spot and that wasn't considered a playoff game.

Teams need to actually be tied for there to be a need for a tie-breaker.

On a slightly related note, why do people hate "play-in" games so much to the point that they say it's not part of the tournament/playoffs? People have the same reaction to the NCAA "First Four".

They hate it because its just a tacked on game that doesn't fit with the rest of the schedule.

But how can that be? It's in the schedule-you know about it in advance.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teams need to actually be tied for there to be a need for a tie-breaker.

On a slightly related note, why do people hate "play-in" games so much to the point that they say it's not part of the tournament/playoffs? People have the same reaction to the NCAA "First Four".

Because it's asinine to pretend that 60/68 teams have first round byes, and is much cleaner and rational to just say those are play-in games. With baseball, it's just a tiebreaker game, the likes of which we have seen for many years. The only difference is, instead of an actual tie, it's like "Okay, we're gonna pretend you guys tied. Go at it to see who goes to the playoffs!"

OldRomanSig2.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it's happy days in New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle...all people nationwide who detest the hated Dodgers and Angels.

Philly doesn't give a crap about the Angels, and they generally hate the Dodgers but could root for them a little bit with Victorino and Blanton on the team, but the city is a Phillies town, not a baseball town, and when the Phils lost 3 of 4 at Houston, that pretty much ended interest in this baseball season...

The only reason I hate the Dodgers is Don Mattingly. Fire him and I'd be indifferent towards them; fire him on Christmas or his birthday and I might actually like them. And I like the Angels because they always give the Yankees a hard time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took them sixteen tries, but yesterday the Cubs finally won a game in an NL West ballpark this season to finish 1-15.

the worst helmets design to me is the Jacksonville jaguars hamlets from 1995 to 2012 because you can't see the logo vary wall

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teams need to actually be tied for there to be a need for a tie-breaker.

On a slightly related note, why do people hate "play-in" games so much to the point that they say it's not part of the tournament/playoffs? People have the same reaction to the NCAA "First Four".

Because it's asinine to pretend that 60/68 teams have first round byes, and is much cleaner and rational to just say those are play-in games. With baseball, it's just a tiebreaker game, the likes of which we have seen for many years. The only difference is, instead of an actual tie, it's like "Okay, we're gonna pretend you guys tied. Go at it to see who goes to the playoffs!"

The former set up stated "Okay Division Winner and Wild Card, we're gonna pretend you guys are the same, both go to the same round in the playoffs!

1985 1989 1991 1992 1993

Time to raise a banner in my lifetime boys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took them sixteen tries, but yesterday the Cubs finally won a game in an NL West ballpark this season to finish 1-15.

I know this is only 'Year One', but how long are us Cub fans supposed to give Theo before we grow impatient? I'm kinda bummed he wasn't able to unload Soriano with all the rebuilding that's supposedly going on on the Northside.

6uXNWAo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it's happy days in New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle...all people nationwide who detest the hated Dodgers and Angels.

Philly doesn't give a crap about the Angels, and they generally hate the Dodgers but could root for them a little bit with Victorino and Blanton on the team, but the city is a Phillies town, not a baseball town, and when the Phils lost 3 of 4 at Houston, that pretty much ended interest in this baseball season...

I could name one person from Philly who gives a crap about the Angels...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its just another example of why this second Wild Card is such a bad idea. We could have a tiebreaker between two teams for the right to play another tiebreaker for the right to play yet another tiebreaker. And part of me is hoping that happens just to expose the second Wild Card for the terrible idea that it is. Probably won't make any difference and the best course of action may be to just accept the fact that this is the way its going to be, integrity of the game be dammned, but I still don't like it one bit.

The wildcard game isn't a tiebreaker. Stop calling it a tiebreaker.

I'll stop calling it a tiebreaker when its no longer a best of one. Till then its the Wild Card tiebreaker in my book, and I don't consider it part of the playoffs.

I see no difference in the structurce between this and what happened at the end of the '98 season between the Giants and Cubs for the Wild Card spot and that wasn't considered a playoff game.

Teams need to actually be tied for there to be a need for a tie-breaker.

On a slightly related note, why do people hate "play-in" games so much to the point that they say it's not part of the tournament/playoffs? People have the same reaction to the NCAA "First Four".

I can't speak for others, but I know I feel that way because calling these play-in games a part of the playoffs inherently implies that eight of the ten playoff teams (and 60 of the 68 teams in the NCAAs) have first round byes. And the majority of the field getting first round byes is pretty inane.

EDIT - Roman said it first, but we've been on the same wavelength with this ideology all year.

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Yankees are putting a beating on the Red Sox right now, it's 9-0 in the 3rd. I'm really hoping that the Yankees can somehow catch Texas for the top AL spot and play either Oakland or Baltimore. I feel really confident that the Yanks could handle both of them in a 5 game series but I'm not so sure how they would fare against Detroit with Verlander likely pitching 2 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as far as that goes, I don't care if Detroit is the weakest playoff team in the AL field at the moment - keep them the hell away from the Yankees. 2006 and 2011 sucked enough, I don't need this to be a trilogy of "Tigers troll Yankees when it matters". Especially since Detroit's playing its best baseball of the season now.

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't care if you call it play-in or the Wild Card round (which I think is the official name) or round one. Whatever floats your boat.

But denying that it's part of the post-season is silly. It is.

Right, but it's possible the losers of these newly implemented games won't feel like they made it to the dance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.