The Liquid Kosmos

Baseball doesn't need Wild-card

Most things change because people get bored or think they have a better way to do something, but the truth is many changes are bad decisions. Major League Baseball's decision go to the Wild-card wasn't necessary and will eventually hurt the game. Here's why.

First of all, I am a lifelong Milwaukee Brewer fan, so it has nothing to do with my team and everything to do with me being a fan of the game. Commissioner Bud Selig owned my team for years and screwed that up, too. He's a car salesman at heart and I think that explains a lot.

Let's look at this year's play-off races. We'll start with the American League.

The Yankees have clinched the division. Detroit and Minnesota have clinched play-off births. And Oakland is 6 games ahead of the Angels with 6 games left. The play-offs are basically set with a week to go in the season.

If we still had the two division, winners only get into the play-offs the AL would shape up like this.

The Yankees and Detroit would be tied in the East. One week of gutsy play and thunderous crowds in both stadiums. 156 games in, there would be a tie for first in the AL East.

In the West, it would be shaping up like this.

Minnesota would have a 3 game lead on Oakland (Oakland plays later tonight and could be within 2 1/2 of the Twins in the old division standings. That race would be for all the marbles.

As it sits, the only race left is between the Tigers and Twins for the stupid wild-card. Who cares? They're both already in.

In the National League East, The Mets are in, while the Phillies claw for the wild-card.

In the Central, Houston is making a run at St. Louis, but they are still three back and have won 6 straight. St. Louis has lost 5 straight. The odds of Houston overtaking St. Louis are very slim.

The National League West is a dog fight between LA and San Diego. The Padres lead by a game and a half.

So, basically, the Phillies, LA, and San Diego are fighting it out for the WC.

If it were the the old division layout we'd have the Mets in the East and LA and San Diego battling in the West. And it would be for a birth, not some tainted division run with a wild-card option on the side. And that is the main argument.

Face it, St. Louis isn't that good this year. They shouldn't be in. Neither should Houston, but they might have had a better shot (not to mention record) if Clemens would stop acting like a little bitch and play from the start of the season like everyone else.

In both leagues there would be the same amount of teams alive and far better races. The Yankees and Tigers tied with a week left? The Twins and Oakland battling to play the winner of the East? The Padres and Dodgers fighting for keeps in the West. That's three intense races with 6 teams and that doesn't include the teams they play who want to be spoilers. Don't think the White Sox wouldn't like to knock the Twins out in the last series of the year? Now, that is a meaningless set.

More proof? Let's look at last year.

The Yankees and Red Sox TIED in the American League East. Is there anything better than a one game play-off??? No. And they didn't even play it last year because of the new rule and the wild card. Anyone remember the Bucky Dent homerun at Fenway Park? Yeah, great moments happen in one game play-offs.

The White Sox fought tooth and nail to outlast the Indians last year and with the old divisions they would have had to outlast the Angels, too. It would have been heated.

In the NL West Atlanta won one more game than Houston. That would have been phenomenal. Houston ended up winning the wild-card and eventually knocked out St. Louis before going to the World Series and getting pummeled by the White Sox.

St. Louis won the East going away and would have played Atlanta in the NLCS in the old layout. Either team would have fared better against the White Sox in the series.

2004. The Yanks outlasted Boston by 3 games, but Boston was safely in the wildcard slot so that race lost its usual zeal.

In the West it would have been Minnesota, the Angels, and Oakland all separated by one game. Same amount of teams in the race, but with far higher stakes. Boston may not have gotten in and back-doored their way to the Championship, which would have been just fine with me. Not because I don't like them, I do, it's just that they won a World Series out of a wildcard slot.

In the National League East (2004) , St. Louis ran away.

In the West it would have been Atlanta, LA, and Houston down the stretch all separated by four games. History shows, they all got in. There were no races. Who cared?

The last three years would have been better WITHOUT the wild card. Same holds for 2003 and while 2002 leans wildcard there is no solid proof. Especially when you throw in the "it means something" factor. When my Brewers held off Baltimore to win a legitimate American League East title in 1982, it was the best feeling of my sports fan life. While I would like to see it, I genuinely don't care if they get there again. I don't think someone should get a rush out of a .500 team slipping in the backdoor then knocking off a team that was 40 games over in a shortened series. It's just not right.

I know we have to move forward, change is good, and it probably makes more money for someone, but the wild card cheapens the game. I can only pray that this is as bad as it gets and that someday soon we get rid of interleague play as well.

posted by The Oscillator @ 8:04 PM