There have been many complaints that MLS's 2-game aggregate playoff format, with the second game going to the home of the higher seed, is not enough of an advantage to the higher seed. One possible way to compensate for that would be to get rid of the golden goal overtime in case of an aggregate tie, and instead let regular season standings be the tiebreaker. In other words, the higher seed needs only an aggregate draw to win. Would that be fair enough?
anyone just sitting back, enjoying the games? I'm fine with the playoffs how they are. True it's too many teams and unclear first round home advantage. two 0-0 playoff games produce a winner? either make it 1 leg only (week off to promote), but don't create any more new-to-soccer MLS rules. expansion will solve the # of teams issues. playoff structure stability is what I want. changing it each year makes it hard for casual fans to start getting involved. making sure all the playoff games are on tv is key. directkick helps but not sure if FSW has a wide enough subscription base get rid of the lower seed legs of first round and there's 7 playoff games. MLS could afford to put them all on generally available TV (basic cable) best solution, enjoy the games
I think what some people need to realize is that some teams just aren't that good. No matter what the format is, they're going to play bad soccer. This is currently amplified in MLS for a number of reasons but will improve over time. What people need to remember though is that some teams will be bad no matter what playoff system is used. Using your system, the team with the better home record would be likely to play for a tie because a tie or a win would be a win. So right there we have the best teams over the course of the league playing poor soccer to preserve a tie. Not good. I think the playoffs should be two 4 team round robin series, with the team with the best record getting 3 home games and the team with the worst record getting three road games. The top two teams move on to a one-off game with the winner going to MLS Cup. If nothing else, this would be interesting.
I am fully in favor of this format. It has worked very well for the Mexican league (and has now for years.) In fact, it has allowed for some very exciting affairs. Bottom line: it is a proven format. I am not in favor of it because I want to pander to Mexicans or make Vergara happy. I am in favor of it because it works and has been proven to work. Nonsense. You really think a team could bunker for 180 minutes? That tactic would get burned over and over again... Look, it's not really that complicated. It's basically the Uefa away goal rule adjusted for a regular season. There is nothing fuzzy about it... I disagree. The lower seed would be forced to take the initiative from the very first minute (being out with a draw) and that in return would open up room for the higher seed to score a goal of their own. Sounds like a rather exciting scenario to me... And before anybody suggests the NFL format, a maximum three game post-season after a 30-game regular season is, well....simply put -- ridiculous. Besides, the chance for bunkering is much greater with a single game knockout than with the MFL system (like when the visiting team tries to bunker itself to a penalty shootout.) 180 minutes most definitely increase the chance of the higher seed advancing than ninety... The MFL format is the way to go. The lower seed should have to win outright.
no incentive for the better team to play an attacking style. they would play conservatively. not nonsense but mls coaching brilliance anything not easy for the casual fan to undertand isn't a good change. so, we only need a tie - let's go get one!
"Should the aggregate score be tied the team with the better regular season record advances." What is so hard to understand about that?
Let's revisit this thread Monday. but after one year experience, the MLS format is proven to favor the higher seed and to generate exciting games.
half the population doesn't know what the word aggregate means playoffs are generally a clean slate except for where the game is played you're giving almost no incentive to the better team to take risks to score, in fact the opposite - incentive to tie it's like saying, let's make the world series best of 6, better regular season record wins if it's 3-3. playoff overtime is actually exciting
What percentage of the population knows what FC, Real, and Chivas means? ...Notice something? What that half of the population thinks is no longer relevant. Ever watch the MFL playoffs? Their games are very exciting...
How about the simplest system of all.. A one-off knock out game. The team with the better record hosts it providing a 'real' homefield advantage. Its simple and it's exciting.
If we have to have two-leg rounds, the way we have it now is fine. This year, the top seed won 3 of 4 rounds, which is pretty damn good. Last year...Chicago and San Jose were higher seeds, not sure about KC and NE. I think they were both #2s. If so, that's 7 for 8.
I agree completely. And if we're going to have a home-and-away, there should be a bye incentive like Wheelock suggests in his article. While the idea of a tie going to the better regular season record does provide an advantage to the higher seed, I'm afraid it would be a disaster in regard to quality of play. One team (the higher seed) would just bunker in and play for the draw. We have to see that for far too many weeks in the regular season - let's keep it out of the playoffs!
You beat me to it. I think there could be much more advantageous than many think to hosting the 2nd game and knowing exactly what you need to do. Or it could simply be that over 180 minutes, the better team is just more likely to win. I'd be fine with the MFL system as well, but its hard to argue that the system is truly broken at this point.
Yes, very exciting... A post-season that is over as soon as it starts. Everybody's raving about the quality of post-season matches......and now we want to cut the total number of playoff games down to six? (as opposed to twelve under the MFL format)
I would like to see the MFL-style tiebreaker too. It wouldn't be that much of a change from the current system, and it would give a more significant meaning to regular season placement. Although, none of the series' this playoffs would have been affected by it this season, it's more a matter of finding a better way to reward the regular season finish. This is also a matter of improving the significance of the regular season (of course, that change by itself won't do the trick, but it would help a little if we're going with aggregate here). Do it MLS! edit: man, I must be tired, I just repeated my point 3 times in slightly different phrases.
What is wrong with overtime when must-win games are tied? You get more soccer. And next year because of the new FIFA regulations there will be no more golden goal. Tied at the end of 90 and you get another 30 minutes of soccer. Even better. The current playoff system is the best the league has come up with so far. Leave it as is.
Yeah it would be fair, but it probably would have robbed Wizards fan's of Jewsbury's series winning strike in stoppage. I'm fairly certain Bob would have crawled into the bunker when the Wizards equalized. But more often than not it would be a fair tie-breaker giving some real worth to the regular season standings.