Teams under .500 in the playoffs

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by uruguru

All of the changes I mentioned have occurred since 1994.

MLB revenue and player salaries have grown enormously since then. From a money-making perspective the decisions have clearly paid off for both parties. The business side has done well. (Whether the sport side has done well is a separate question.)

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

MLB revenue and player salaries have grown enormously since then. From a money-making perspective the decisions have clearly paid off for both parties. The business side has done well.

I have never disputed that. But there are three entities in the sport: owners, players and fans. I am a fan, and the game is much less fan-friendly than it used to be. I am happy that the owners & players are making money hand over fist, but I stopped contributing to their money-making operation a long time ago.

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by uruguru

I have never disputed that. But there are three entities in the sport: owners, players and fans. I am a fan, and the game is much less fan-friendly than it used to be. I am happy that the owners & players are making money hand over fist, but I stopped contributing to their money-making operation a long time ago.

There's 4 entities. The League is sperate from the owners as it has it's own agenda.

It what ways is it less fan friendly then before?

[WestCoastGuy]

Originally Posted by OutS|der

It what ways is it less fan friendly then before?

I know that I'm not in this conversation, but to add my reaction ...

My first immediate thought was how they introduced ghost runners because the players and owners wanted it, not even giving a thought as to what the fans felt about them.

In the bigger picture, there's just no longer any consideration to what the fans want. And so many of the massive changes to this sport that have been implemented over the past few years are changes that weren't being asked for by fans.

[jcard]

Originally Posted by WestCoastGuy

I know that I'm not in this conversation, but to add my reaction ...

My first immediate thought was how they introduced ghost runners because the players and owners wanted it, not even giving a thought as to what the fans felt about them.

In the bigger picture, there's just no longer any consideration to what the fans want. And so many of the massive changes to this sport that have been implemented over the past few years are changes that weren't being asked for by fans.

The massive explosion in the size of the professional sports market has been good and bad for long-time fans. On the one hand, this growth—combined with technological developments—has resulted in more content (games themselves, analysis, social media platforms, etc.) being more accessible with more immediacy. On the other hand, this popular surge has not been primarily achieved by creating more true SPORTS fans (rules, trade-offs, strategies, etc.) but rather by positioning the sports as another ENTERTAINMENT option. As such, managerial and administrative decisions are focused on appealing to the tastes of this wider audience, not the smaller group of existing fans who embraced sports over other entertainment options because of the specific appeal of the sports themselves. It is inevitable that changes—from in-arena atmosphere to tactical options) will necessarily in the long-run be away from the model that attracted existing sport fans.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by uruguru

But there are three entities in the sport: owners, players and fans.

Only the first two have any direct decision-making power.

Originally Posted by uruguru

I am happy that the owners & players are making money hand over fist, but I stopped contributing to their money-making operation a long time ago.

That is the correct approach if you are dissatisfied. Like any customer of any business you vote with your dollars by either spending them or withholding them.

I just stopped being bothered by MLB's choices long ago. They're going to do what they want and I either go along for the ride or I don't.

[WestCoastGuy]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

That is the correct approach if you are dissatisfied. Like any customer of any business you vote with your dollars by either spending them or withholding them.

I'm the same as uruguru in that the only dollars that I spend nowadays that I believe go to MLB are spent on OOTP so that I can play historical games, and I never watch or listen to any broadcasts.

[Brad K]

I'm stuck with supporting MLB. That's because a decade ago a couple of guys named Wengay Newton and Bill Foster, who didn't agree on anything else, plus a few others, turned down $40 million the Rays offered to leave town early. Now we're spending $400 million on a ball park on the promise it will draw more fans. But note it has a lower capacity than the existing park. And St Petersburg is spending this on a team that refused to name itself after St Petersburg.

The Rays are far beyond Sabermetrics. In addition to figuring out how to pay players less than the value of their production (that's exactly what Moneyball is) the Rays have figured out how to get a city to pay them more than the value of their own production.

[Brad K]

MLB lets mediocre teams into the playoffs and then sets things up to minimize their chances of winning. But it can't stop them from winning.

There's a good story when a team that won the most games in the AL but was an underdog in the World Series goes on to win it. Afterwards it can be said they were better than we thought and maybe the AL was a really tough league that year.

There's no story when a .500 Wild Card team gets hot and wins the World Series. All that can be said is they didn't deserve it and got lucky.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Brad K

But note it has a lower capacity than the existing park.

Well, yes. Clubs figured out that lower capacity meant artificial scarcity which allowed for higher prices.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Well, yes. Clubs figured out that lower capacity meant artificial scarcity which allowed for higher prices.

Except the new lower capacity is still higher than they've ever drawn to the current park.

[mytreds]

Different save of mine, but it happened again!



Meanwhile, I'm struggling against LA...

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by mytreds

Different save of mine, but it happened again!

Balanced schedule?

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Balanced schedule?

This is a generic mlb start save from 21. So the schedule settings are out of the box.

I haven’t played the recent versions, but in 21, ootp seems to have a hard on for LA.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Balanced schedule?

Real baseball, y'know. The OOTP results show just how screwed up it is.

I think baseball should kick the Rays and another team out and go with 4 divisions of 7, schedule weighted to in division, no interleague, and only division winners to post season.

[Lordofbrewtown]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Just wait until they expand to 32. They'll have four team divisions.

When the Pirates made the post season in the McCutchen era and lost I never felt very bad about it. I figured they didn't belong there anyway. Will more fans come to that realization?

I hope this isn't the case. If they are going to keep the current playoff format (6 teams/league), there's no reason to have 4 divisions, just have 2 divisions per league, with the division winners getting the bye, and 4 wild cards. They should really be doing this currently, as thee's no benefit to being the 3rd division winner

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Lordofbrewtown

I hope this isn't the case. If they are going to keep the current playoff format (6 teams/league), there's no reason to have 4 divisions, just have 2 divisions per league, with the division winners getting the bye, and 4 wild cards.

Take the top three in each division instead. This makes the playoff races divisional affairs.

[Le Grande Orange]

Teams under .500 in the playoffs have happened in the minor leagues, even without the Shaughnessy playoff format. In the second half of the 1984 Southern League season, for example, Nashville and Birmingham finished tied for first place in the Western Division with 35-40 records (Nashville won the tiebreaking playoff game).

[Pelican]

Originally Posted by WestCoastGuy

I'm the same as uruguru in that the only dollars that I spend nowadays that I believe go to MLB are spent on OOTP so that I can play historical games, and I never watch or listen to any broadcasts.

LOL I too can get truly peeved at utter nonsense like ghost runners and the ridiculous three-batter minimum and the runaway salaries and owners who don’t even try to win. And then the Phillies are in the World Series and two of my sons snd I overspend on standing room tickets and have the time of our lives (2022). So, call me a hypocrite! I’m still a baseball fan.

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Teams under .500 in the playoffs have happened in the minor leagues, even without the Shaughnessy playoff format. In the second half of the 1984 Southern League season, for example, Nashville and Birmingham finished tied for first place in the Western Division with 35-40 records (Nashville won the tiebreaking playoff game).

Yeah, Cal league has the split season, first and second half winners, so teams under .500 often made the playoffs there as well.