Changing the Wildcard game format

As we embark on the sixth set of Wildcard games in the MLB, we will see two teams' miraculous seasons come to a screeching halt as losing one game will cost them their entire body of work. That precise idea right there has come under much scrutiny lately. The concept ofone game and one game alone ending end a team's successful season in almost a snap of the fingers like that makes a lot of people upset and gives them reasons for wanting something better to be put in place. While the wildcard game still has a mystique to it that people love because of the intense drama and immediate gratification it brings, there are also people, at the same time, that think it simply doesn't work, regardless of how fun it is. I'm going to offer up a few alternatives to the singular wildcard game and let you decide if they are better or worse than the current system.

Alternative 1: Best-Of-3 series

This is by far the most popular alternative people bring up. It's a seemingly easy alternative, and most of the baseball calendar includes 3-game series' in one ballpark so why not? I mean, it makes sense. If you want to decide who is better then just do it like you do all year, essentially. The problem here though might be time. To have a best-of-3, you're going to need three days. You'd have to start the series' on Tuesday since the Monday after regular season ends is reserved for possible tiebreaker games, as well as just a nice day off. This means the division series probably wouldn't start until that following Saturday or  Sunday, Friday at the absolute earliest if neither series goes 3 games (and this is the MLB playoffs we are talking about of course one will go the distance). This is simply just way too long to ask a division champ to sit and wait. Also, the MLB already pushes it on the brink of November or into November, so extending even two additional days may not go over well. The only way this could work is to compress it into a two-day series with a double header on one of the days. This is logistically plausible, but there'd have to be some modifications to the traditional best-of-3 format we often think about.

Alternative 2: KBO Style

The KBO (Korean Baseball Organization) often has some whacky rules, and this system I am about to present is very much so, but it may just be crazy enough to work. The system is that it is 2-game series, with the home team needing to win 1 game to move on and the road team having to win twice to move on. What is good about this is it can be completed in maximum two days, and that is huge. Another key thing is it gives the home team a more decided advantage that they deserve for being WC1 (first wildcard team). Home-field advantage means less in baseball than a lot of other sports however, so it still balances out a bit. Moreover, the road teams winning wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility at all still; I mean, the road team is 7-3 in the WC game format after all. The home team's advantage would not be too large that it is insurmountable but still large enough that it feels like they actually earned an advantage. The disadvantage, though, is that could you imagine the outrage from people if the WC2 team won game 1 but lost game 2 to lose the series, despite it being a 1-1 series? People might feel cheated if that were to occur, and that's understandable for sure. 

Alternative 3: Winner of WC2 vs WC3 plays WC1

This is a wild idea, way in the depths of the imagination. Hear it out anyways, if for nothing else but a laugh even. Say the MLB added an additional WC team to the mix (already off to a crazy start). Now, on day one of this, WC3 faces off against WC2 (WC2 at home). The winner of this advances into day 2 to play against WC1 (WC1 at home). This would create a lot of drama and would basically give us four wildcard games instead of two. That is the beauty of this. Another thing to like is, again, it can be completed in 2 days. The drawback could be, however, that the winner of WC2 vs WC3 gain added momentum from winning a game going into matchup with WC1. However, WC1 would have their best pitcher ready and everyone fully rested going up against a team not well-rested that used their best pitcher already and had to travel (possibly travel twice if it's WC3), so it may balance out a bit in that way. If nothing else, this would give the fans even more do-or-die drama to love. It is fun to think about how crazy this system would be though. 

Alternative 4: Three team round robin

This one is another outlandish one, but again, hear it out. What if we had a 2-day, 3-team round robin at a neutral site to decide the last two teams in the playoff field in each league. This series would include the two wildcard teams and the division winner with the worst record. Each team would play just 2 games over 2 days, and the best two records on those games move on and the other one is left out. The idea behind this would be to throw these teams into the ring and see who comes out on top of the pile. The thing to like, again is that it can be completed in two days. Another thing is it would let these teams see show who is better in a different sort of way. The drawbacks would be that two games each may not be enough to decide a round robin and throwing a division champion into this mix would unfair. 

Note: This round robin could work with a WC3 added as well, but only one of the three would move on instead of two.

Are either of these alternatives better than the current one? Well, that is going to vary from person to person. Some people like the idea of changing the wildcard format, some don't and some would be open to it if an alternative they liked came by. The beauty of this is that there are really no right or wrong answers because each format suggested have their strengths and their weaknesses, and the current system is like that too. Because of this, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to definitively say what the absolute correct format is or should be, but it is certainly fun to consider all the different possibilities there are out there.