| MLB fans: Are all One-Game playoffs solely for the Wildcard spot going forward? |
|
I have a question on this one-game playoff, aka, the 163rd game of the season. FYI, I'm a Yankees fan, not too disappointed that the Yanks were eliminated, I think the Red Sox may have had an upper hand if we were to face them. So GO ROCKIES! |
|
Actually, the 1995 AL playoff between the Angels and Mariners WAS just for the division (the Yankees had the wild card that year); and had Philadelphia lost their 162nd game this year, they would have had a one game playoff with the Mets for division only. If both teams from the same division are tied, such that the loser of a playoff would still be the wild card, then the playoff game defers to "head to head" season record instead - almost like last year's Yankees and Red Sox. |
|
only if it means one team will be out of the playoffs. They won't play a tie-breaker to determine div winner and wild-card. See AL east 2005. I think a one game playoff would be necessary if two teams tied for the division lead at the end of the regular season, but yet their percentage of victories was less than a second place team in another division. If the Mets showed up for their final game and won there would've been a one game playoff for the NL East title with the Phillies. The loser would then be involved with the Wild Card possibilities. It's already happened -- 1995 AL West, a showdown between the Mariners and Angels. The Yankees finished one game ahead of both and took the wildcard. The Mariners won the postseason berth. yeah, it sure is. If you were really old school, you would like when there were no divisions, and the team with the best record in the American League played the team with the best record in the National League in the World Series with no playoffs. |
| Topic Related |
|
|
