-Shortening the season(it goes one forever--especially if one is a Rangers fan).

-Expanding the divisional series to 7

-I agree on the Div Champ playing the team with the worst record.

-The home field idea is worth considering.

Anyone have Bud Selig's cell number?

I don't mind the wild card per se--I was in favor of it when it came out. I remember the 1993 season when the Braves won 104 games and the Giants 103. That was in the two division days, so the Giants stayed home. The Braves and Phillies, who won 80-odd games, went to the NLCS. The Giants clearly got hosed.

My main concern is that there should be more reward for winning in the regular season if the season is going to be this danged long.

Also since Trader Jack took over the Marlins had a .631 winning percentage, better than both the Braves and the Giants.

Note the Yankees had few problems with the Twins. And this was a matchup of the team with the best record in the league playing the team with the worst. In the National League the Braves (best record) played the Cubs (worst record.)

And please don't start with the problems of the Braves in the post season. As we saw with the Cubs and the Red Sox, the post season is the time when your manager and his choices can have the most effect on the outcomes of a series. And Bobby Cox has one of the worst post season records, and record in 1-run games, of any manager in baseball. But that is another discussion.

As for your NFL analogy, it is not uncommon for the team with the best winning percentage to fail to make it to the Super Bowl. (Tennessee (13 wins) 2000, Pittsburgh and Chicago (both 13 wins) in 2001, St. Louis (14 wins) lost to New England (11 wins) in the 2001 Superbowl. In 2002 Philly and Green Bay had 12 wins, and Tennessee had 11, (Philly even had home field over the Bucs.) Oh and Green Bay lost to Atlanta (9 wins).

Back to baseball. As much as I would have liked to have seen the Cubs v Red Sox, the Yankees v Marlins feature the best two teams in baseball.

Just because they are a wild card does not mean they don't belong.

A greater unfairness might be the fact that you can get into the playoffs from the AL West by being the best of four teams, whereas the NL Central champ has to be the best of six.

You both make a good point about the wild card team versus a division champ with an inferior record. Indeed, the Giants getting left home despite 103 wins back in 1993 was one of the reasons I supported the system to begin with. But the five game division series makes the road to the LCS much more a matter of luck and not enough reward for regular season winning and overall team depth.

I agree that Bobby Cox has made some boneheaded decisions in the postseason. But, mainly, I think the team just isn't built for the postseason. This year's team greatly overachieved in the regular season, with several players greatly exceeding their projections. Cox deserves some of the credit for that.

I agree that the Marlins are probably the hottest team in baseball right now. But the Giants and Braves were both better teams over the course of 162 games. If you're going to have a system that gives so little reward to winning that marathon, reduce it to, say, 100 games.

Anyway the simple solution is to give home field to
the team with the better record instead of the
stupid all star game idiocy.

Selig is an idiot.

Last year, both teams in the Series were wild card teams, so one had to win! And the Marlins did it in 1997 as a wild card.

---