Proposed Baseball Rule Changes

[billbuck]

I am conducting some independent research and would like your help in answering a survey about some proposed rule changes in MLB. I have surveyed the internet and found a list of 25 proposed changes and have organized them into the following survey. The survey is available at

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=714423208106

The results will be available at:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/Report.asp?U=320810657169

I do appreciate any and all responses and will be using the information for an article to be published. There is no obligation and participation is completely voluntary.

Bill Buck

[RuthMayBond]

I really like the ones about SHRINKING the strike zone and allowing ALUMINUM bats :laugh :laugh :laugh

[Huntington Avenue]

Ok, I voted! Some interesting issues were brought up: DH, length of the season, interleague play.

Where is this being published eventually? Is it a magazine, a website?

[cubsfan1073]

I liked the instant replay rule, eliminating the DH, giving home field advantage in the WS to the team with the best record, and the allowing of bigger mitts. The worst rule was probably the eliminating of bunting or the pitch clock. Having a pitch clock would just be weird and bunting is very exciting and involves a lot of strategy.

[AutographCollector]

I enjoyed answering the survey. Can't wait to see the final product!

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

A few things:

6. Let the coach visit the pitching mound more than two times per pitcher.Isn't it 2 times per inning?

10. Change the 4-0 walk to count as a walk to 2nd base not first base.I've never heard this be discussed. Where did it come from?

18. Eliminate the intentional walk.Does this mean just have a signal for an intentional walk, or just not allow them?

A neat survey though...

[cubsfan1073]

Isn't it 2 times per inning?

It is twice per pitcher per inning and the second time the coach comes out he has to replace the pitcher.

[AutographCollector]

Does this mean just have a signal for an intentional walk, or just not allow them?

I think that he meant that a pitcher can not intentionally walk anyone.
Example: runners on 3rd & 2nd, with two outs in the 9th. You won't be able to walk Big Papi.
Isn't the signal to walk someone the catcher standing up and raising his arm outward?

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

It is twice per pitcher per inning and the second time the coach comes out he has to replace the pitcher.That's what I thought.

I think that he meant that a pitcher can not intentionally walk anyone.
Example: runners on 3rd & 2nd, with two outs in the 9th. You won't be able to walk Big Papi. I have no idea how you would police this. Instead, the pitcher would just pitch poorly. There's no way that the ump could make a pitcher throw a strike...

Isn't the signal to walk someone the catcher standing up and raising his arm outward?I thought he might have meant that the pitcher would signal the umpire that he wishes to issue an intentional walk, and the batter would take his base instead of the pitcher having to throw the four pitches. I've heard this suggested as a way to save time. I am against it personally, but that's another issue.

[Paul McCartney]

I disagree with the Instant Replay Rule because I believe umpires making mistakes is human and a part of the game. Although not mentioned, I'd like to see the first round of the playoffs be a 7-game series intead of 5.

[Paul McCartney]

I recall the 2nd base on 4-0 walk being proposed during recent years when Barry Bonds was being intentionally walked at an alarming rate.

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

I think one that should be seriously considered is adding a second wild-card team to each league, and making them play a one-game playoff the day before the start of the division series. That would give them a disadvantage going into the DS. It would also provide excitement for more fans, because there's another team "making the playoffs".

[ElHalo]

I would personally go with increasing walks to six balls. There's just entirely too many walks in today's game.

[ReignInBlood]

I would personally go with increasing walks to six balls. There's just entirely too many walks in today's game.

That would be crazy. :crazy Games would last more, 6 balls for an intentional walk?, pitchers would have a crazy advantage.

[DodgerBlue8188]

Having an automatic call for an intentional walk would save time (just like in video games these days) but it would make the pitchers job easy. I know a pitcher doesn't throw 90 mph on an intentional walk but he does still have to throw 4 pitches which can wear him down more. If he only has to throw 1 then he is saving a little bit of strength.

As far as interleague play goes. I just wish they did it like the NFL. Each year you play a different division. Have 3 home games and 3 away games.

[_sturt_]

1) I don't know how it would work, but in theory, I truly like the idea of pitchers and batters having a constant strike zone via use of laser technology.

2) I want a DATE for the two leagues to agree that they ABSOLUTELY WILL have one rulebook... vis-a-vis, there will be a DH, won't be a DH, or a suitable alternative that addresses both sides' concerns will be agreed upon.

By setting a date far enough in advance so that current DHs' contracts will have expired, it eliminates the greatest resistance pressure to getting this thing done.

3) I agree that there's something very unfulfilling about watching bone-chilling World Series games, and that it would be good if the league could back up by at least a week. I wouldn't advocate a reduction in the number of games, but instead, I'd seek to re-establish the DOUBLEHEADER :eek: as a regular part of the schedule.

What's a doubleheader you ask? :noidea Well, it's where the two teams play each other once, then wait about a half-hour after the first game, and start a second game. You may have heard of minor league teams doing this, but they ordinarily only play seven innings... but back when major league baseball had these events, they'd always play 9. :cool:

[RuthMayBond]

I'd seek to re-establish the DOUBLEHEADER :eek: as a regular part of the schedule.

What's a doubleheader you ask? :noidea Well, it's where the two teams play each other once, then wait about a half-hour after the first game, and start a second game. You may have heard of minor league teams doing this, but they ordinarily only play seven innings... but back when major league baseball had these events, they'd always play 9. :cool:And you expect people to believe this :rolleyes: ;)

[Captain Cold Nose]

And you expect people to believe this :rolleyes: ;)
Sometimes you're never sure what people know. :dance

[bluezebra]

A few things:

Isn't it 2 times per inning?
I've never heard this be discussed. Where did it come from?

Does this mean just have a signal for an intentional walk, or just not allow them?

A neat survey though...

<b>10. Change the 4-0 walk to count as a walk to 2nd base not first base.

I've never heard this be discussed. Where did it come from?<b/>

From some coed slow-pitch softball rules.

Bob

[bluezebra]

1) I don't know how it would work, but in theory, I truly like the idea of pitchers and batters having a constant strike zone via use of laser technology.

2) I want a DATE for the two leagues to agree that they ABSOLUTELY WILL have one rulebook... vis-a-vis, there will be a DH, won't be a DH, or a suitable alternative that addresses both sides' concerns will be agreed upon.

By setting a date far enough in advance so that current DHs' contracts will have expired, it eliminates the greatest resistance pressure to getting this thing done.

3) I agree that there's something very unfulfilling about watching bone-chilling World Series games, and that it would be good if the league could back up by at least a week. I wouldn't advocate a reduction in the number of games, but instead, I'd seek to re-establish the DOUBLEHEADER :eek: as a regular part of the schedule.

What's a doubleheader you ask? :noidea Well, it's where the two teams play each other once, then wait about a half-hour after the first game, and start a second game. You may have heard of minor league teams doing this, but they ordinarily only play seven innings... but back when major league baseball had these events, they'd always play 9. :cool:

<b>2) I want a DATE for the two leagues to agree that they ABSOLUTELY WILL have one rulebook.<b/>

There IS ONE rule book. It gives individual leagues the option of using the DH, or not.

Bob

[bluezebra]

I couldn't open the survey, but from what I've been reading here, it sounds like a bunch of garbage. Except for the idea of Instant Replay (but only under strict limitations), about everything else should be thrown into a shredder.

As for double headers, try to get THAT past the Players Association.

Leave the game alone. If you want all these asinine changes, play slow-pitch softball.

Bob

[_sturt_]

<b>2) I want a DATE for the two leagues to agree that they ABSOLUTELY WILL have one rulebook.<b/>

There IS ONE rule book. It gives individual leagues the option of using the DH, or not.

Bob

:laugh

And as long as we're accepting of that, perhaps for the sake of more scoring, you could go for a 30 year trial wherein the AFC has the option of allowing dropkicked FGs to count as 4 points, just like in arena football.

Makes just as much sense. :waving

[Mattingly]

Any player wearing extra "stuff" in his back pocket, if he gets hit there, he doesn't get a base. The ump is obliged to roll his eyes and the batter must get back into the bog or risk getting ejected.

Any batter deemed to be excessively crowding the plate (not just a little, but a lot) who gets hit does not get to take a base.

Any DH that can't hit shall be deemed "worthless" for the purpose of the game (unsure if this is a rule or just my mindset).

I'm still a little funny about fan interference on foul balls. Does this automatically become a GRD if the runner would've surely scored from 1B? In that case, the home fan has a reason to touch the ball.

I'll think of something else later on.

[RuthMayBond]

I'm still a little funny about fan interference on foul balls.But you're all for fan interference (and runner interference) on FAIR balls, right? ;)

[Mattingly]

But you're all for fan interference (and runner interference) on FAIR balls, right? ;)
So how else are the fans gonna interfere with the ball in play? :D

Well, there was one a bit ago when a ChiSox player (out in LF, as expected) supposedly got punched by a Yankee fan. Debatable whether it was a punch or not, but seemed funny to me.

Oh, and no more commissioners nicknamed "Bud".

[KCGHOST]

So far, I was the only respondent in the 56+ age bracket.

[digglahhh]

I couldn't open the survey, but from what I've been reading here, it sounds like a bunch of garbage. Except for the idea of Instant Replay (but only under strict limitations), about everything else should be thrown into a shredder.

As for double headers, try to get THAT past the Players Association.

Leave the game alone. If you want all these asinine changes, play slow-pitch softball.

Bob

As usual, ain't no shortage of sunshine here...

Sturt,

Just to let you know, I put my money where my mouth is.

I voted "agree" on AL dumping the DH and "neutral" on the NL accepting it. Assuming that only one of them would happen of course....:)

[RuthMayBond]

So how else are the fans gonna interfere with the ball in play? :D Read Jeffrey Maier's book, with a foreword by Reggie Jackson :grouchy

[Mattingly]

Read Jeffrey Maier's book, with a foreword by Reggie Jackson :grouchy
I know about Maier. What did Reggie do?

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

I would leave the intentional walk the way it is. If it had been changed, Joe Dimaggio never would have had his streak. There was one game where the pitcher stated that he would get Dimaggio out in his first at-bat, and then walk him for the rest of the time so that he would break the streak. He got him out the first time, but then while he was issuing the intentional walk, Dimaggio reached out and poked a hit into the outfield.

That is why the pitcher should have to throw the pitches, because anything can happen.

[RuthMayBond]

I know about Maier. What did Reggie do?Stuck out his hip in the WS to deflect a throw, the umps let it go. Are you the real Mattingly? ;)

[_sturt_]

Sturt,

Just to let you know, I put my money where my mouth is.


There's money involved? Where's my cut? :D

[Elvis]

Stuck out his hip in the WS to deflect a throw, the umps let it go.


:grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy 000000000000------

[RuthMayBond]

:grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy 000000000000------Three optically-challenged mice

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

Maybe my previous idea was simply lost in a flurry of posts, but I was really wondering what you guys think. I've heard a few radio personalities here in Toronto, and elsewhere, talk about this as a viable option:

I think one that should be seriously considered is adding a second wild-card team to each league, and making them play a one-game playoff the day before the start of the division series. That would give them a disadvantage going into the DS. It would also provide excitement for more fans, because there's another team "making the playoffs".The league would like (from what I hear) more teams in the playoffs. It is always being discussed whether or not MLB should expand it's playoffs, but I think that this would be the best way to go about it. It solves two problems:

Number one, it's two more teams "in the playoffs". Number two, it gives the wildcard teams a distinct disadvantage going into the actual playoffs. They will have already used their #1 pitcher, so they would have to begin the DS with someone else. Add to that the fact that the players would be tired, etc... and I think that it's a solid idea. Any thoughts?

[JamesWest]

MLB has too many playoff teams already. To start the wild-card teams at a disadvantage, I think they should either have to sweep the Division Series to advance, or maybe they should only get one loss in the DS. They should also be matched against the team with the best record, and this will give that team a bit of an advantage.

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

Generally speaking, I am against things like adding and subtracting teams, changing playoff structures, changing fundamental rules of the game etc... But in this instance I believe that it's a good idea. The game is already "tarnished" with the Wild Card, so we might as well make it work well, and make it so that the WC teams are truly at a disadvantage.

While your ideas would certainly work, I believe that adding another team would be the most non-intrusive way of achieving that disadvantage. I don't feel comfortable going out and changing the format of the series, or anything like that. In addition to being the least obtrusive (in terms of the rules of the game), it would also add some excitement for more fans. More teams would be in the "playoff" race, and therefore would stay interested longer into the season. And I always loved the one-game playoffs whenever there was a tie in the standings. Winner-take-all was so exciting to watch.

That being said, the reason that those playoffs are so exciting may be because they are so infrequent. If we instituted them every year, they might lose their novelty. But I don't think so. I'd like to see it.

[bluezebra]

Any player wearing extra "stuff" in his back pocket, if he gets hit there, he doesn't get a base. The ump is obliged to roll his eyes and the batter must get back into the bog or risk getting ejected.

Any batter deemed to be excessively crowding the plate (not just a little, but a lot) who gets hit does not get to take a base.

Any DH that can't hit shall be deemed "worthless" for the purpose of the game (unsure if this is a rule or just my mindset).

I'm still a little funny about fan interference on foul balls. Does this automatically become a GRD if the runner would've surely scored from 1B? In that case, the home fan has a reason to touch the ball.

I'll think of something else later on.

...the batter must get back into the bog or risk getting ejected.


This 'rule' would only be in effect at Fenway park. It's the only ballpark I know of built on a bog (fen).

Any batter deemed to be excessively crowding the plate (not just a little, but a lot) who gets hit does not get to take a base.

If the pitch is in the strike zone, it's a strike.

I'm still a little funny about fan interference on foul balls. Does this automatically become a GRD if the runner would've surely scored from 1B? In that case, the home fan has a reason to touch the ball.

1..It would NOT be a GRD, but a 'Book Rule'. 2..How in the name of Alexander Cartwright can a runner advance on a FOUL BALL?

Bob

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I recall the 2nd base on 4-0 walk being proposed during recent years when Barry Bonds was being intentionally walked at an alarming rate.

Paul, don't hold your breath waiting for this change. I doubt that the lords of the game as bad as they can be with some changes would go for this one.

To say it would be idiotic would be an understatement.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Having an automatic call for an intentional walk would save time (just like in video games these days) but it would make the pitchers job easy. I know a pitcher doesn't throw 90 mph on an intentional walk but he does still have to throw 4 pitches which can wear him down more. If he only has to throw 1 then he is saving a little bit of strength.



Save time, how much time. Lets say there were 3 IBB in a game, what are we saving 3 or 4 minutes out of a 3 hour game.

[digglahhh]

MLB has too many playoff teams already. To start the wild-card teams at a disadvantage, I think they should either have to sweep the Division Series to advance, or maybe they should only get one loss in the DS. They should also be matched against the team with the best record, and this will give that team a bit of an advantage.

There is something that gets lost in the whole idea of the wild card making things more interesting, the increased excitement at the end of the season.

That is that the divisional races suffer. Two years ago the Yanks and Sox met with the division on the line in the last weekend of the season. But instead of being an epic, historic series, the loser was able to back into the playoffs and teams were resting starters and setting up rotations.

As I've said before, if there was a wild card back in the day, Bucky Dent would still go by the middle name that his parents gave him.:crazy

[wilkerson_rulz-06]

You know what, keep the MLB rules the same.

We don't need to have a league that changes rules and experiments, that can turn me off, although I do have to admit, the NHL tweaked their rules and the game is more fast-paced and much more exciting to watch, however, I doubt that this can transition to MLB as these two sports are very different in terms of general play.

If the MLB does change any rules, they should consider diminishing the number of playoff teams. The wild-card can stay but I don't know how MLB can do this without jeoperdizing the divisional format (which is perfect right now).

My final answer would have to be no, it would not be good for the game and it likely would not work well with the fans (especially the older ones).

[RuthMayBond]

As I've said before, if there was a wild card back in the day, Bucky Dent would still go by the middle name that his parents gave him.:crazyIf he wasn't born as the king of fudge, then I better go back and change my baseball poems in the Between Innings forum. Thanks for the inspiration

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?p=809053#post809053

[Charger567]

Yeah, we should totally ban bunting!

[JamesWest]

That is that the divisional races suffer. Two years ago the Yanks and Sox met with the division on the line in the last weekend of the season. But instead of being an epic, historic series, the loser was able to back into the playoffs and teams were resting starters and setting up rotations.



That should have been one of the biggest weekends of the season, but it ended up meaning nothing. I would prefer a 1949 or even 1978 type ending myself.

[Old Sweater]

I disagree with the Instant Replay Rule because I believe umpires making mistakes is human and a part of the game. Although not mentioned, I'd like to see the first round of the playoffs be a 7-game series intead of 5.

. yep

[Old Sweater]

1) I don't know how it would work, but in theory, I truly like the idea of pitchers and batters having a constant strike zone via use of laser technology.


Take to much of the game away. Besides I think they tried this once and forgot about a thing called a bat that comes thru the same zone.

IMO the Ump is a very important part of the game. You just have to keep the human element in a human game.

[_sturt_]

Take to much of the game away. Besides I think they tried this once and forgot about a thing called a bat that comes thru the same zone.

IMO the Ump is a very important part of the game. You just have to keep the human element in a human game.

Yeah... now that you mention it, tennis will never be the same. :D

But seriously, "they tried it once?" You got a link on that one? I'm not sure about that... besides the danged bat, there's the difficulty caused by aiming laser guns lateral to players standing in the batters box beside home plate.

Not sure how technology gets around that one.

[Padday]

Unlike in the movies the lasers won't kill the batter if they hit him and they won't be glowing red bars going across the plate like they're guarding the world's largest diamond. Plus, there could be ways around the issues with the bat and other various interfiering forces like inserting minute chips into the ball which could act as a kind of barcode that could insure it's the ball and not anything else being detected in the strikezone.

[Erik Bedard]

. yep

. how?

[Erik Bedard]

. ah

[Erik Bedard]

Mods, feel free to delete the last two posts.

Good survey, even if most of the questions were ridiculous (aluminum bats? more interleague play?).

[Old Sweater]

Yeah... now that you mention it, tennis will never be the same. :D

But seriously, "they tried it once?" You got a link on that one? I'm not sure about that... besides the danged bat, there's the difficulty caused by aiming laser guns lateral to players standing in the batters box beside home plate.

Not sure how technology gets around that one.

Think I read that they tried the laser or whatever in a Graig Nettles book. Long time ago, I could be wrong

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Boy, I I sure hope I don't live long enough to see that. Electronic aid involved in the strike zone. Leave certain parts of the game alone.

[Old Sweater]

. how?

. agree

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

But seriously, "they tried it once?" You got a link on that one? I'm not sure about that... besides the danged bat, there's the difficulty caused by aiming laser guns lateral to players standing in the batters box beside home plate.

The technology is already available. MLB uses it to evaluate the performance of the umpires. It's made by a company called Questec, and doesn't require any lasers or fancy gadgets. The MLB has decided to use it as an evaluation tool to improve the performance of the umpires, as opposed to having it replace the umpires.

Here's the link. (http://www.questec.com/q2001/index.htm)

[winningtheweapon]

How about not changing any of the rules except for withdrawing the wild card and the total number of teams in the playoffs. Get rid of the Division Series and go back to two rounds of play.

Oh, and anyone who complains about the length of a baseball game and advocates a pitch clock should be given season tickets for an NBA team and telling him/her to shut the hell up. Besides, I think people overexaggerate the amount of time inbetween pitches. Sometimes, it only takes about 10 seconds.

[digglahhh]

Well, if that's all I have to do to get some NBA season tickets...:)

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

How about not changing any of the rules except for withdrawing the wild card and the total number of teams in the playoffs. Get rid of the Division Series and go back to two rounds of play.

Oh, and anyone who complains about the length of a baseball game and advocates a pitch clock should be given season tickets for an NBA team and telling him/her to shut the hell up. Besides, I think people overexaggerate the amount of time inbetween pitches. Sometimes, it only takes about 10 seconds.While most of the people on this board would likely agree with you, the general population would not. Unfortunately, MLB doesn't try to appeal to the person who loves baseball (aka, us). They want to draw in the people who aren't necessarily huge baseball fans.

These people won't stay if the games are too long, or if their team is out of the playoff race by May. MLB must cater to the average fan. And if you are on this board, odds are that you aren't the average fan.

[Seattle1]

I think they could stand to raise the pitcher's mound a little.

[Seattle1]

I just thought of another one. Let's take the top three stadiums that give up the most home runs per season over the last ten years, and move their fences back a little.

[milladrive]

If ya ask me...

The DH should be illegal.
Artificial turf should be outlawed.
The AL and NL should have an equal and even number of teams.
An end-of-season divisional tie should have a playoff game, no matter what.
The home field advantage in the WS should go to the team with the better seasonal record.
Instant replay should be allowed in the postseason (except for balls and strikes).
I may think of others as time goes on.

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

If ya ask me...

The DH should be illegal. Not gonna happen. I'd like it, but it's not gonna happen.
Artificial turf should be outlawed. Do you include FieldTurf in this ban?
The AL and NL should have an equal and even number of teams. Agreed.
An end-of-season divisional tie should have a playoff game, no matter what. Agreed.
The home field advantage in the WS should go to the team with the better seasonal record. Agreed again.
Instant replay should be allowed in the postseason (except for balls and strikes). Not so sure about this one... I need to give it more thought.
I may think of others as time goes on.-----------------

[milladrive]

Do you include FieldTurf in this ban?

Yes. All synthetic dirt and/or grasses. I have nothing against FieldTurf (it's heads'n'tails better than that other garbage they used to use), but for Major League Baseball, I think a natural field should be required.

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

I kind of agree... But what about domed stadiums?

[milladrive]

I kind of agree... But what about domed stadiums?

Well, for now, there are only three. And two of them have a retractable roof. That leaves one. In Florida. Heh.

That aside, though, it's not altogether difficult to grow natural grass indoors. It's just slightly more expensive, but it's not that hard.

[Seattle1]

Artificial turf should be outlawed.

The home field advantage in the WS should go to the team with the better seasonal record.

I definitely agree with these two 100%.

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

Well, for now, there are only three. And two of them have a retractable roof. That leaves one. In Florida. Heh.

That aside, though, it's not altogether difficult to grow natural grass indoors. It's just slightly more expensive, but it's not that hard.

I'm not really sure that it's possible for them to grow real grass in Toronto. They host alot of conventions and they also play football in the Skydome. I think that if they could, they would. But I don't think that they can.

[Erik Bedard]

For football, I like FieldTurf. For baseball, I prefer grass. I do hate it when umpires blow calls in the postseason (dropped third strike in 05, etc.).... maybe instant replay could be used then. But only in the postseason. And the AL and NL need an equal number of teams.

[milladrive]

They host alot of conventions and they also play football in the Skydome. I think that if they could, they would. But I don't think that they can.

You could be right. Perhaps the conventions could be routed elsewhere if grass became a concern at the Rogers Centre. Football is another thing, though. I think football and its players benefit from FieldTurf, especially in the north. And since football in Canada begins in late Spring and continues through the end of the baseball season, this is a tough call. Thing is, I feel the artificial turf stipulation should be in the baseball rulebook (much like the banning of all but wooden bats). My thoughts are that all teams would have to make accommodations for the rule, even if it inconveniences one or two teams in the short term.

Incidentally, just to be clear, when I said I feel that an end-of-season divisional tie should have a playoff game, no matter what, I meant a first-place tie. I made this point because never again do I wanna see a team "awarded" the top seed simply because they had a winning seasonal record against the team with whom they were tied ('05 AL East).

As for the idea of a second wild-card team, I'm not sure I understand the reasoning. The wild-card was added to the postseason out of necessity. With three divisions, there became a need for a fourth team in the postseason. The non-first-place team with the best record is a natural solution to this. We're now proposing a fifth team? For what now?

Btw, I agree that the DH will not be made illegal anytime soon. Sad, but probably true.

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

As for the idea of a second wild-card team, I'm not sure I understand the reasoning. The wild-card was added to the postseason out of necessity. With three divisions, there became a need for a fourth team in the postseason. The non-first-place team with the best record is a natural solution to this. We're now proposing a fifth team? For what now?I think that it's a good idea. Not really necessary, but I think it would add excitement to the game without taking away from any traditions.

What they would do, is play a one-game playoff the day before the start of the Division series'. This way, the two teams would be tired going into the DS, and therefore be at a disadvantage. I think that this would be a good way of handicapping the WC team's chances. Since they didn't finish 1st in their division, they should be at a disadvantage going into the playoffs. A byproduct of this format is more excitement for more fans. The Another WC team would mean that more teams would be in the race for longer, and therefore more fans would stay interested longer.

It would mean one more team per division would "make the playoffs", and yet they would be at a disadvantage when the real playoffs start. I think that it's a great idea, and that it should at least be tried.

[milladrive]

I think that it's a good idea. Not really necessary, but I think it would add excitement to the game without taking away from any traditions.

What they would do, is play a one-game playoff the day before the start of the Division series'. This way, the two teams would be tired going into the DS, and therefore be at a disadvantage. I think that this would be a good way of handicapping the WC team's chances. Since they didn't finish 1st in their division, they should be at a disadvantage going into the playoffs. A byproduct of this format is more excitement for more fans. The Another WC team would mean that more teams would be in the race for longer, and therefore more fans would stay interested longer.

It would mean one more team per division would "make the playoffs", and yet they would be at a disadvantage when the real playoffs start. I think that it's a great idea, and that it should at least be tried.

I dunno. Seems kinda far-fetched to me. Intrinsically, it sound like something to try, but realisitically, it's probably as likely as eliminating the DH. Thoughts?