|
Post by Commish_Ron on Oct 9, 2021 11:35:59 GMT -5
I do not want to keep coming back to realignment but this idea was a little different so I'll facilitate one more conversation on it. It has been proposed that we realign to 4 divisions of 8. A couple of things to be aware of:
Playoffs would be 1-2 seed to the divisions winners then 3-6 to the rest of the league as wild cards. This is not up for discussion. OOTP does not allow for custom playoff seeding so it is what it is.
It would require generating a new schedule. That takes time. As such this change would not be implemented until the 2062 season at the earliest.
I'll keep my opinions to myself for now. If this idea gets reasonable support in this thread we'll vote on it in a poll.
|
|
|
Post by MetDaMeats on Oct 9, 2021 12:10:32 GMT -5
I have my own thoughts on whether I like the playoff implications of having 4 divisions of 8 vs. 8 divisions of 4. But before we have the playoff argument I'd like to raise a practical concern. I have come to believe that one of the main drivers of fan interest and making money is the amount of the year you've spent leading your division. The fewer divisions you have the fewer division leaders you have and the less likely you are to have that fan interest/cash boost.
I think there's pros and cons to the playoff format. But I'd like confirmation that financial boosts wouldn't be reduced by lowering the number of divisions before I have that argument.
|
|
|
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Oct 9, 2021 12:12:43 GMT -5
I, personally, support reducing divisions to increase the odds of better teams making the playoffs.
But I agree with Ben's concern about the financial consequences and the desire for sandboxing beforehand.
|
|
|
Post by detroitcarl on Oct 9, 2021 13:22:44 GMT -5
So, at least for the past two seasons, this is a 1 team in the AL problem. The NL sent the six best teams by record into the playoffs the last two years. The AL had one team miss due to the AL East winner.
I am not a fan of moving to four divisions. I like focusing on beating the three other teams in my division for a guaranteed playoff spot. IMO, if you cannot win your division that means there is at least one other team better than you. Others can make a case whether one leader with 103 wins vs another with 90 is fair or not to the second place team.
If people feel the current alignment is not fair, I would much rather toss all the names in a hat and randomly draw for divisions once every five years (or the first season after 1 Jan which would be around 4 seasons). Not like our teams actually travel. Looking at the schedule file format, it is based on index so I assume we can use either the current one (if the team index changes when it moves) or it is a day to write a program to spit out a new one.
|
|
|
Post by NickP_Marlins GM on Oct 9, 2021 14:20:55 GMT -5
I’m in favor of shaking things up.
|
|
|
Post by Jared Carolina on Oct 9, 2021 14:22:31 GMT -5
I like the alignment currently and would like to keep it the same. I like having the rivalries to about 3 teams.
|
|
|
Post by PadresGM on Oct 9, 2021 14:48:37 GMT -5
I haven’t been around long enough to make an educated comment..I’ll do battle wherever we end up.
|
|
|
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Oct 9, 2021 14:55:38 GMT -5
Over the last 7 seasons we have seen:
4.5 teams losing a Bye to their divisional alignment 6 teams losing a playoff spot to their divisional alignment
Let's not act like this never happens.
|
|
|
Post by detroitcarl on Oct 9, 2021 16:04:39 GMT -5
Changing the divisional structure won't remove the problem with byes. There will be plenty of cases where the #2 team in one division has a better record than the #1 in the other division.
If the goal is to really have the all the best teams in the playoffs, then you remove divisions entirely. Top 2 teams get byes, next 4 are WC.
|
|
|
Post by Jared Carolina on Oct 9, 2021 16:21:53 GMT -5
In real mlb, doesn't the same occur? It isn't always perfect. The cardinals did win the ws with close to a 500 record once i believe.
|
|
|
Post by markblakemore on Oct 9, 2021 16:26:26 GMT -5
Changing the divisional structure won't remove the problem with byes. There will be plenty of cases where the #2 team in one division has a better record than the #1 in the other division. Possibly not but it would reduce it. This is a thorny one and has potentially very significant consequences particularly to the schedule. As the GM of a team that has been affected by this twice in recent seasons you might think that I'd be automatically in favour of changing. But I'm not sure I am - I can genuinely see both sides of this and can understand the concerns raised by Ben and Carl. I'm going to follow the debate on here as I'm currently unsure either way.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Oct 9, 2021 16:50:24 GMT -5
I'm torn.
While I respect the idea of having the best teams make the post-season, in an online situation I also kind of like the chance of having a team that may otherwise rarely get a sniff win a weak division from time to time.
And yes, while it sucks to miss out because of that, it also kinda sucks to have to climb over more teams.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Oct 9, 2021 17:00:45 GMT -5
Unfortunately, messing with the seeding is not an option in OOTP. We can set up the division structure how we like and specify how many teams are going to the playoffs but there is no option to manually seed playoff teams. What you get is division winners taking the first x seeds and the remaining seeds go to the rest of the league based on record as wild cards. Custom seeding is not an option available to us. As stated above, what you would get with this alignment is 1-2 seeds going to division winners and 3-6 going as wild cards to the rest. This structure would reduce the likeliness of a lesser team getting into the playoffs, but it is still possible the 3 or 4 best teams in the league would be in one division giving the bye to the 4th or 5th best team.
I am a little wary of making the change based on recent history. It is true that we have seen many teams that would benefit from a restructure recently and the Red Sox in the playoffs this year was probably a historical worst. But if you look back at the entire history of PBL, division power fluctuates over time. I also conceded that we have a couple of divisions with an over abundance of GM talent. On the other hand we have seen a real influx of extremely skilled GMs over the last few seasons. Given some time I think there is a very real possibility that we will see some of the current imbalance even out.
The schedule is a big thing for me. I love the symmetry of our current schedule. 3 game series against each division opponent to start and end the season and then two 4 game series mixed in, one 3 game series against all inter league teams, two 3 game series against all non divisional inner league teams. It is all perfectly balanced which I like. I have not yet dug into the numbers to see how four 8 team divisions will balance but doubtful it will align that nicely.
As far as financial and fan interest impacts of a change, I really have no idea. Sandboxing enough full seasons with both alignments to have enough data to be meaningful would be a pretty large undertaking. I am not convinced I will be able to answer that question confidently. If we proceed we would likely have to concede that it is possible that it may have a negative impact and hope for the best.
On a personal note, I have never been one of the fans bothered by a 7-9 NFL team getting into the playoffs once in awhile and getting a home game. (i.e. the 2010 Seahawks). It is fun for me to see if they can get hot at the right time or get a couple lucky bounces and make a run. Like someone else mentioned, the 2006 Cardinals won a MLB championship with a regular season record of 83-78. It happens and does not invalidate the accomplishment in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by dodgerschuck on Oct 9, 2021 17:39:49 GMT -5
I could see an argument for both sides. The one thing I will say is that I don't know if the NFL comparison is a valid argument for not changing. In the NFL when a division winner goes 7-9 it doesn't happen repeatedly in the same division. I think this can be explained by the parity in that league. I haven't been around long but I remember when I joined last season the team that won the AL East was around or below .500.
So my thought is as long as this is just cyclical and the division sending sub.500 teams to the playoffs changes or doesn't exist in some years I think 8 divisions work. If we're in a situation where one specific division could be terrible for 4 or 5 years at a time it hurts the competitive balance of the league and we should consider changing. I haven't been around long enough to actually know which scenario this is closer to but I figured I'd share my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by Mac_Yankees GM on Oct 9, 2021 17:47:35 GMT -5
I place a high value on the division rivalries.
What I feel separates MLB & NFL from the NBA & NHL is the smaller and stable divisions that create the intense Yankee- RedSox , Dodgers-Giants , Cubs-Cards and in Football Dallas-Washington, Packers-Bears, Steelers-Browns.
And to add to a point made by Ron, I love the balance and symmetry we have with the current schedule format and would hate to lose that.
|
|