A better way for 12 team leagues?
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2016 7:19 pmI was going to send a request to the SOM 365 management folks to ask them if it would be possible to offer a second option for 12 team leagues, namely two divisions of six teams in addition to the standard three division format. But first I'd like to see if there is a groundswell of support for such a request.
The reasons I think they should consider adding a second option for 12-team leagues are as follows:
1) It is more historically accurate. When the leagues expanded to 12 teams each in 1969, they had two six-team divisions. Even when the AL went to 14 teams in 1977 and the NL followed suit much later in 1993, they continued to use a two division setup with the division winners advancing to the LCS. The advent of 3 divisions per league did not occur until 1994, when both leagues had 14 teams and a wild card team was added. This 25-year period, where the division winners met in the LCS with the winners advancing to the world series, is the way most of us (aged 50+) fondly remember the playoffs as kids and young adults. All I'm saying is, if we have 12 teams the precedent is to split leagues into two divisions, not three.
2) It adds value to the achievement of winning your division, and eliminates the possibility of a weak wild card team sneaking in and stealing a championship away from either of the two teams who proved they deserve it more over the course of a full 162-game season, simply by getting hot in the playoffs. This is what I like best about the 6-team leagues, but the main reason they aren't more popular is many of us don't like the measly single credit awarded to the league winner. In this proposed format, both division winners automatically earn a credit and meet each other in the world series for a shot at earning a second credit, for a total of 3 credits awarded per 12-team league, same as now.
3) There is the perfect symmetry of a truly balanced 162 game schedule, which is not the case in any of the other types of leagues; 6-team, 12-team or 24-team are all unbalanced in one way or another. Current 12-team leagues play 24 games against 3 division opponents (12 home, 12 away) = 72 games, and either 9 or 12 games against the eight other teams, 2x9 plus 6x12 = 90 games. In a 12-team league of two divisions, teams play 18 games versus 5 division opponents (9 home, 9 away) = 90 games, and 12 games against the other 6 teams (6 home, 6 away) = 72 games. I think 90 games in division and 72 outside is the best mix to determine which two teams should meet in the finals.
As for disadvantages, some would argue it reduces the chances of making the playoffs by taking away the wild card. That is true, and there is a risk managers would lose interest quicker if they feel there isn't a reasonable chance at catching the first place team in their division. If anyone feels that way, they could continue playing the current format. I'm suggesting another option, not replacing what we currently have. The second disadvantage is, what about the two best teams in the league being in the same division? My argument for that goes back to being historically accurate. Sometimes the second best team misses out because they couldn't win their division. It happened a few times in the big leagues from 1969 to 1993, so it could happen here as well. That's the way the game was played. It may not be "fair" in that case, but each division winner deserves to be there by taking care of business against their 5 divisional opponents.
So I'll post a poll to gauge if there is enough sentiment in favor of this proposal before I (we) submit it to SOM.
The reasons I think they should consider adding a second option for 12-team leagues are as follows:
1) It is more historically accurate. When the leagues expanded to 12 teams each in 1969, they had two six-team divisions. Even when the AL went to 14 teams in 1977 and the NL followed suit much later in 1993, they continued to use a two division setup with the division winners advancing to the LCS. The advent of 3 divisions per league did not occur until 1994, when both leagues had 14 teams and a wild card team was added. This 25-year period, where the division winners met in the LCS with the winners advancing to the world series, is the way most of us (aged 50+) fondly remember the playoffs as kids and young adults. All I'm saying is, if we have 12 teams the precedent is to split leagues into two divisions, not three.
2) It adds value to the achievement of winning your division, and eliminates the possibility of a weak wild card team sneaking in and stealing a championship away from either of the two teams who proved they deserve it more over the course of a full 162-game season, simply by getting hot in the playoffs. This is what I like best about the 6-team leagues, but the main reason they aren't more popular is many of us don't like the measly single credit awarded to the league winner. In this proposed format, both division winners automatically earn a credit and meet each other in the world series for a shot at earning a second credit, for a total of 3 credits awarded per 12-team league, same as now.
3) There is the perfect symmetry of a truly balanced 162 game schedule, which is not the case in any of the other types of leagues; 6-team, 12-team or 24-team are all unbalanced in one way or another. Current 12-team leagues play 24 games against 3 division opponents (12 home, 12 away) = 72 games, and either 9 or 12 games against the eight other teams, 2x9 plus 6x12 = 90 games. In a 12-team league of two divisions, teams play 18 games versus 5 division opponents (9 home, 9 away) = 90 games, and 12 games against the other 6 teams (6 home, 6 away) = 72 games. I think 90 games in division and 72 outside is the best mix to determine which two teams should meet in the finals.
As for disadvantages, some would argue it reduces the chances of making the playoffs by taking away the wild card. That is true, and there is a risk managers would lose interest quicker if they feel there isn't a reasonable chance at catching the first place team in their division. If anyone feels that way, they could continue playing the current format. I'm suggesting another option, not replacing what we currently have. The second disadvantage is, what about the two best teams in the league being in the same division? My argument for that goes back to being historically accurate. Sometimes the second best team misses out because they couldn't win their division. It happened a few times in the big leagues from 1969 to 1993, so it could happen here as well. That's the way the game was played. It may not be "fair" in that case, but each division winner deserves to be there by taking care of business against their 5 divisional opponents.
So I'll post a poll to gauge if there is enough sentiment in favor of this proposal before I (we) submit it to SOM.