When will MLS owners vote for 12 teams playoff?

Again, the question was not whether you're guaranteed to make the SB with a seed, the question is whether your odds are better with a seed. If you think the number of teams that had a seed versus didn't is irrelevant, you don't know the first thing about probability and you shouldn't be involved in this discussion.

 

Check the AFC again. As many non seeds as #1 seeds made it. 1 more non seed than #2 seed made it.

So between the AFC and the NFC we've got two control groups. One says it matters, the other says it doesn't.

 

How did this become about the NFL and the SB?

 

6 out of 17 (the number of one seeds in the pool) is not the same odds as 6 out of 68 (the number of wildcard round teams in the pool).

The question at play was whether having a bye round can reward the regular season more than now even if there are also more teams in the playoffs. If we went by the NFL's example (I didn't bring that one up, but it's as good an example as any), the answer would be yes, because as an individual team that might get a wildcard slot or a bye, you'd like to be out of that wildcard spot, because having the bye improves your odds.

Therefore, if you had a bye round, it wouldn't just be about 'making the playoffs'--you'd want better position within them if you could get it.

 

Your numbers, and the numbers you quoted don't add up.

 

As Unak has observed, this list must cover a 17 year period of time (2008 playoffs not complete) not an 18 year period. Therefore, out of 17 1-seeds in the AFC, 6 advanced to the Super Bowl. Whereas, out of 68 total wildcards. 6 advanced. The 1-seed had about a 1 in 3 shot, versus about 1 in 11 for wildcards.

 

Looking at the AFC .... 4, is 23.5% of 17, not 68.

In any given year (according to the quoted stats) the wild card teams have just as much of, or more of a chance than either of the seeded teams.

 

The argument was about bye vs. non-bye, not wild cards. The non-bye teams are two division champs and two wild cards.

In the 20 seasons since the NFL expanded playoffs to 12 teams, 31 of the 40 Super Bowl participants (77.5%) have had byes.

31 of 80 bye teams (38.8%) have reached the Super Bowl (max possible 50%).
9 of 160 non-bye teams (5.6%) have reached the Super Bowl (max possible 25%).

I don't know what is so difficult about the fact that having a bye is an advantage.

 

In context of this conversation, "WildCard" indicates teams NOT seeded 1 or 2 .... that's one thing that everybody here has grasped.

 

Let's try this way of looking at it instead.

If all things were equal, each team would have a 1/6 change or 16.67% chance of making it to the superbowl.

Out of the 12 possible slots- 5 slots are above the 16.67% mark,and 7 spots are below.

All 4 of the seeded spots, NFC1, NFC2, AFC1, and AFC2 are above the average.

Only 1 of 8 non-seeded spots, AFC4 is above the average.

Clearly, having the seed and the bye makes it easier (but not automatic) to make the super-bowl.

 

Screw the playoffs. Single table round robin determines League CHAMPION just as in most leagues around the World. Chances are pretty darn good a single elimination playoff system will not be won by the best team (nature of the game). Table standings determine placement in CCL and better reflects strength of team.

Let the US Cup competition give you that "Playoff" atmosphere. As stated earlier, maybe 8 "lower league" teams vs top 8 regular season MLS teams if you insist on end of season playoffs. Or heck, have two Cup competitions: one for end of season and one for FA Cup style competition.

Oh yeah, maximum of 20 teams in (top tier) of MLS, go to Promotion/relegation when it comes to further expansion. It'll be a challenge to play a round robin schedule once you hit 20 teams (38 games) Of course, you'd have to start dropping salary caps and have each team manage it's own affairs.... but that's another topic.

 

Playoffs are stupid.
Playoffs are the reason RSL won...undeservingly.

 

Welcome to America- you must be new here.

 

A sport where more than half of the teams make the playoffs is a joke as it takes away from regular season and allows mediocre teams to have chance to win title. Us having 12 teams would have our playoffs even worse than the NBA's which take forever.

 

Well said. I like where only the top of each conference go and then the next best teams are in. It makes for better quality playoffs.

 

When will MLS owners vote to get rid of Bob Kraft and Co. He's a joke who's destroying the game in Boston..and turning MLS into a mockery!

 

You know that every time someone writes this on Bigsoccer, Kyle Beckerman gets laid, right?

You guys keep beating that horse, or effing that chicken. or whatever this is.

Playoffs are never going anywhere, because single table is boring as all hell without pro/rel, which isn't going to happen. And as long as there are playoffs, 8th place teams will have a chance to win (a good chance when they're only 9 points behind the table leaders).

I don't think the league goes to 12 teams any time soon. 8 teams are enough to make a compelling tournament and there ought to be enough competition for those lower playoff spots to keep the regular season interesting, even if there are 20 teams in the league.

 

Obviously as the league grows and more teams are added, the better teams will be making the playoffs. There is no need to make the playoffs 12 teams. 8 is perfect. I wouldn't even mind 4 honestly.

 

I agree completely..! If the United States had every major city clamoring for a team in the top flight..then maybe, actually it would make great sense for no playoffs and pro/rel...

However, that may never happen in our lifetime..so for now..PLEASE KEEP IT AT 8...or lower.

Or make the season really worth while and give the SS a bye to the Final..or at least the semis. Then the regular season champ could really have a reason to say we won the League and look forward to the Cup Double!! just a thought..!

 

I agree. I think cup competitions in CONCACAF in general are pushed aside. This would change that.

 

Nah They did deserve it they Beat the top teams in int playoffs.

Columbus
Chicago
Los Angeles

Thats no cake walk.

 

2 confernces
top 4 in each into playoffs
seeds 1 and 3 from east with 2 and 4 from west into group a
and vice versa for group b
play each team once
top seeds all 3 games at home , 2nd 2 games at home etc
top 2 from each group into semis
neutral final


conference champs into champions league plus next best team in play offs
4 next best teams into superliga

 

Except they didn't deserve to be there. Finishing 8th shouldn't qualify you for anything. THAT is the point.

 

Playoffs aren't the reason that I have trouble when a team like RSL wins the title. It's the structure of the playoffs that's ridiculous. Of the three rounds, only one represents any type of home advantage for the team with the better regular season. The other two rounds are essentially neutral competitions. The regular season should mean something beyond getting to the playoffs. How well you do in the regular season should have meaning. A team shouldn't be able to sneak into the playoffs and then be two neutral rounds and one away game from a title.

 

It'll never happen. In my opinion, letting in more than 1/3 of the teams unnecessarily dilutes the meaning of regular season games. I wouldn't mind if the number of teams in the playoffs were reduced to four.