One was the subject of the expansion of post-season play. For the first time since 1995, a change will be made to the playoff format. Starting no later than 2013, a second Wild Card will be added in each league, increasing the post-season pool to 10 of the 30 clubs.

The new format does not appreciably increase the length of the post-season since it consists of a simple one-game playoff between the two Wild Cards in each league. The winner of that game will advance to the regular Division Series.

Though this seems like a no-brainer in terms of implementation, the November announcement stated the question of whether it will go into effect in 2012 would be decided no later than March 1. With one month to go before the self-imposed deadline, the two sides have yet to concur.

Not surprisingly, MLB commissioner Bud Selig wants to get it done immediately.

“It’s pretty definite in my mind,” Selig told USA TODAY. “Teams are anxious. Clubs really want it.”

Michael Weiner, executive director of the Major League Players Association, is unsure it is feasible this year.

“The 2012 season was not designed to accommodate an extra round of playoffs,” Weiner told USA TODAY. “We’re having discussions to see if it can work. We’ll decide in the next month or so if we’re able to do it.”

Though Weiner was not specific, the concern seems to be the travel involved in the expanded post-season schedule. In addition to this one-game Wild Card play-in game, any division ties will reportedly also be decided on the field going forward. The potential scheduling impact of this change also has to be considered. Though not stated, revenue-sharing issues could also be present.

Given the considerable regular-season benefit of an additional team in the playoff hunt in each league, having fewer off-days during the post-season to fit in an extra game or two should not present a significant challenge. Nor should money be an insurmountable problem.

Here’s hoping the two sides resolve their differences, whatever they may be, and MLB begins the new playoff format this coming fall.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.
Follow TCN on Google+.

Atlanta finishes with three at Washington and three at home against their Eastern Division foe and 2012 champion Philadelphia Phillies. Having already clinched home field advantage for the NL Divisional and Championship Series, what might the Phils have left to prove as the regular season ends?

It is too bad that MLB doesn’t give home field advantage in the World Series to the team with the best record in the regular season. In that case, perhaps the Phils would be motivated to ensure they win more games than the Yankees, but that is not the case – leaving an argument ripe for picking another day.

As they will enter into the final three games of the regular season against the Braves Monday through Wednesday, what will take precedence for Philadelphia, currently losers of six straight?

Will they want to rest up to prepare for the playoffs? Will they feel an obligation to play their best, trying to re-establish some momentum? Will they have in the back of their minds which team they would prefer to play in the first round?

Perhaps if rotations were altered, starters were removed early and/or stars were given multiple days off, then questions could be raised. The motivations of the individuals and how hard the players are playing could never be measured, however.

Without even asking, we know the Phillies will say the right things. They play every game to win and the identity of their first-round opponent does not matter to them. But what are they really thinking?

It is only natural to have a preference as to their NLDS opponent. What is unnatural is that they could help decide that team based on their play in the final three games. Somehow, somewhere, the Cardinals need at least two Atlanta losses in the final six. If the Braves win and keep winning, they are in.

So, which team would the Phillies prefer to play in the NLDS? If Atlanta wins the wild card, the Phils would play Arizona, the division winner with the worst record currently. (It could be Milwaukee instead, based on how the final six games unfold.) Instead, if the Cardinals claim the wild card, they would face the Phillies in the first round.

The Cardinals are one of only two teams to take their season series against Philadelphia at six wins and three losses. (The Nationals at 10-8, including a just-completed sweep, are the other.)

Would that lack of success against St. Louis motivate the Phillies to want another shot at the streaking Cards, who took three of four from them in their house last weekend? Or would they prefer to face Arizona, against whom they split six games this year? Overall, the Snakes are 5-5 over their last ten games. (Philadelphia had a 4-3 season edge over the Brewers.)

Could all of this somehow affect how the Phillies’ approach their final three regular season games against Atlanta?

(Of course, it should go without saying that if the Cardinals don’t take care of business against the Chicago Cubs this weekend, the final three games may not matter to anyone. Specifically, a combination of five Atlanta wins and St. Louis losses, which could occur as soon as Sunday, would end the wild card race once and for all.)

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

In a recent post, I looked at two of the leading proposals for Major League Baseball to expand the playoffs. As Commissioner Bud Selig made the rounds at the end of last season, he was increasingly vocal in his support to add two wild cards, one per league.

Apparently that will not come to pass in 2011. Even Bud can’t make major changes to the game unless the owners and the Players Union are behind him.

The Chicago Tribune’s Phil Rogers, who has been on top of this story from the beginning, tweeted this:

“Expanded MLB playoffs will definitely not begin before 2012. Owners and players union are unwilling to pursue amending CBA for next year.”

The current collective bargaining agreement will expire on December 11, 2011. Preparing for the negotiations for the next CBA has reportedly been a major topic during this week’s General Manager Meetings in Orlando.

The AP reports there appears to be little opposition to the concept of the expanded playoffs in 2012, but that will still need to be negotiated into the CBA. There does not yet seem to be a preferred format for a wild card play-in round, whether one or three games or something else entirely.

In fact, Selig is now pondering expanding the aperture to four wild cards. Ed Price of Fanhouse tweeted the following, quoting the commissioner:

“Eight (playoff teams) is a very fair number, but so is 10.”

When the 2011 regular season schedule was announced, with its start a week earlier than in the past, some (including me) speculated it was done at least in part to accommodate the new wild cards.

Even though that won’t be the case, the new schedule guarantees (unless there are a large number of weather cancellations) that the World Series will be complete in October. That isn’t a bad thing.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

I fully acknowledge being a baseball traditionalist. As such, I was not excited about the institution of the Wild Card in MLB. After some time, I now admit that it has been effective in prolonging fan interest and therefore, putting more money into the owners’ coffers.

My main beef moved to the format itself, which I have always strongly felt devalues the first-place finishers by giving them just one more home game than the Wild Card entrant. Having a five-game Division series instead of a seven-game set has also rubbed me the wrong way.

Here in 2010, we have already seen one Wild Card team, the New York Yankees, dispatch a division winner, the Minnesota Twins, in three quick games.

As we learned when the 2011 schedule was announced, next season will begin early – on Thursday, March 31, a half-week sooner than the traditional Monday start. This may have been designed to buy more time for October baseball.

That is what Chicago Trib’s Phil Rogers believes as part of a plan by MLB to expand the playoffs starting this coming year. One big reason why? Money, of course. In-house outlet MLB Network can then elbow up to the post-season broadcasting table.

It would also be consistent with recent comments from commissioner Bud Selig, who in addition to taking frequent bows over the addition of the Wild Card, also notes that MLB has the lowest percentage of playoff participants of major sports and favors a growth in October (and November) ball.

As an aside, I wonder when MLB will make more money from their Advanced Media ventures than from running the teams themselves. As a journalist, I fear the expanding role of the owners of a league self-reporting, with its inherent risks of stifling objectivity, but that is a subject for another day.

Anyway, Rogers suggests two possible formats are under consideration.

1)     A play-in, best-of-three series between the two Wild Card clubs in each league.

2)     A one-game play-in between the two.

The former seems fairer to me than a single winner-take all contest, but even it would not be without controversy. The division winners would have to wait for at least a half-week, which could either be good (resting starters and revamping rotation order) or bad (entire team sitting for the better part of a week getting rusty).

Nothing was yet said about the Division Series and Championship Series mix, but I hope they would make two other changes at the same time as the Wild Card is expanded. First, give the division winners at least a 5-2 home advantage over any Wild Cards and second, increase the DS to seven games.

One other consideration is the removal of potential game 163’s, tiebreaker or play-in contests. The thinking is that they would in effect add a fourth level of post-season play. In other words, too much. Instead, an NFL-style of regular-season tiebreaker based on season series and division record may be implemented, Rogers reports.

On one hand, it would eliminate exciting play-in games like when the Twins and White Sox tied in 2008. Better though would be recognizing what occurred during the 162-game season and giving the berth to the superior team over the previous six months. Overall, I think this proposed change would be positive.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

The conclusion is that many teams further out in the standings that were making trades were wasting their efforts and perhaps hurting themselves for the future.

As the reader comments that follow point out, eight of the 28 reached the World Series and four of them won, a sample that is too large for my tastes. I am not going to go off on how badly the 162-game season has been devalued by a first-round best-of-five series. I won’t, but I would really like to. Well, maybe I will just a little bit.

A baseball purist at heart, I can begrudgingly acknowledge the value of the wild card for fan interest purposes. Still, the first round of the playoffs needs to be extended to seven games even if it means shortening the regular season. Further, the wild card must be put at a greater disadvantage (only one or two home games at most). (The first point caused an awful flashback to Ford Frick and his fricking 1961 asterisk.)

At any rate, Luttrell’s post left me wanting. The most important question was left mostly unanswered.

Which teams were not within five games of the wild card at the non-waiver deadline but still made trades that are most likely to do them no good?

I am not sure why the writer stopped short of the logical conclusion, so I will satisfy my own curiosity, focusing on the National League.

First and foremost, the St. Louis Cardinals were in first place by a half-game on July 31. The other NL Division leaders were Los Angeles and Philadelphia. The co-wild card leaders were San Francisco and Colorado. Other teams within five games of the two were Chicago, Florida, Atlanta, Milwaukee and Houston.

In other words, only six of the 16 NL teams were not either leading their division or sitting within five games of the wild card.

Somewhere Bud Selig is uttering “excellent” while tenting fingers together, even if he isn’t counting his money at the time. (Heading further astream, is it just me or can anyone else see the resemblance of a rug-free Bud with Mr. Burns from The Simpsons?)

Two of the “out of it clubs” are from each division. They are New York and Washington from the East, Cincinnati and Pittsburgh from the Central along with Arizona and San Diego from the West.

Pittsburgh dumped half their team. San Diego shipped off ace Jake Peavy. Washington jettisoned first baseman Nick Johnson. The Mets and Diamondbacks basically did nothing of substance.

That leaves the one schizophrenic seller-buyer-seller, the Cardinals current opponent, Cincinnati. Walt Jocketty’s Reds made three deals, the biggest in adding former Cardinals third baseman Scott Rolen from Toronto.

This trade probably won’t turn out to be quite as bad as the ill-fated deadline deal made by the Bucs two years ago when they inexplicably picked up Matt Morris, but is as equally puzzling. The Reds were 12 games under .500 at the July 31 deadline and have gone 3-5 since.

In a weird and unfortunate parallel with the Cards’ earlier acquisition of Mark DeRosa, the newest Red has been able to play in just four games for his new club. Rather than a wrist injury, Rolen’s problems have resulted from a beaning suffered a week ago Sunday at the hands of his ex-St. Louis teammate, Rockies pitcher Jason Marquis.

As Cincinnati falls further back in the standings, they made a waiver trade on Sunday sending reliever David Weathers to the Milwaukee Brewers. They had earlier sent infielder/outfielder Jerry Hairston to the Yankees. In other words, if the Reds were a buyer for one day last week, they were a seller immediately before and after.

So there you have it. Other than the odd trade of Edwin Encarnacion and two prospects for an aging, injury-prone and expensive Rolen, none of the NL teams considered too far back in the standings made any such questionable deals.

Maybe that is why the author didn’t bring his original post to its logical conclusion. At least in the NL, there doesn’t appear to be much of anything to say.