Skip to content

If there’s a three-way tie for the Wild Card …

Sep 27, 2013, 5:17 PM EST

wild card tiebreaker

MLB just sent out a press release revealing how things would play out if there’s a three-way tie for the two Wild Card spots.

Some of the details for how things were determined are pretty mind-numbing, but ultimately it boils down to this: Tampa Bay would play at Cleveland on Monday, with the winner claiming one of the Wild Card spots. And then on Tuesday the loser of Monday’s game would play at Texas for the second Wild Card spot.

And if there’s a two-way tie for the second Wild Card spot–how boring, I know!–that game would be played Monday, to be hosted by the team that won the season series. That means Tampa Bay would host Cleveland, Texas would host Tampa Bay, and Cleveland would host Texas.

Got all that? Me neither.

  1. thetruth702 - Sep 27, 2013 at 5:37 PM

    play in games in the MLB are the WORST idea in sports. how can they even have them? last year braves #1 overall defense during the seaaon and had 3 errors in the fame and it ended Chipper’s career. plus had a 5 or 6 game lead over the Cardinals going into yhe play on game. just straihht BS of an idea. not more excitement.

    • ireportyoudecide - Sep 27, 2013 at 8:28 PM

      That’s kind of the purpose, it’s a reward to the division winners so they don’t have to play a single elimination game.

      • forsch31 - Sep 27, 2013 at 9:17 PM

        Except that the wild card was created to reward playoff-worthy teams for stuck in a tough division. By forcing that team to play a single elimination game against a second wild card defeats that purpose.

        Either go back to four divisions, or dump the second wild card.

  2. Jeremy T - Sep 27, 2013 at 5:46 PM

    So if there’s a three-way tie, Texas only gets one shot at the actual wild card game, while Cleveland and Tampa get two? I’m assuming they lost some kind of head-to-head matchup or something to get that short straw?

    • stabonerichard - Sep 27, 2013 at 5:57 PM

      That schedule is the result of the Indians having the best combined record (7-5) against the Rays and Rangers, and therefore having the right to choose to host the first game. The Rays’ combined record is second (7-6), and they chose to go on the road on Monday rather than host a game on Tuesday. The Rangers (5-8) were left with only that option.

  3. rbj1 - Sep 27, 2013 at 5:47 PM

    Three way tie! Three way tie! Three way tie!

    • Jeremy T - Sep 27, 2013 at 5:54 PM

      Fangraphs says there’s a 2.8% chance of it happening. That’s not zero! Three way tie! Three way tie!

      http://www.fangraphs.com/coolstandings.aspx?type=3

  4. stabonerichard - Sep 27, 2013 at 5:47 PM

    Wacky stuff indeed.

    But more teams in the hunt right down to the wire, added incentive for teams to go after their division crown, and 7 of 8 WC teams have been 90+ win ball clubs (since the postseason field was expanded last year).

    I’d still prefer a 3-game series to decide the opening WC round, but overall this is good shite.

  5. professor30 - Sep 27, 2013 at 5:59 PM

    How long before Joe Maddon throws some kind of conspiracy blanket over the whole thing looking for some sympathy or a new stadium or just somebody to listen to his latest rants.

  6. scoutsaysweitersisabust - Sep 27, 2013 at 6:12 PM

    So, if there is a three way tie, there will be two play in games to decide who gets to play the bonus play in game. What a stupid system. Next thing you know they’ll start looking at inter-league record as a tie-breaker.

  7. weaselpuppy - Sep 28, 2013 at 12:27 AM

    personally I’d love to see expansion and have 4 divisions

    NYY BLT BSX TBR
    DET CLE CWS TOR
    MIN KCR TEX HOU
    LAA OAK SEA (PRT or LSV)

    NYM WAS PHI PIT
    CIN (CAR) ATL MIA
    STL CHC MIL COL
    ARZ LAD SDP SFG

  8. albertmn - Sep 28, 2013 at 8:26 AM

    No expansion, please! There are already 2-3 guys that can’t hit or can’t pitch well on nearly every team. If there are 50 more major league spots to fill, there would be even more players that have to be on teams. Sure, it won’t hurt the big money teams, as the Dodgers, Yankees, etc. can afford to still get 25 solid contributors. But, the discrepancy between the big budget and low budget teams would become even greater, which is not needed in MLB.

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Maddon has high hopes for Cubs
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. P. Sandoval (5326)
  2. Y. Tomas (4155)
  3. H. Ramirez (4090)
  4. J. Lester (3079)
  5. J. Upton (2218)
  1. J. Bruce (2126)
  2. M. Kemp (2124)
  3. C. Headley (2059)
  4. A. LaRoche (1992)
  5. Y. Cespedes (1926)