Skip to content

Quote of the Day: Bud Selig on expanding the playoffs

Nov 1, 2010, 12:30 PM EDT


“It’s more fair than eight.”

Bud Selig, when asked if ten playoff teams — which Selig is strongly considering for 2012 — is “fair.” And 12 is more fair than ten, and 16 is way more fair than 12.  We can play this game all day if we want to.

Either way, with the union appearing to adopt the idea of an expanded playoff wholeheartedly, it seems inevitable that it’s going to happen. Baseball will survive this, just as as it survived the wild card. But let’s not equate survival with optimal conditions, OK?  Baseball’s playoffs are better than the other sports precisely because mediocre teams are, for the most part, kept out.

And, it’s worth noting, if there was a 10-team setup this year, there would have been basically zero pennant race drama whatsoever apart from a bit of a battle between Boston and Chicago for the fifth slot in the AL.  The whole thing between San Francisco, San Diego and Atlanta would have been totally academic.

  1. Charles Gates - Nov 1, 2010 at 12:36 PM

    Fair? Fair?? Eff it all. Let’s give all the kids trophies at the end of the season, not keep score, tell them how well they did because they tried hard and buy them a popsicle at the ice cream stand after each game.

  2. Lukehart80 - Nov 1, 2010 at 12:45 PM

    I wouldn’t mind this IF it’s a one-game playoff between the two teams, they waive the “wild card winner can’t play a team from it’s own division” rule, and there are no off-days added in.

    That would increase the number of teams that can make the playoffs, which I don’t think is needed, but it would also put teams that don’t win their division at a more real disadvantage and would make having the best record in the league more meaningful by allowing them to play a team that has not been able to rest and is more likely to be without its ace for the first game or two.

    I’m sure Bud will do nothing like that though, and two years from today, on November 1, 2012, we’ll be getting ready to watch Game 1 of the World Series.

    • Richard In Big D - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM

      And it will be the LAST WS, shockingly NOT because of anything the Wisconson Weenie did or didn’t do, but because the Mayan Calendar says so.

      • hardjudge - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:18 PM

        What a crock! Go do some research on what the Mayan descendant think.
        Back to baseball, lets either bring it into the 21st century with full replay, electronic balls and strikes or go back to the beginning of the 20th century with 16 teams, only the world series, wool uniforms, small gloves and $2,500 salaries. Why we could even do away with television!. ROFLMAO

    • Kevin S. - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

      I ask this question each time the issue comes up, and I never get a satisfactory answer: why do we want to give any significant advantage to a team that had the best record among a geographically-determined subset of the league, over a team that had a better record but happened to share a division with the best team in the league? This was pointed out by Matthew Carruth over at Fangraphs, but this format would have severely disadvantaged whomever of the Yankees and Rays finished second-best in their division, since they would have had to go crazy trying to win it, while Boston, assured of its second-place spot, could have lined up its rotation for that “play-in” game, despite finishing six games behind the Yankees. It would have given a significant advantage to the Rangers over the Rays (if you couldn’t play a team from your own division in the first round), despite the Rays finishing six games better than the Rangers. The first-, second-, fourth- and seventh-best records in the AL this year belonged to East teams. Why are we punishing them for not having the foresight to relocate to a shittier division?

      Stop the insanity. Go the other way. Seeding based on record, only. The advantage one gets for winning one’s division is a guaranteed spot in the playoffs, even if there’s a better team staying home. That’s it.

      • doctorfunke - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:29 PM

        Why don’t you just go one step further and just eliminate divisions?

      • Kevin S. - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:36 PM

        I’d love to!

      • Lukehart80 - Nov 1, 2010 at 4:27 PM

        I’d be fine with getting rid of the divisions, or going back to just two-per-league, but neither of those are viable options. I was making a suggestion for what I’d like to see among what seems realistic at this point. The issue of there being more good teams in some divisions than in others has more to do with economics than anything else (I think), and those economic changes are the ones I’d really like to see, but they aren’t coming at any point in the very near future either.

  3. Jonny 5 - Nov 1, 2010 at 12:48 PM

    Bud is just thinking. “More games = more $$$” Is it better for the Game? No. But since when has Bud cared about that? Now there will be less incentive to win all your games, how is that better?

    • hardjudge - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:20 PM

      Get rid of Bud, immediately. He has had a huge conflict of interest the whole time he has been Commissioner.

  4. WhenMattStairsIsKing - Nov 1, 2010 at 12:49 PM

    This is a horrible idea. The playoffs are long enough, and I like more end-of-season competitiveness.

    • hardjudge - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:21 PM

      Cut the season to about 120 games, have lots of playoffs and be through before the NFL starts.

  5. mangothefruit - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:04 PM

    When was the last memorable divisional series? I can barely remember the ones from this season. We want more of those?

    Also, who has even been pushing for more playoffs other than Bud Selig? And yet when it comes to an issue where there is genuine public sentiment for it, like replay, he can’t drag his heels deep enough.

    • hardjudge - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:22 PM

      See comment about about Bud, he should be

      • Richard In Big D - Nov 1, 2010 at 2:08 PM

        Nice try Fiorentino. You can’t hide that kind of anger and disdain for other people (not to mention lack of a reasonable thought process) simply by changing your screen name.

  6. easports82 - Nov 1, 2010 at 1:43 PM

    Here’s the concession: Extra playoff team(s), shorter regular season. Sanctity of the playoffs, best teams, whatever; I see that as falling under the ‘arbitrary rules’ tree. My problem is with the World Series being played around Thanksgiving. Unless they push Spring Training back into January or schedule double-headers during the season (which I’d actually like to see) the playoffs will continue to get into colder weather, which typically produces worse baseball.

    Expand the playoffs? Fine. Get the regular season to end by mid-September so I don’t have to worry about clearing snow to get to the Series.

    And Bud still needs to go away.

  7. twinsfn343 - Nov 1, 2010 at 2:25 PM

    Didn’t they already push up the start of next season so that the World Series wont go past Halloween? If they did add a one game wild card playoff then we still wouldn’t have any Series games in November right?

  8. Panda Claus - Nov 1, 2010 at 2:32 PM

    What would be “fair for baseball” is if the Brewers would add a fifth mascot from the Running Meat category and call it Big Bud. It would never win a race, much like Teddy R. in DC, because it could never figure out which way to run around the field.

    • Lukehart80 - Nov 1, 2010 at 4:37 PM

      Does anyone know WHY Teddy never wins the race at Nationals’ games??? Was he chosen as the least important of the four? Is it the glasses? Does the ownership group hate national parks?

      • Kevin S. - Nov 1, 2010 at 6:34 PM

        Does the ownership group hate national parks?

        Oh, the irony of the man who founded the National Park System not being able to win in Nationals Park.

  9. 12strikes - Nov 1, 2010 at 2:33 PM

    Let me start with Bud Selig is a Butt Clown….
    Actually….. that is all I have, but it seems to be enough.

    • Utley's Hair - Nov 1, 2010 at 2:46 PM

      No…you’re wrong. Bud Selig is most definitely not a butt clown. That is incredibly disrespectful! He is an ass hat.

  10. scatterbrian - Nov 1, 2010 at 2:55 PM

    Tom Symkowski’s Jump to Conclusions mat is a better idea than this.

  11. Adam - Nov 1, 2010 at 3:39 PM

    How is fair even in play in this debate? Selig says it would be fairer, but fairer to whom? Is it “fair” that only 8 teams get a chance to win the World Series? I don’t know, but that seems a lot fairer than having to watch 18 straight losing seasons just because you happen to live in Pittsburgh.

  12. ta192 - Nov 1, 2010 at 3:55 PM

    I miss Happy Chandler…

  13. itsmekirill - Nov 1, 2010 at 5:31 PM

    It would be more fair if the 4 best records in each league made the playoffs, divisions be damned.

  14. dasher521 - Nov 2, 2010 at 8:00 AM

    NO! NO!! NO!!! Greed! Greed!! Greed! I love baseball because it is baseball. I don’t want it to be hockey, basketball, football or March Madness. Next thing you know you will want to steal the games from the fans whose teams are in the World Series by playing at a neutral site. Maybe we should add a clock to make it more fair. Bud, take you steroids and go home.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. J. Baez (2278)
  2. B. Crawford (2250)
  3. H. Pence (2194)
  4. B. Harper (2127)
  5. A. Rodriguez (2024)