http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/mls-reveals-expanded-playoffs-structure-2011 It seems more complicated. If it was used for 2011, we would play the wild card game against Colorado.
I don't like this format, as it gives too much of an advantage to the top 3 teams in each conference. In years where one conference is much stronger than the other (like last year), and the teams are still playing a balanced schedule, that doesn't seem right. With the top 3 teams in each conference getting a bye, that means that teams with much better records could be forced to play an extra "Wild card" game. Eventually, if the teams don't play a balanced schedule, like in MLB or the NFL, then something like this makes more sense. It's hard to predict at the beginning of the year, but this year it seems like the West will be much stronger than the East again, at least at the top of the conference. LA, RSL, Dallas, Colorado and Seattle are likely to be as good as they were last year, if not better. The jury is still out on the Quakes, but they should be at least as good, if not slightly better. Compare that to the East, where Columbus seems to be in rebuilding mode, New England looks to be as bad if not worse than last year, and while Philly and DC will likely be better, they still seem behind of the top West teams. At this point, other than New York, it's hard to say which teams in the East will be decent this year. So in the end, this could mean that the 4th, 5th, 6th and perhaps even 7th place teams in the West all get stuck as Wild Cards while they could have better records than the 3rd place team in the East...... The part of the playoffs that seems to be more "unfair" is the two game aggregate goal format in the Conference semifinals which doesn't give much of an advantage to the higher seeded team. I was expecting that to change. I guess the good news for the Wild Card teams is that if they get past the Wild Card game, they then play the home and away two game format against the top seeded Conf leaders, and have a reasonable chance of winning that game. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.
What I don't like about this playoff structure is the addition of two more teams. In an 18 team league it is ridiculous to have 10 teams (55.5%) qualify for the playoffs. This only furthers the chance that a team with a losing record could win the MLS cup. The march toward mediocrity continues
No it makes their regular season essentially meaningless. Just because their playoffs are a joke we want to be like them?
well i'm pretty sure both their leagues are doing just fine. I personally prefer a sport where a lot of teams get into the playoffs...it's not fun if you're a fan of a loser team that never makes playoffs. Plus, nothing is better at getting fans than a good playoff run. more teams in playoffs = more playoff runs = more fans.
OK, time for a single table, top 8 teams play in the playoffs, #1 vs #8, #2 vs #7, #3 vs #6, #4 vs #5...
Actually they're not doing ok. The NBA is having so much trouble they may have to contract a few teams. And the NHL has several franchises that are struggling mightily.
That wont happen anytime soon. Garber has gone on record saying that he'll keep conferences as long as he's commissioner. He's convinced that the match-ups that are generated by this format will create rivalries that fans will want to watch. Like regular season matches wont do that between nearby clubs. I enjoy playoffs but it should be the top 8 teams regardless of geography. I don't think it's fair that a team has a much better record than other teams that are in the playoffs but the only reason they're not in the playoffs is because they're unlucky to be in a strong conference.
Well yeah. The more playoff rounds you have, the more money you make. But it has little to do with improving the game or the game's integrity. It's all about trying to make up losses their leagues are incurring elsewhere. Particularly in the NHL "sunbelt" outside of San Jose. The rest of their sunbelt teams have turned out to be a disaster.