The Perplexing History of MLS Playoffs

Discussion in 'MLS: News & Analysis' started by cpwilson80, Nov 25, 2015.

  1. The Artist

    The Artist Member+

    Mar 22, 1999
    Illinois
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This actually reminds me how much less I enjoy single game series. I'd be more than happy with a 56% winning percentage for the higher seed given how close the top 12 MLS teams usually are.
     
    footballfantatic and whiteonrice04 repped this.
  2. lime

    lime Member

    May 18, 2016
    not sure what "ideal" is, but 56% is too low, IMO. (to the extent that we're participating in soccer version of keynesian social engineering). while MLS playoff teams are close, that's probably about what you'd expect, with a large enough sample size, from neutral field between slightly uneven teams. if you want the regular season to mean much, there needs to be a bit more of an advantage for being good. an ideal range is probably around 67%, IMO. the top 12 are fairly close, but they're there. the Red Bulls were about +21 in GD over the Impact during the regular season. not La Liga huge but .6 goals/game in a league where the average is ~2.8 goals/game is nothing to sneeze at.
     
    SiberianThunderT and The Franchise repped this.
  3. asoc

    asoc Member+

    Sep 28, 2007
    Tacoma
    People like to say the playoffs are like the lottery.

    But I really do believe there is a different skill set for those who can get it done when it matters most.
    Being consistent throughout a regular season is impressive too. But when it comes to the do or die moments, seeing who has the ability to dig deep and put it all out there and get it done is really impressive to me.
     
  4. whiteonrice04

    whiteonrice04 Member+

    Sep 8, 2006
    #179 whiteonrice04, Nov 9, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2016
    I thought you wanted a continuation of the same rules used during the season. How does overtime fit that bill?
    I think the first to four is too complicated and would seem odd to the average sports fan, and yes I think at this point in MLS evolution they need to be worried about the average sports fan. IMO, playoffs need to be a simple format. I think aggregate goals is extremely simple. I do think the away goals rule complicates it some and makes it confusing to average sports fans.

    I would be OK with these two or three tweaks to the current two game aggregate series.
    - eliminating the away goal tie breaker (I agree with you guys that this is a must. It needs to go.)
    - letting the higher seed choose which leg they want to host
    - I would consider the idea of letting the higher seed advance in the case of an aggregate tie. No overtime...higher seed advances. My fear is this could be a little odd to some sports fans.
     
  5. lime

    lime Member

    May 18, 2016
    I don't think first to 4 is that complicated for the average fan. it basically makes it best-of-3 with game 3 just happening to be only 30 minutes of extra time. bigger issue is probably more just people being like "well that's dumb" but you get that with casual fans on aggregate, too (keep in mind that MOV is basically meaningless in US sports other than as the #7 tiebreaker in the NFL and style points with college football poll voters).

    1) needs to happen now. like I would be fine with MLS ditching it for the conference finals. it was a stupidly conceived rule.

    2) should happen, although I don't think you'd see anyone actually opt to do it. the backlash against club management the first time a higher seed lost it ET/PKs away would be huge. sports decision-makers are pretty risk adverse.

    3) is intriguing, although Mexico actually dropped this. I also think any system where it isn't perceived to be settled on the field will be an issue.
     
    whiteonrice04 repped this.
  6. The Artist

    The Artist Member+

    Mar 22, 1999
    Illinois
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yes, I think there are a couple different debates overlapping.
    1) Were the upsets this year problematic? I think the answer is no. NYRB have established problems with knockout games and the missed penalty that probably would have spurred them to victory is another chapter in that story. NYC was clearly not built for the playoffs with their mistake prone defense and their poor home form. Dallas, too, was a team that relied more on their offense but when two key pieces of that offense were lost before the playoffs, they no longer seemed a favorite. Colorado is built for the playoffs and is making good use of their homefield advantage and advanced. Had the order of games been reversed or away goals been eliminated, there's a good chance the same teams advance.
    2) Is the higher seed win percentage historically a problem? Maybe. It's lower than one might expect unless one thinks that regular season performance is a poor predictor of playoff success. I could certainly see the argument that more open play succeeds in the regular season but not in the playoffs such that being a higher seed really doesn't mean much.
    3) Is the current format entertaining and fair? I think you can debate this without even relying too much on real world results. I tend to find aggregate goals entertaining as the week between games is full of fun talk and debate and each goal in the first game seems meaningful. Away goals add the excitement of a team snatching victory from defeat with one kick of the ball, but it also means that a shutout in the first game can really alter the feel and flow of the second game. Away goals also helps us avoid PKs, which I find to be an even worse way to decide a winner. I was never in favor of away goals but I can take it or leave it as a tiebreaker. To me the higher seed tiebreaker takes the best parts of away goals (avoid PKs, dramatic shift in fortunes) while eliminating the major flaw (arbitrarily making some goals worth more than others), but I understand why it is probably an unacceptable solution. First to four also eliminates the major flaw of away goals but it will likely result in overtime and PKs for at least half of all series. Overtime in soccer is wonderful about 10% of the time (teams exchanging goals) and dreadful about 80% of the time (tired teams waiting for penalty kicks).
     
    Ismitje and whiteonrice04 repped this.
  7. The Artist

    The Artist Member+

    Mar 22, 1999
    Illinois
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Away goals are certainly not part of the regular season but aggregate goals are. In the regular season if you are tied with another team on points and wins then the team with the better goal differential is higher in the standings. In the playoffs if you are tied with your opponent on points and wins, then it makes sense that aggregate goals would be the tiebreaker. The away goal rule greatly skews things as you point out several times, but I don't think it is a different set of rules to consider aggregate goals as a way of differentiating two tied teams.
     
  8. ToMhIlL

    ToMhIlL Member+

    Feb 18, 1999
    Boxborough, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If you get 4 points out of a two-game series, by definition you would have won the series using the total-goals formula anyway.

    Didn't Mexico do something like having a 2-leg series, and instead of the tie-breaker being away goals, it went to the higher-seeded team? Do they still do that? So the lower team knew it needed to attack more and get the extra goal, even if it was tied. Did that lead to higher seeded teams bunkering? Any data on how that turned out?

    Personally, I like the idea of group play, but it would only work with multiples of 4, not 2x6. The top team plays 3 games at home, the second team hosts 2 games and the 3rd team hosts the 4th team. The 4th team should be happy just to be in the playoffs, so they shouldn't whinge about not getting a home game. The only drawback is if there are two 2-0 teams playing on the last matchday, there would also be a meaningless game between two 0-2 teams.
     
  9. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Yes, but you could also win a total goals series by only getting 3 points, the same as the other team. If you switch to 4 points, then you cannot advance after splitting the first two games.
     
  10. nlsanand

    nlsanand Member+

    May 31, 2007
    Toronto
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016–17_Liga_MX_season#Liguilla_-_Apertura

    Apparently, away goals is now first tiebreaker then higher seed. No extra time in QFs or semis.
     
  11. nlsanand

    nlsanand Member+

    May 31, 2007
    Toronto
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    If I can throw a random idea (not necessarily what I think would become a rule). Instead of away goal tiebreaker, how about a last goal tiebreaker. Ideally, this would only be used after extra time.

    I note this is a good rule for a lot of reasons (slightly favours home side in 2nd leg, allows game to be won/lose with a goal, reduces penalties, and also parrots organic soccer games played in parks).
     
    The Franchise repped this.
  12. lime

    lime Member

    May 18, 2016
    right now, total goals is just in effect the first tiebreaker, since you can't lose a series with 4 points. away goals is the second tiebreaker, then extra time, then penalty kicks. going 4 points just means that extra time becomes the tiebreaker.
     
  13. Flambe

    Flambe New Member

    Feb 27, 2013
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    I think I read the whole thread, but if this was already suggested I apologize.

    What about putting playoff teams into groups?

    Each conference would have 2 groups:

    Group A
    Seed #1
    Seed #4
    Seed #6

    Group B
    Seed #2
    Seed #3
    Seed #5

    Each team plays each of the other teams in their own group once, at the higher seeded team's stadium. That's a total of 2 games per team in each group, 3 games total. No away goals rule. Group winners advance to the Conference Championship, and then of course to the MLS Cup Final match against the winner of the other conference.

    Why 1/4/6 + 2/3/5 and not 1/5/6 + 2/3/4? Because in 1/5/6 + 2/3/4, the 5th seeded team would host a playoff game whereas the 4th seeded team would not. So 1/4/6 + 2/3/5 ensures that seeds 1 - 4 all host at least 1 playoff game each (in the case of 1 & 2, 2 playoff games), and seeds 5 & 6 never will (well, in the group stage anyway).

    I like this system because:
    - Higher seeds are rewarded with more home games (Seeds #1 & #2 never have to travel in the group stage).
    - Seed #1 gets lower seeds in their group, thus giving a little more meaning to #1 vs #2 seed
    - A single game won't ruin you (because every team plays twice)
    - Goals scored, the 2nd tiebreaker, is important, so you won't see teams bunkering. Teams will want to attack and score in both games to give them better standings in the table

    Yes, this means that 2 teams won't get home playoffs, but I think that's ok. (use the NFL as an example: wild cards never host a playoff game, but they're still wildly successful).

    And, it feels "natural" - that is, we see Group play in lots of tournaments, so it's not forced.
    People can continue to argue about the best format for the Conference Championship game(s), whether it's home-and-away or just a single home game at the higher seeded team's field.

    Thoughts?
     
  14. holiday

    holiday Member+

    Oct 16, 2007
    wait, doesn't mls already have a playoff format? :)
     
  15. whiteonrice04

    whiteonrice04 Member+

    Sep 8, 2006
    IMO, group play doesn't make sense in playoffs that follow a season. The season is the group play.
    Group play works for most other tournaments because there isn't any games played between the teams before the tournament starts. It guarantees each team at least a few games.
    Group play for MLS Cup would in my mind actually devalue the season more than enhance it. Not sure how making the higher seed play against more teams (2 instead of the current format of them only having to play 1 team before the conference finals) to advance to the conference finals helps them out.
     
    nlsanand and holiday repped this.
  16. Stan Collins

    Stan Collins Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Silver Spring, MD
    Group play could be interesting, but the tricky part is, what if a team that's already eliminated goes into the game and gives a half-effort, skewing the group in favor of whoever got lucky enough to play them last? It's better in three-team groups, but even there it happened once in the Canadian Championship.
     
  17. ToMhIlL

    ToMhIlL Member+

    Feb 18, 1999
    Boxborough, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Three-team groups don't work too well since one team will have finished while the last game is going on. The potential for shenanigans is much greater (1978 World Cup) than it is with a four-team group, where all the final games are played at the same time.

    It would be hard to it with the 12 playoff teams, even if they seeded them by points to make 3 four-team groups. Somehow, either 8 or 4 teams would have to go through, and I don't see how you could do that and have it work. Now once we get to a 28 (or more) team league, having 16 playoff teams and 4 groups could work...
     
  18. Daniel from Montréal

    Aug 4, 2000
    Montréal
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    What kind of nonsense are you guys talking about? Playoffs are playoffs, they're not gonna start doing group-play rounds all of a sudden. It's a knock-out competition.
     
    JasonMa and whiteonrice04 repped this.
  19. jayd8888

    jayd8888 Member+

    Aug 22, 2006
    Denver CO
    I think the longer MLS sticks to the same format the more likely it will become tradition and the less likely changing it will be up for discussion.
     
    whiteonrice04 repped this.
  20. whiteonrice04

    whiteonrice04 Member+

    Sep 8, 2006
    Yeah don't you think group play makes since after 34 games of group play? Haha
     
  21. nlsanand

    nlsanand Member+

    May 31, 2007
    Toronto
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    This is where I disagree. Though honestly group play is a stupid idea. I think stinking with the same for the sake of sticking with the same has been used to rule out better ideas.

    One of the dumbest elements of MLS playoffs is the single game MLS cup final where a team gets home field despite east and west not having comparable schedules. This is especially true since it uses 2-legged playoffs between teams in same conference teams' records are comparable.

    Just as MLS has changed playoff structures before, this can be rectified for the better.
     
    JasonMa repped this.
  22. Stan Collins

    Stan Collins Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Silver Spring, MD
    I don't think he's describing what ought to happen as much as what tends to happen.

    OR it's the only element that is not dumb, because it's the only one that incentivizes good teams not to half-ass the last games of the regular season. Hosting an MLS Cup Final can be a financial windfall for a team, as well as an irreplaceable moment for the players and fans. You can bet it's one of the incentives teams really care about.
     
    whiteonrice04 repped this.
  23. nlsanand

    nlsanand Member+

    May 31, 2007
    Toronto
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    If it makes sense to have two legged semi fimals out of fairness (or whatever reason), it makes more sense to have a two legged final. Fairness matters, but it seems the league is more concerned with emulating the Super Bowl or some sense of Americanness that doesn't like 2-legged matches.

    The real issue is the game used to be neutral (so a one-off made sense there), but was changed to the home team (which I also supported since it guaranteed a crowd). But the league hasn't changed the final structure to match this home and home structure out of a sense of inertia which is why I refer to this unwillingness to change.

    Additionally, from 2008-2011, the schedule was relatively balanced across the league whereas now it's not. So saying that we should reward one west or east team with asymmetric schedules is not fair. And again, fairness matters.

    With regards to your point of incentivizing a team to try in the last game where its playoff or bye status is concerned. I acknowledge its philosophical, but think it simply doesn't weight that much.

    a) For starters, it's only applicable where those teams are in different conferences. When they're in the same conference, it makes no difference since they'll play in the semis not MLS Cup.
    b) Second of all, no 3-6 team is going to give it that much if they have to play mid week game anyways as they likely feel they would have to play MLS Cup on the road.
    c) I'm not even sure that 1-2 seeds even do this based on prior experience.
     
  24. Stan Collins

    Stan Collins Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Silver Spring, MD
    The problem is that few people accept that antecedent, so naturally few are going to accept the consequent that flows from it.

    I can assure you 'fairness' was not the consideration (and anyway there are too many angles from which to view that word for it to be useful without further specificity). The consideration was to have every fanbase hosting a playoff game so that they would feel invested in the playoffs.
     
  25. KCbus

    KCbus Moderator
    Staff Member

    United States
    Nov 26, 2000
    Reynoldsburg, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well, those teams don't deserve to host an MLS Cup final.

    Last season, Crew SC came into Decision Day as the #3. They promptly blew D.C. United off the field 5-0, and that margin of victory gave them the edge they needed to host over Portland, should the Timbers have made it -- and we all know where that match wound up taking place.
     

Share This Page