Does any one agree with the Home and Home series with a 15 min mini game to decide the winner I know it saves on cost but why cant they have a Home and home series with the mini game being 2 15 min halfs to decide a winner ?
well, its better than the golden goal tiebreaker they used to have. tied at 1? well next goal wins.. it really should be best of 3, but thats just me.
It's not even just costs. It's almost impossible to find three dates in the right order on the right weekend.
Play it out over 2 weekends.....1st weekend is a Friday-Saturay.....or a Friday-Sunday. If it's tied, then play Game 3 the following weekend and give the home team a chance to sell tickets. Sure dates might be a problem, but you take what you can get.....IF you want 3 full games. I still like the Final 4 format they did in 1981 with the Semi-Finals on Friday night and the Championship on Sunday afternoon. The #1 seed could host it. You could sell 2 dates for $25-$30.
Do whatever you want, but this year, they should just have a 3-game MISL Championship Series. If you can't win half your games, you shouldn't qualify for playoffs. 'nuff said!
The other problem is you would not be able to determine playoff format until the end of the season. How do you know if there's 2, 3 or 4 teams with winning records. Plus if you only take teams with winning records then you might as well just stamp Milwaukee and Baltimore in at the beginning of the season and tell the other teams they're playing for nothing. With this format it looks like the Comets (who have already beaten Milwaukee and Baltimore on the road this season) and the Soul (who have beaten Baltimore twice at home this season) will be the two sub .500 teams getting in and I don't think anyone truly believes either of them couldn't pull off an upset.
But then you'd be well into April with two weeks for each round. We do the Final 4. When Cincinnati hosted and lost in the semifinal it killed the championship crowd. And really all four years people only went to the games that involved the host team. In other words, lol, there is no perfect solution. There are pros and cons to every format.
And when the NBA, NHL & NFL can't fill their buildings for playoff games, your counterpoint will become a valid one. PAINFUL TRUTH: Indoor soccer teams LOSE MONEY by playing playoff games... sometimes, they don't collect enough ticket revenue to cover the costs to produce a home game, much less the additional costs for a road game (2-game series)... so unless your team wins it all, the owner is left with a bad taste in his mouth...
It's a valid point now because many NBA and NHL teams are operating in the red way more than these MISL teams. These league aren't having lockouts for no reason, it's because many of the clubs are hemorrhaging cash, having to sell off players because of ridiculous payrolls and aren't drawing enough fans to cover operating expenses. Hell the NBA is talking about contraction because of revenue issues and the NHL has been in trouble for a long time, yet both regularly let in sub .500 teams.
On top of that the Wave and Blast clinched playoff spots weeks ago, at least this way we have all 4 of the other teams still in contention (albeit barely for Syracuse). If you told all the rest of the teams at that point their playoff chances were over they'd have lost way more fans in the remaining games costing them a lot more in the long run. And let's look at attendance figures from last season: Baltimore - 300 less fans per game in the playoffs...hardly much at all Milwaukee - 1,400 MORE fans per game...pretty significant bump Missouri - 400 MORE fans per game...not bad at all Rochester - 14 MORE fans per game....insignificant difference, but not a loss. And you want to talk about inflating numbers, the NHL and NBA are two of the biggest abusers. The NBA is reporting average attendance at Buck's games this season of 14,400 per game...if they've hit that in any 2 game combined it'd be a miracle. Most of the time they close the upper section of the BC and still can't come close to filling the lower bowl.
Really, the NFL has 32 teams and only 12 make the playoffs. I know it happens once in a great while, but when was the last time a sub-.500 team made the NFL playoffs?
I could see for Admirals games, but if they are closing off the upper deck for Bucks games, that is not good. Seems like it would further depress the attendance by driving up the "get-in" ticket price.
I have never seen it closed off for a Bucks game. I've seen it sparsely populated in the upper deck, but they sell all of the "affordable" tickets up there, and they would not alienate those fans. With that said, though, the Bucks are in that "jail" that teams like the Minnesota Twins are in (and the Houston Astros are trying to escape). The Bucks (and Twins) are good enough on paper to "you know, maybe, possibly make a playoff run". Inevitably, that run falls short (or if they do make the playoffs, they also make a quick exit). Then they drop one salary, draft a couple of raw projects, and the worst part - pick-up a couple of mid-priced free agents that won't really help the team, but will make the fans and media think they are getting a great player at great value (Kevin Corriea, anyone?) In the end, they don't want a wholesale roster dump because then nobody would go to the games (or watch them, or listen to them) so they stay just at or below mediocre for years and years and years... and just good enough to keep the lights on. Ladies and Gentlemen, your 21st century Milwaukee Bucks.
Frankly I stopped going to games years ago because I don't think Kohl is committed to putting a winner on the court. The fact that they're shopping Jennings is just more proof. I do however have some buddies who are die hard fans and who typically buy the cheap seats and most games (excluding the higher drawing games like LA, Miami and Chicago) they've been 'encouraged' to move to the lower section to make the crowds look bigger on TV and the TV camera rarely if ever shoots the upper section because of it.
The bucks have the oldest stadium outside of the garden, and as others have stated they are in pugatory, because of the market and how the NBA is run. Kareem leaving changed everything for the Bucks. They could have had him,Oscar roberrtson and a young Dr J on the same team. that team probably would have won 70 games. instead kareem leaves for the big coty and the Bucks havent eenn the same since. At this point I'd rather have the Bucks be relocated and have NHL move in.
Maybe wishes do come true. As a twelve year old I had suffered through the Bullets losing year after year to the Knicks. To finally have the Bullets beat them, in a final game in New York no less, but then have the mis-fortune of running into a young Lew Alcondor and a hungry Oscar Robertson, seemed wildly unfair to me at the time. I wished that neither the Bucks or the Knicks would ever win a championship again. Actually, I wished for the ground to open up and swallow both teams whole, but not being champions again was my fall-back wish. With the exception of a small blip in 1973 for the Knicks, I have spent the last four plus decades blissful in both teams' ineptitude. Some people hold on to things and appearently, I am one of them.