We're guaranteed a sub-.500 team playing in the MLS Cup final

Not necessarily, at least if you add the post-season wins and losses to the season totals.

 

and then maybe we can add the pre season and last years record to mask the fact that a poor quality team might end up as "champion".

 

It's happened before in other sports. As someone mentioned on another thread, the Minnesota North Stars made it to the Stanley Cup Finals in 1990-91 (0r maybe int was 89-90) after finishing nearly a dozen games below .500. They were even up 2 games to 1 before the Penguins dispatched them. A few people complained, but the series, and the ones leading up to the Final, was compelling, so who cares. If we get a good game out of the final, it's no big deal.

 

If you think the Revs are a poor quality team then you haven't seen their playoff games as they are playing quite well. San Jose was overachieving ever since last years playoffs and you had to figure they would not repeat. I think you've got the best 3 teams in MLS still in the running and Dallas and San Jose the next two.

Oh wait, Ted wants us to have teams that play different schedules to compare records for a champion. He's a genius. I'll just schedule all my games against Metro and DC and be next years champ. After all I'll have the best record.

They are also going to take away all World Cup titles not won by a league format, and all Champions League titles since they are not won by a league format. Dang they have to take away the European Championship titles too. What championships of note are determined by a league title? Oh the country qualifiers for the Champions League...ok got me...

 

Whoa, easy boy. Someone can think that the MLS system is a little screwy without thinking that league table formats are the only way to go. The problem here in my opinion is not so much that a "bad team" will be in the finals but rather that this just shows that by and large the regular season was pretty close to meaningless. I think the regular season should be about more than just finishing at least 8th and that's pretty much what the regular season is about now.

 

Newsflash: The MLS season is pretty meaningless.

And yet, 3 champs have been #1 and none worse than #4.

I'd like to see the playoffs cut to four teams. The only way this will happen is if we keep complaining to MLS. You've got to figure that at some point they'll figure out that all the playoff games are a waste.

 

I have no idea what any of this means, but I'm sure it was a popular essay yesterday during your 3rd grade recess.

 

Beause as we all know, preseason games and playoff games are the same thing.



But hey, credit where it's due. It's not easy to have an "argument" consisting of only one line of sarcasm that still has an obvious contrdiction. Sarcasm is usually the clever, postmodern way to avoid going out on a limb.

 

Any team ever advanced that was seeded 7th or 8th? Just curious. I'd be for the two conference winners getting a bye and 3-6 playing. It would be a huge advantage to finishing a top of your conference. 6 teams in the playoffs is feasable for a 10 team league. 8 is silly.

 

The Rapids made the final as a 7th seed. I won't mention who the 2nd seed was that year.

 

so then your idea of adding the playoff records to the regular season records to make teams look better is what you would consider "cutting edge"?

I'd say it's really just a way of avoiding sarcasm, the one true altruism we have in this big, cruel world of ours.

 

The only one reason we don't typically add in postseason to a team's cumulative record is becuse it wouldn't be fair to the teams that made the playoffs. . . because those games are harder. To lump them in with the preseason is quixotic to say the least.

 

Actually there are precendents for teams being judged by their overall record and not just league.

For instance. Wasn't it the 73 Dolphins that went 17-0. Etc.

Of course how far you get through the playoffs is a measuring stick when you have to adjust to and beat a team over a series of games.

 

DC United was 16-16 in 1996 and made the final. Not sub 500 but Colorado was 14-18 in 1997 when they made the final.

 

I have always thought this would be a great playoff format. 6 teams is definately better than 8.