Or as Jon-Kevin Elster’s book goes…“Sour Grapes: Studies in the Subversion of Rationality for Obvious Thickheads”
“The biggest problem is the divisional setup in major league baseball. I didn’t like it in the 1970s, and I hate it now,” Steinbrenner wrote. “Baseball went to a multidivision setup to create more races, rivalries and excitement. But it isn’t fair. You see it this season, with plenty of people in the media pointing out that Joe Torre and the Dodgers are going to the playoffs while we’re not.
“This is by no means a knock on Torre - let me make that clear-but look at the division they’re in. If L.A. were in the AL East, it wouldn’t be in the playoff discussion. The AL East is never weak.”
...“I’m happy for Joe, but you have to compare the divisions and the competition,” Steinbrenner wrote. “What if the Yankees finish the season with more wins than the Dodgers but the Dodgers make the playoffs? Does that make the Dodgers a better team? No.”
Steinbrenner also questioned the legitimacy of the Cardinals’ 2006 title, noting that their 83 regular-season victories were two less than the Phillies’ total, but because of the system, St. Louis reached the playoffs as NL Central champs while Philadelphia lost the wild card race to the Dodgers, who had 88 wins.
“People will say the Cardinals were the best team because they won the World Series,” Steinbrenner wrote. “Well, no, they weren’t. They just got hot at the right time. They didn’t even belong in the playoffs. And neither does a team from the N.L. West this season.”
Repoz
Posted: September 23, 2008 at 09:38 PM |
126 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags:
yankees
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
YES! Exactly. You can't put any weight into conference championships and then expect every regular season game to count the way it does now. The championships (championship game berths) can and often are locked up before the final game of the season.
Arguably illegitimately but still ... the idea of turning Michigan/OSU into a tune-up for the "playoffs" is an idea best left to the lesser sports.
All systems have flaws but the one flaw College Football doesn't have is that teams can't mail games in. Sure, some teams get away with it on occasion -LSU last year- but in College Football your season can effectively end on any Saturday. Trust me, as a USC alum, I think its fair to say that nobody circled the 2007 Stanford game as the most important Saturday of the year. Yet for USC, and the game as a whole, it was.
To guarantee yourself a title chance you have to win all your games, if you don't you cant #####. For example, USC got hosed a bit in 2003. However, I never gripe about it because had they beat Cal, they would have played for (and won convincingly) the BCS title. However they dropped the ball in the bay and received a fair punishment. The fact that the BCS took Oklahoma instead of USC after the Kansas State debacle is something to fix, but it's not something USC can complain about- they allowed it to happen.
The rampant pro-SEC bias is a flaw in the system as we speak. It shall pass.
In 2004, Auburn played Louisiana-Monroe, The Citadel, and Louisiana Tech out of conference. Oklahoma beat Oregon and USC beat VA Tech and Notre Dame. Play somebody out-of-conference, SEC, and you'll have a complaint. Until then, stop b!tchin'. (**)
(**) Until it went to Arizona State last Saturday, Georgia hadn't played a non-conference game west of the Mississippi since 1960. That's pathetic.
and
are contradictory.
So your message is that in order to get in the title game you need to go undefeated against a tough schedule. The problem is that every year there aren't any teams that meet that standard and there certainly aren't two teams. So what happens instead, two teams are chosen arbitrarily out of a hat among equally qualified teams. That is arbitrary and capricious and the definition of injustice. Moreover it is endemic injustice since no matter what every year someone is going to get screwed.
Why don't we skip the season entirely and just draw names out of hat. There is no difference between that and what happens now. You say that all the games matter--I say that none of the games matter to the point where I watch much less. Why watch win whether you win or lose does not determine who is the champion.
Why? this is a stupid idea. Frequently two or even three of the best teams are from the same conference. These ideas are thoughtless.
On one end, the NFL fan argues their method for selecting the final 2 teams produces the real champion. On the other end, I hear how great it is how a crappy football team, 8-8 football team, can win the championship.
Which is it? When a losing NFL team wins its tiny 4 team division, you will finally hear crying. The NFL system has it all wrong. The Super Bowl Champ is nothing but a door prize. Everyone who shows up has a shot, somebody has to win it.
Great point! This is never made.
Another great point.
There were at least 2 NFL games in week 17 last year, where teams mailed in games, which led to a couple of teams getting key wins that send them to the playoffs over more deserving teams. You had 2nd string players all over the place. It was sick. And the NFL pretends its system is great. Considering the Steelers won the SB as a #6 seed a few years back, it is unconscionable that the NFL stood by and allowed the AFC and NFC 6 seeds decided by backups.
Disgraceful. Never saw anything like that in college football.
Lies. Tell that to Auburn in 2003. When USC played OU for the title. This "bias", it it exists, is well earned. Beating the hell out of Ohio State each of the past 2 years should be worth something, if not respect.
The best championships are those which create their own exciting story line. Maybe D-I basketball doesn't choose a "true" champion- too many Cinderellas - but it sure as heck produces extreme tension as one team makes it through by winning six straight games against teams that have won none, one, two, three, four, and five straight. You absolutely cannot say that the winner wasn't "fair," because all 64 teams had an equal shot, and that's enough teams to be dead certain that #65 (I guess 66 after the play-in) isn't championship timber.
In baseball, as moronic as he may be, old Hank has a point. The Yankees could easily finish this year - not ahead of the Dodgers, who cares really - but ahead of the Central Division champ. Things like that happen almost every year, and they give the system a (slightly) sour cast.
OK, I've cried my one tear. Now, I want to watch the playoffs, and the hell with the Yankees.
When was the last time any sports league matched 2 undefeated, untied teams for the championship other than college football? College football matches the final 2, the only 2, undefeated and untied teams about once every 3 or 4 years. That is a perfect championship game. You play the season, only 2 undefeated teams remain.
Texas v USC featured a team with a 19-game winning streak (Texas) and a team with a 34-game winning streak (USC). What league could pull this off? College football produces a pure champion, a perfect title game, way, way, more often than any sport.
In three sentences or less, why were Ohio State and LSU deserving to go to the National Championship game last year instead of: Georgia, USC, Missouri, West Virginia, or Kansas? Couldn't you have picked any 2 of those 7 teams and had just as good (or better) of a national championship game, as well as an equally deserving champion?
Hell, throw Boston College or BYU or Hawaii in there and, oops, guess what? You've got a playoff!
Fake college football fans have been suggesting this garbage as part of their master plan, a 8, 16 team playoff that features a series of games that "maintain" the bowls (as if this is so clever) all at a new neutral site. So picture this for a moment, week one of this tournament, we have Va Tech playing Missouri in rd 1 at Ford Field in Detroit. Week 2 we have Va Tech advance to the final 8 and they play Boston College in the East Regional final in Jacksonville. Va Tech has great fans, we all know they sell out each game, travel very well.
Check out this image. This should end the discussion of neutral site college football. The team sport that gets the largest crowds in america, the most passionate sports fans.....yea, lets have a neutral site game. The NCAA tourney does it.....
Worst Idea
Yea, more of this is what we need. Good call. Buh-Bye neutral site college football.
LOL!
2007 NFL Season: WINS
Pats 16
Colts 13
Cowboys 13
Packers 13
Chargers 11
Jaguars 11
**Browns 10 Missed Playoffs!!!! (why the hell where they not given a chance?)
Seahawks 10
Titans 10
Steelers 10
*Giants 10 Wild Card
Bucs 9 WON DIVISION
Redskins 9 Wild Card
That's right, the Titans played the Colts in week 17 where the Colts rested most of their starters.
Manning 16 pass attempts
Sorgi 24 pass attempts
Titans win 16-10, bump Browns from playoffs, yet with 10 wins, the better conference AFC, and they had more than Redskins and as many as Giants.
Do not come here and for a second imply the NFL knows that the hell it is doing with its playoff/championship format. Last season was garbage.
Get lost NFL fan.
This is factually correct and cannot be disputed (as well as only the first part of a two part statement, the rest of which you conveniently left out). Your list of wins/team per the entire league, as well as the Titans/Colts Week 17 game, is irrelevant to my statement.
I notice you did not answer my question.
The BCS formula is not perfect, I much prefer the old system that gave us years like '81, '82, '83, '84, '85, '89, '90, etc. which effectively gave more than two teams an opportunity to win the MNC w/o a silly playoff. The biggest problem pre-BCS was stubborn conference tie ins, which kept us from seeing Miami play Washington, Colorado v Ga Tech, Nebraska v Penn St., Nebraska v Michigan. A removal of tie-ins would've alleviated that problem, without forcing the selection via the BCS formula of 1 v 2.
On New Year's '86 ('85 season) one loss Iowa played in the Rose, undefeated Penn St. played one loss OU in the Orange, and one loss Miami played Tennesee in the Sugar. All had an opportunity to claim #1 w/o a playoff, genius. Iowa got whipped by UCLA, Tennessee hammered Miami 35-7 and Keith Jackson and OU beat Penn St. 25-10. It was a thrilling day. the BCS cheapened Jan. 1 by removing this possibility. Put that group in brackets over two or three weeks and now we are back to Beano's photo of that great scene in Jacksonville.
Ohio State was selected because they had fewer defeats (at the time of selection) than any of the teams you referenced save Kansas who accomplished the feat against a weaker schedule. LSU was selected because of all the two loss teams (a)they were conference champions of the best conference in the country and (b)they didn't lose to Stanford at home.
Kansas could have been selected over LSU but in view of the fact that Kansas played a poor schedule and not only didn't win their conference but failed to even win their division within their conference, I think the proper choice was made.
This is factually correct and cannot be disputed
Unless its determined that either the Cowboys, Seahawks or Packers switched conferences without telling anyone, I disagree.
In any case isn't the better question more like why were 13 win teams having to play a mediocre Giants team in the playoffs. Under a system that respected a team's season-long accomplishments, the Giants would have been golfing instead of playing those games.
I'm not about to argue that the BCS is perfect (Nebraks in'01 and Oklahoma in '03 were tragic choices) and I agree with post #124 almost completely. My point is that the College Football regular season is the most important regular season, in terms of relevance to winning a title, of all sports. I think their is great virtue in that, even if the end of the year isn't wrapped in a nice media-friendly package.
* I didn't make both of the contradictory statements you referenced. Though I agree with SugarBear's point generally, I think its reasonable for Auburn fans to be upset. As I indicated however, I think Auburn's beef is better directed at the folks who put together Auburn's 2004 schedule.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main