I think you're mixing a couple ideas here but as for the top seed needs 1 win, lower seed needs 2, Ive seen it suggested that you only enact this when there is a 5 game lead or more.

I was referring to the doubleheader with away having to win 2 under any circumstance. Anything that changes the set up based on the final rankings is pedantic and tiresome.

Is the next step to penalize a 86 game division winner when the wild card has won over 97 games? NO. Win your division, welcome to the divisional. Wild card team, win your game.

That's been suggested.

I like how it is now.

I love the Double Header in the post season idea though.

Japan already does this.

1 game. I like the winner take all one game playoff. I don't want to invest more then one game to a wildcard team I don't follow. Would not watch the Twins vs Yankees if it was a 3-5 game wildcard series

The reservations many fans, players, and executives share about a 162-game season boiling down to a one-game play-in will burst out, fueling coast-to-coast debate and setting social media aflame.

The problem is, regardless what you do, the 162-game season often boils down to one game. So what? Win that fucking game.

It kinda does but it doesn't. The World Series went to a Game 7 but the Indians had 3 chances to close it out.

Any series that reaches a winner take all could have been won earlier so not TRULY one game.

Go back to the way it was. 3 division winners, one wild card. Top seed plays the Wild Card regardless of if that team is from their division or not.

Also no gloves and you had to take a train between cities.

Cancel the playoffs. Declare the champion to be the one who wins the most regular season games.

It's partially the Yankee thing but also the disparity between the teams. This is the first year in a while that it's been more than 1-2 games.


Here is what Rosenthal wrote. I love the doubleheader idea, that's great.


Rosenthal: If Yankees or D-Backs lose, expect wild-card outrage—and calls for change; more news and notes

Ken Rosenthal
1 hour ago
Hoo boy, imagine the reaction if the heavily-favored New York Yankees lose the American League wild-card game to the Minnesota Twins tonight. The reservations many fans, players, and executives share about a 162-game season boiling down to a one-game play-in will burst out, fueling coast-to-coast debate and setting social media aflame.

Baseball would face immediate pressure to expand the wild-card round and prevent other superior regular-season teams from suffering similar fates. A new format also could include what Hall of Fame pitcher John Smoltz and many others in the game believe is necessary—a fairer, more rigorous wild-card round that would ultimately provide a greater reward for division champions.

Fans outside of New York would howl in protest over a so-called “Yankee rule,” accusing baseball of kowtowing to the television networks that, in search of higher ratings, want to show the Yankees as often as possible. I work for one of those networks, FOX, and yes, business is better when the Yankees are involved. But outrage will be just as warranted if the Arizona Diamondbacks lose to the Colorado Rockies in the National League wild-card game on Wednesday night.

Both the Yankees and D-Backs won six more regular-season games than their wild-card opponents—the Yankees finished with 91 victories, the Twins 85; the D-Backs had 93 wins, the Rockies 87. Only once since the inception of the wild-card round in 2012 has the spread between wild-card opponents been as large, when the Atlanta Braves won 94 games to the St. Louis Cardinals’ 88 that first year, and lost the one-game knockout, 6-3.

In each of the past six wild-card games—one in each league over the last three years—the difference in victories between the wild-card opponents has been one or zero. No real disparity, no cause for complaint. But the other issue with the wild-card game—that it is not enough of a hindrance for the participants—is a constant concern no matter what the final standings say.

Travis Sawchik of The Athletic recently wrote on Fangraphs about the two-game, wild-card round used by the Korea Baseball Organization (KBO); the higher seed needs to win only one game to advance, while the lower seed must win two. Joel Sherman of the New York Post expanded the concept, arguing for the wild-card round to remain one game only if the participants finished within four games of each other; otherwise, the round would follow the Korean format, giving the superior team the edge yet preserving drama for the networks.

Neither concept would extend the postseason, particularly if baseball employed a doubleheader and play the two games in one day. Smoltz, FOX’s lead analyst, offers additional suggestions—a best-of-three with a doubleheader on the second day or a best-of-three played on consecutive days. Either way, the off-day before the start of the Division Series would be removed, putting the wild-card winner at a major disadvantage with its pitching for the next round.

Think about it: If the Twins eliminated the Yankees by beating them twice, no one could rightly say the Yankees did not have a good enough opportunity to win. But if the Twins win a one-game elimination and/or the Rockies knock off the D-Backs, complaints will be justified, and not just from the networks. A team with six more wins than its opponent in the regular season should get a bigger break in the wild-card round.

I know what some of you are thinking: Ken, you would not be writing this if it were the Rays playing the Twins and not the Yankees. I’d like to believe otherwise; the circumstances would be unfair no matter who was playing. If the Twins pull off the upset tonight baseball will get the uproar it deserves—and needs.

It was written by a midget who wears a bowtie. Of course it's not meant to be taken seriously.

Hey you won congrats, on to the next round, lol jk beat them again and then you can advance. It's literally a troll suggestion.