Is there anywhere, at any level, where there's something that can, even broadly, be called a 'playoff' that has ties?
Ignoring single games in two game aggregate series--where the game itself means no more than a half does in any old week of the season--ties in playoffs can occur: The Australian Football League. If the Grand Final is tied, they play again the following week. They used to play again if ANY finals match was tied, and pushed everything back a week. First Class Cricket finals can and do end in draws. I believe that the higher seed usually is given the win in such cases. Mexico does not break even scores in two-legged playoffs. The higher seed advances Until the advent of overtime, college football bowl games can and did end in ties Though not used anymore, the Cricket World Cup allowed, on at least one occasion, the winner of the group stage match to advance when a knockout game ended in a tie. On a slightly unrelated note, many college conferences don't technically break ties when teams tie for first place. They just use tiebreakers to determine which co-champion is given the tournament berth/higher seed.
LigaMX no longer uses the higher seed as the first tie-breaker in the playoffs. They changed to away goals in 2012. Higher seed is now the 2nd tie-breaker.
You mean after away goals? I'd really be against higher seed as a tie-breaker. Personally I don't like either one of them. I think you should have to win something (aggregate goals, overtime, PK's, something) to advance.
Brazil had single table for a few years and now there's a very strong push to return to a playoff system because attendance drops when a club wins the championship with several weeks to go.
Since this is "You be the Don" I'll jump in and say that i have always figured we'd get to the point that there are four 8-team divisions based on geography and that teams would play those in their divisions and their closest geographic divisions more during the season and only be exposed to other places during US Open Cup, MLS Cup, etc. With three in California and three in the Pacific NW, you only need a team in Sacramento and San Diego to get to 8 on the Pacific Coast. You get a West division from: Salt Lake, Colorado, Dallas, Houston, and expansion to places like Austin, San Antonio, Las Vegas, Phoenix, or OK City. You get a midwest out of KC, Columbus, Chicago, Toronto, Montreal and expansion in Minnesota, St. Louis and Indy You get an Atlantic Coast division from NYCFC, Red Bull, Philly, DC United, Orlando, Atlanta, Miami and expansion in the Carolinas. Yes there is a lot of expansion built into this, but I believe MLS will be at 32 teams eventually. If they only get to 28 you cut back one team per division here.
Because you know what would be great, especially for out-of-market TV ratings, is if the best teams on each coast only played each other, every so often. I'm sure the MLS BoG doesn't want LA-NY games ever. Yup, much better that the MLS Game of the Week be Akron vs Des Moines.
I see your point. I will say as a West Coast guy (now living in Texas), I have never cared much about the East Coast teams or cross-country rivalries. Boston-New York is a great rivalry in some sports. LA-San Francisco as well. But LA-NY? Doesn't move the needle for me. I suppose you would argue I'm in the minority. In MLS the best games to watch have to do with local passions, not national demographics.
I can see where you're coming from a little bit. In fact, I'd say a Seattle - Portland match is going to generate more interest nationwide, which is one of the reasons why I'm always whining for a single-bracket playoff. Still, if you're not excited for LA v NYC this year, you're insane.
My 2 cents since we've moved past the OP… I like the idea of two big geographically based conferences each with 6 teams qualifying for the playoffs. It was posted earlier, and I tend to agree with it, that larger conferences result in more exciting playoff races for mid-table teams due to the ability to jump and fall positions week-to-week based off wins or ties. I also like the idea of a 6 team playoff as it encourages a race at the top of the conference for the bye into the semifinal round. One thing I think that is paramount for a system like that to work would be balanced schedules within the conferences. For example once our league reaches 22 teams, 11 team conferences playing 20 games vs conference opponents (home-and-home) and 14 games against out of conference opponents will make the playoff races more equal. It would also make for an easy tie-break if teams are locked on points, 1st tie break is points against conference opponents. As for the playoff format that is one thing I think MLS consistently messes up in their quest to give every team a home playoff game, a concept I get ($$$$), but hate. To me No playoff match should be worth more or less than any other and when one leg is home-and-home and the next is a one off that is what happens. If it were up to me you would have single elimination matches the whole way up the tree starting round one and ending in the final, OR you have 3 game series starting round one and a 3 game series final. The final should not be a different format from the other playoff rounds and the format should not differ within rounds. If MLS changes to this format and STICKS WITH IT, I could see the league having the best of both worlds, American Style system with a single table(ish) feel. Exciting nationwide match ups with heated local rivalries. A fun playoff race so very few teams feel truly out of it, while still having incentive for teams to fight for the top spot in the conference. But sadly I’m not the Don and I see us constantly watering down and expanding the playoffs and I see the format flopping around year to year so the league stays confusing to both casual and invested fans alike.
Actually, once we get to 32 teams with two 16 team divisions, why not expand the playoffs to, say, 32 teams, hmmm okay, 16). Makes the Supporters Shield matter (home and away in division, alternate year series with six others for 36 league games. Makes MLS Cup playoffs truly into a second, separate season (CapitalOne/MilkCup). Everyone gets what they want, single table champions in both conferences, supporters shield for the kind of overall champ, and playoffs. Of course, that means MLS is playing championship numbers of games, with the two cups and ccl.
If teams are playing unbalanced schedules even within their conferences, how can that do anything but make the Shield less meaningful and the need for playoffs to decide the champion more obvious?
I was only hoping you wouldn't make that particular point... They've played home and away in the division, so I guess there are two supporters shields? The playoffs are a completely separate season, though, or a full blown League cup. You could set up seeding as of the all star break and have the thing run concurrent, ending about the same time it does now, single elimination until the current playoffs would have started... I don't know, it would offer hardware. If the league is heading towards 32 teams, there's no way to go play everyone home and away.
Ask old-time Lakers fans who their chief rivals are. Anyone over 40 will say, in order, Boston, New York, and Philly. They won't mention Sacremento or Golden State at al
When more than half the teams make the playoffs, there is no need to go to games or watch them on TV. Because, chances are, you team will make the playoffs winning 7 games all season. MLS = Minor League Soccer
I see the expanded playoffs giving more teams at the bottom more inspiration to keep fighting. I think the fight for the last few playoff spots will be more intense than ever before because more teams at the bottom will be encouraged to keep pushing deeper into the season than they would if there were less spots.
Did you catch the Manchester City vs. West Brom game last week? How did single table help that game then? As in, THEN, last week?
1) Man City is fighting for a title. 2) Man City is fighting for a spot in the Champions League. 3) Man City is fighting for money, because your final position does affect the amount of TV money you get. 4) West Brom is fighting for a Europa League spot. 5) West Brom is fighting to avoid relegation. 6) West Brom is fighting for money, because your final position does affect the amount of TV money you get. 7) Watch Chicago v. Philadephia, a game in which each team has about 80% chance of making the playoffs. I'll give you the summary now.....it's going to end 0-0!
I guess all those people that choose to watch the EPL over breakfast instead of MLS in primetime are delusional, too.
10 actually, also 11 once and 12 once. Generally though around 13-14 wins have been necessary to make the playoffs in the 34 game season.