Let me first start off by saying that I'm a baseball fan. I love good competitive baseball. I'll watch the Phillies any time I can (living in Indiana), and I'll always be sure and catch the playoffs or sometimes even meaningful pennant race games between other teams. That having been said, I've got a bone to pick with baseball.
The reason people follow teams is because it's so exhilarating to watch a team that you follow win it all (I'm assuming here, mind you, having never seen any team I follow win "the big one"). It's fun to watch the chase, it's fun to see hated foes overcome, and it's fun to bond with millions of people you don't know when you walk down the street and see someone wearing the right kind of jersey, or high-five the stranger next to you when there's a big hit. So what's my problem with baseball? They don't let enough teams play to win the whole thing.
I know that in baseball there are more traditionalists than anywhere else, for whatever reason. They'll always be the ones to cry about how "back in the glory days of baseball" there were two teams who made the playoffs, and the playoffs consisted of the World Series. That's all fine and dandy, but now there are more teams, and there's more money to be made for baseball as a business.
For a pattern that works, let's look at the NFL. I know what those who know me are thinking--I'm a big football fan and I think that every other sport should be like football. Well, to an extent you may be right. I think if every other major sports organization adapted the organizational qualities and policies of the NFL, they would see more fans, better quality of play, and more money. (Let me be perfectly clear that I'm not worried about how much money these owners and such are making--I'm just giving reasons as to why it makes sense to do what I'm talking about here.)
But back to the subject (warning: boring background). The NFL has 32 teams split up into eight divisions of four teams. At the end of the season, 12 teams will make the playoffs. That consists of the eight division winners and two wild card teams from each conference (the conferences are each made up of four divisions). That means that any given group of fans has a 37.5% chance of seeing their team go to the playoffs and at least compete for the title, however slim their hopes may be. In baseball, there are 30 teams split up into six divisions (most divisions have five teams, but for some reason the American League West division has four teams and the National League Central has six--whatever). So at the end of the season, eight teams will make the playoffs (the six division winners, and one wild card team from each league (the National and American Leagues, of course, being split into three divisions apiece). This gives any given group of fans a 26.6% chance of seeing their team compete for the title. So basically if you follow a football team, you've got an 11% better chance to see your team in the playoffs.
Now some would argue that since there are more teams in the playoffs, the quality of play decreases. I say, "who cares?". If that holds true, it will only be so in the first round of the playoffs. Not only that, but if there were more teams who had a chance, it would make the pennant race that much more exciting for more fans. The baseball season is so long that sometimes by the middle of the season, a team that is just okay has almost no hopes of pulling their record up and making the playoffs. What reason do these fans have to diligently follow their teams? Now of course, you've got your St. Louis and your Chicago, and New York and what have you that will always fill up a stadium. But what about Florida? What about Milwaukee? What about all the smaller market teams who are out of the race by the All-Star break? Wouldn't an expanded playoff give them more reason to keep watching?
Another reason an expanded playoff would work for baseball is that we could shorten the regular season. Say you allow one more team into the playoffs from each league. That makes for an extra series and gives the top seed in the league a bye. If you make that series a best-of-five, it allows another team to get a chance, while rewarding the top team with a week of rest. That would also give your teams with a 17-game lead in the division something to play for. (While I'm on the topic of top seeds, baseball really really needs to get rid of the rule that the winner of the All-Star game gets homefield advantage in the World Series. The provision makes absolutely no sense. It's so mind-numbingly dumb that I can't possibly come up with a reason that it's still in place.)
I can hear the arguments against an idea like this. It diminishes the accomplishment of making the playoffs, the week or so of rest is too long, and of course the subject of tradition comes up whenever anyone talks about changing something. The argument of tradition has always bewildered me. Yes, there's something to be said about respecting the past and remembering how it was, but if a sport doesn't evolve, it's going to be left behind. Fans change. The organization should recognize that and act accordingly. Baseball has a lot going for it with the game itself--now the only question is when the people in charge will let the scales fall from their eyes and fix what's wrong internally. There's more I could say on baseball's screwed up organization, but I'll save that for other times.
All that aside, I'd like to address my Phillies. At the time of this writing, the Fightin' Phils have a 1.5 game lead in the wild card race. Every year they make a run at the playoffs only to dash our hopes against the rocks when crunch time comes. Hopefully this year is different. This is the kind of pennant race I really enjoy. It's hard for me to really get into it when it's not a team I'm interested in. Of course, I always like to see the Yankees and the Red Sox lose, I always like to see teams win that you don't usually see in the spotlight (i.e. Arizona), I always like to be apathetic about the Cubs when everyone wants them to win (the only difference between your team never having won and your team never having won in your lifetime is that with the latter, your dad can tell you about the time they won it all). But I just don't get into it like I do when my team is playing. I know the Phillies can take out the Braves in the playoffs (an example of seeing a hated foe overcome). I know they've got a shot if they can just get in. I'll never forget the 1993 season that took my Phillies to the World Series, only to get our hopes crushed by Joe freakin' Carter and a team from Canada of all places.
Sure, if more teams made it to the playoffs it might not change who wins it all. But going for the ride of trying to win it all is a lot of fun.
9 years ago
0 comments:
Post a Comment