A thought on the Seahawks and the MLS...
by malcontentjake on Jan 2, 2011 11:43 PM PST
Email
Print
By any objective metric, the Seattle Seahawks were a bad team. In a 32-team league, they finished 28th in offensive yards per game, 27th in yards allowed per game. They were 25th in points scored, and also 25th in points allowed. The Seahawks had the 29th rated scoring differential in the league at -97, which means they allowed 6 points a game more than they scored.
Based upon these metrics, one could conclude that the team probably over-performed by finishing with a 7-9 record. What facilitated this? Consider that Seattle finished 4-2 against their 3 division foes. And how good were these teams? Consider that in the total of 40 non-division games played by the 4 NFC West teams, they won a combined 13 games. The NFC West's combined points differential was -322. Only two of the 7 other divisions had negative overall differentials, the NFC East at -8 and the AFC South at -39!
In the NFC, there are two 10-6 teams, the N.Y. Giants and Tampa Bay Buccaneers, who will miss the playoffs. It so happens that both these teams played the Seahawks this season, one home and one away, and they both won their games by a combined scored of 79-25.
The Seattle Seahawks will make the playoffs, due to the fact that they were the "best" among the 4 teams in their division. This is how the NFL is structured: You only need to beat three other teams - which is to say finish with a better or even record (and win tiebreakers) - and you will host a playoff game, regardless of your record, regardless of the strength of your division. If you are not fortunate enough to be in an easy division, or unfortunate to be in a strong division, there are only two other available "wild card" spots amongst the 12 remaining teams in your conference, and you will be given one of the last two seeds into the playoffs - regardless of your record that may be better than a division winner's - and you will not be able to host a playoff game (there is a very small chance if you are the better of the two "wild card" teams, but both the wild card teams would need to win two road playoff games for this to happen).
On the surface, this system seems a little bit silly. In a League of 32 teams, you only need to be the best among a group of 4 to have a shot at the championship (and history has shown that all 12 teams in the playoffs have a legitimate shot at the championship).
For the most part, the system works out, and the NFL is wildly popular so few people spend much time dwelling on it. However, there are occasional notable injustices. The system has been in place since 2002, giving it a 9-year run, and in at least two of those years glaring injustices have taken place, once in the 2008 season (playoff games actually played in '09) and once again this year.
In both these seasons, there was a conference with at least 2 non-playoff teams with better overall records than a division winner (and at least one of those teams with 3 more wins than a division winner) and a "wild card" team with 4 more wins than the division winner they must travel to play in the first round. In 2008 it was the 8-8 Chargers making the playoffs as AFC West winners over 11-5 Patriots and 9-7 Jets teams, and hosting a 12-4 Colts team in the first round. This year it will be 7-9 Seattle - the first division winners with a losing record in NFL history - making the playoffs over the aforementioned Bucs and Giants and hosting the 11-5 New Orleans Saints.
There are, of course, many, many reasons for this format to the NFL, including geography, preserving "rivalries", and scheduling (which in itself includes the fact that the violent nature of the sport precludes a long season).
Like I said, the NFL is popular, and has few true detractors, so these situations are met with insipid platitudes which don't address the true issues of competitive balance and, for lack of a better word - "fairness" of the season.
But what about a sport that isn't so popular, that is struggling for acceptance and credibility? What about a sport that is showing signs of copying many aspects of the NFL's model? I'm talking, of course, about the MLS.
Many of us have been flabbergasted these past few years about the MLS sticking with a conference format and a playoff system that many of us have complained is, for lack of a better word, "unfair."
Dave visited this topic recently, but it bears repeating. And we can be pretty sure there will be a conference and division structure once the MLS expands beyond 18 teams (which we know will happen).
It's all offered as food for thought.... and to once again raise the question of "is this a good thing?!"
24 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Struggling for credibility?
Is the Major League Soccer really “struggling for credibility” in Seattle? And if so, will the Major League Soccer changing their playoff structure make any real difference?
The Major League Soccer is not about to go to four-team divisions, and probably will not subdivide conferences at all (contrary to popular belief, aping the NFL for it’s own sake is not on the Major League Soccer’s agenda), so using the example of the Seahawks to criticize the Major League Soccer is tenuous at best, dishonest at worst, and food for precious little thought.
Yes, MLS is struggling for credibility, even in one of its most amazing markets
Is the Major League Soccer really "struggling for credibility" in Seattle?
By some measures, yes. Look at coverage in traditional media.
And if so, will the Major League Soccer changing their playoff structure make any real difference?
Absolutely not.
But let’s not pretend that the League’s acceptance in Seattle is why it is struggling for credibility nationwide or not. It is struggling on a national scale.
You claim that MLS will never go to 4 team divisions, and unlikely to subdivide conferences.
So how does it become a league that is actually national? If it stops at 20 that would mean only 15 US markets with MLS. So it will certainly expand beyond 20. When it passes 25 choices will have to be made. Subdividing Conferences or not actually playing every team at least once in a season.
Adding divisions is certainly more likely than sticking with a balanced schedule.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Oh, there’s no question that the double round-robin schedule goes out the window with much further expansion. That’s not the same thing as the need to subdivide two conferences into divisions, and certainly not into the small divisions needed to make the comparison with the Seahawks even remotely apt.
Even with 28 teams with two conferences (which is looking 10-15 years down the road, at least), 26 games within the conference + 14 out of conference = 40 games. By that time, that would probably be about right.
by Scott Yoshonis on Jan 3, 2011 7:48 AM PST up reply actions
40 games?
plus Open Cup, plus CCL, plus Playoffs? I found that less likely than Divisions.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
WTF
I would seriously doubt the MLS wants more than a 34-match schedule, and I would figure that they consider 32 matches ideal (since this was their schedule for many years).
We KNOW there will be 20 teams, since once Montreal is added to be the 19th, the League won’t want an odd number of teams for very log, if at all. Here is how the schedule would work with 32 teams:
split into two conferences, each with two divisions of 5 teams each.
division play: 3 games against each of 4 division opponents (remember the MLS wants to "promote local rivalries) = 12 games
2 games each against teams in other division in same conference = 10 games
1 game each against teams in other conference = 10 games
and that’s 32 total. If you don’t believe me that is your prerogative, certainly. But I would encourage you to consider what we know about how the MLS operates, what their goals are, and how they want to fit into the American sports landscape by “looking like an American sports league”
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 9:06 AM PST up reply actions
I actually think I'm criticizing NFL, not MLS
and it is a fact that the MLS is struggling for credibility, and it is a fact that there will be conferences subdivided into divisions, probably as soon as 2011 or 2012, and it is a fact that changing the playoff format can make a difference. It is also a fact that the MLS is very enamored with the NFL model.
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 8:57 AM PST up reply actions
oops
I should say by 2012 or 2013,,, still forgetting that its 2011 right now ;-)
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 8:59 AM PST up reply actions
Its a fact?
Based on what? Your speculation? Stop making stuff up. You look like a complete fool who knows nothing about how Major League Soccer operates.
First of all, there is no “The.” You don’t call it THE Major League Soccer do you? Or do you refer to baseball as THE MLB? If you are going to cover the league, please get it right.
Second, Don Garber has never made any claims about creating divisions. MLS was split up in to the conference format from the get go as a way to feel more familiar to American sports fans. This was done prior to him being named commissioner.
Third, Don Garber game from the NFL. He has seen up close how wildly successful the NFL has become financially since going to the revenue sharing model. Sink or swim together is the general train of thought, and for a financially unstable league he felt this was the best course of action. See the history of the North American Soccer League if you need a case study on why.
by B-Lot tailgater on Jan 5, 2011 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
Nate Silver weighs in on worst Playoff teams ever
So there you have it, Seahawks fans, you lucky dogs, you. You are probably no worse than the 1953 Baltimore Bullets. At least when you’re playing at home. And when Matt Hasselbeck is healthySo there you have it, Seahawks fans, you lucky dogs, you. You are probably no worse than the 1953 Baltimore Bullets. At least when you’re playing at home. And when Matt Hasselbeck is healthy
But for this awful season they will be Champions.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
In fact, you know which American pro sports league gets shit all the time? The one that lets the best teams into the playoffs, regardless of division or conference. In MLS last year, six of the top eight teams were from the West, so that’s who went in.
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 9:36 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
You seem to think that MLS wants to divide into divisions just for its own sake, and give no other reason than what you think you know about “how the league operates, and what goals they have,” which is really just your baseless speculation. Do you have any GOOD reason why they would mindlessly divide the conferences up just to look like the NFL?
Keep in mind that vague, unattributed statements about “wanting to look like an American sports league” does NOT mean the same thing as, “We HAVE to have divisions, just because the NFL does.” You keep implying that you don’t really understand the distinction.
I’d be willing to bet that there will be no further subdivision in either 2011 or 2012. There is no real reason to think that they’re in any hurry to do it just because.
you don't know much about Don Garber, do you?
he had a 16-year career with the NFL before taking over as MLS commissioner. He has admitted that the conferences exist to “make the MLS look like an American sports league” (at last year’s supporters summit) and has expressed admiration for the NFL’s model of competition:
I was fortunate enough in my early career in the NFL to work for Pete Rozelle and then to continue working for over a decade for Paul Tagliabue. And I believe the NFL is the most popular league in the world for a reason. And that’s that every fan knows at the beginning of the season that their team has a chance to go to the Super Bowl.
- Don Garber
He has admitted that the conferences will remain to “promote local rivalries.” There is also the geographic reality of a sports league in North America (travel costs teams a lot of money).
Consider, also, that a divisional structure is an important part of the parity model Garber is so interested in (have you read sidereal’s parity posts? good stuff). Divisions create the potential for lesser teams to have paths to the championship, and the very structure of divisions opens up more teams for the possibility of winning something and having a season they can call successful. (take a moment to analyze how the other American-Canadian league’s are structured and how this is true)
Scott, with all due respect, do your research before making these accusations against me. If you are familiar with this site and my opinions, you would also know that I am not in favor of this model, and would like to see the MLS stop expanding at 18 teams, continue to play a balanced schedule with a single table, reduce the number of playoff teams, and open up the possibility for new markets through a viable second division and promotion-relegation.
You seem to miss the comparison that I am trying to draw and that is unfortunate. With the MLS we have a League that is still taking shape. I don’t once imply the MLS will have 4-team divisions, but if you analyze league structures, as I have, you will see a clear pattern emerge, in the MLB, NHL, NBA, and NFL, of weak and strong divisions, of conference disparity, and of, as I like to call it, competitive injustice. The post was meant to ask the question “is this something we want for MLS?”
I am sorry you missed my intended purpose, and think it is unfortunate you are implying I am somehow irresponsible for posting it.
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 2:14 PM PST up reply actions
I think that Jeff Sullivan over at Lookout Landing, a SB Nation Mariner blog talks about the fairness of the situation well
He wrote:
“Is it fair? Of course it isn’t fair. The Giants and Buccaneers both finished 10-6, and neither of them will advance. That’s absurd. But then, was it fair when the 93-69 Mariners stayed home in 2003 while the 90-72 Twins, 91-71 Marlins, and 88-74 Cubs went on? Was it fair when the 83-78 Cardinals advanced in 2006 while five teams with better records missed out? Was it fair when an excellent Seahawks team lost the Super Bowl to the Steelers in the way that they did? Sports aren’t fair. They can be, but they often aren’t, and that’s something we’ve always had to live with. It just so happens that this most recent lack of fairness gave Seattle a break.”
http://www.lookoutlanding.com/2011/1/3/1911368/the-most-awesomest-football-team-ever
but the question remains
do we want this divisional system for MLS?!
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 10:09 PM PST up reply actions
My answer is yes. I personally do like the division system.
I know you do not care for it, but to me I have yet to read a compelling argument against it.
well, I've been trying to make those arguments for some time now!
and this particular post/discussion is one
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 11:27 PM PST up reply actions
I have been reading all of the discussions as well
I am just saying that I am unconvinced.
I realize I represent a distinct minority in my opinions on League structures
and believe it or not I’m not out to “convince” anyone, I just think the dissenting voice needs to be heard, because I have rarely heard these points raised in discussion of how our sports league’s operate.
at any rate thanks for reading, and sharing the link!
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 4, 2011 9:12 AM PST up reply actions
I understand and I agree that it is good to have dessenting point of views
or this site would be very boring. I do like to be challenged and providing another point of view is good.
I do think you do a good job, as well as the other people who write articles on the site.
In Scott's defense
Your article was a long analysis of the Seahawks and then only three sentences basically saying “by the way this is likely the way MLS is going” so I can understand his skepticism when your article was a bit lacking in explaining why MLS is likely to follow a NFL model specifically. So when he talks about unattributed statements I can see his point, but you did address them with your comment. I don’t think it is fair to assume your readers have already done or ought to do research on all topics covered on this site to be part of the conversation. I also think readers generally have a more positive experience with the site when authors can refrain from smugness and condescension when addressing comments that are critical of their posts and hardly personal attacks.
-Ben R.
by reesebw on Jan 3, 2011 8:24 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
in the context of previous discussions on this blog, my post made perfect sense
and I stand by that. A regular reader of this blog would understand the place this has in discussion arcs which have been on this site for months, if not longer. Perhaps I did not provide enough links, and this is a valid criticism… in my defense I was rushing to get it posted so i could go to bed late Sunday night.
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 10:01 PM PST up reply actions
more positive experience with the site when authors can refrain from smugness and condescension when addressing comments that are critical of their posts and hardly personal attacks.
the commenter’s clear purpose was to attack my credibility, and he offered no valid discussion points of his own. To quote Monty Python “this isn’t an argument, this is merely contradiction.”
furthermore, I think my purpose here is well-explained: I am a Supporter, I do not hold myself out to the public as anything more than a blogger with opinions and a desire to analyze the game. Anyone can do what I do, and I welcome them to. This isn’t rocket science, its writing about soccer… Dave asked me to become a regular contributor because he liked my writing. for the record, what I write is almost entirely for my own amusement, and if a few people happen to like it then great. There is a lot of content on this site and multiple posts every day. If you don’t like my stuff, don’t read it. I couldn’t care less about how many hits I get and never look…
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 3, 2011 10:08 PM PST up reply actions
@malcontentjake
I’m wondering what your opinion is of the “simulated promotion/relegation” Garber hinted to at the MLS Cup is. Will it be something creative (both different from the standard pro/rel in world leagues, yet alien to any ideas in the US leagues currently), or something mundane (MLS will keep chugging away at expansion in the same fashion of other American leagues, with no noticeable change from the standard American sentiment).
American sentiment – Grow and divide rapidly, let the little guys (American 2nd division) pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, and maybe someday we will give them the opportunity to compete with the best (pro/relegation).
honestly...
I had no idea what Mr. Garber was on about at that time, and was too upset over expansion of the playoff field to process much else he said (and as an aside, the only good contribution Alexi Lalas has made as a studio analyst was when he popped Garber with the "so you’re saying the 10th-best team can win MLS Cup next year)
The issue has been raised on this site in other posts about the MLS only expanding to “proven” markets “tested” by USL/NASL et. al. There has also been talk of “financial promotion” of the teams in these markets. If you read K61’s posts (which have been slammed by people from other parts of the country – particularly self-important bloggers posting as falsifications of Seattle coaches – but I find to be well-thought out and presenting worthwhile ideas) he speaks of the need to not turn MLS into a “charity” (Garber’s word choice) and avoid the spectre of the MLS having L.A. Clippers-type teams. (if you want to properly punish failure, and avoid the potential for such franchises, pro-rel is a powerful tool).
At the end of the day, I am a Sounders supporter, and as such, it helps my cause to have my team win trophies which actually mean something in a League which is viable and strong. I don’t know how much satisfaction I could Really take out of being “top of the pyramid” in a League which isn’t well-run and competitive. I find myself in uncomfortable situations as a Supporter, not only for the Sounders, but for the Seahawks (while I am immensely happy we salvaged this turd of a season and get one more game, the fact we are in the playoffs is an abomination against the ideals of meritocratic competition).
So, I don’t think I’ve answered your question… I have no idea what “simulated promotion/relegation” could possibly be. It is worth noting, that a lot of the topics Dave and I have been on about – expansion of the League, and how it will be broken up and structured – are “long term” propositions. I.E. we are trying to look 5-10 +/- years into the future (although I am rather confident we will see 4 divisions of 5 teams each by the time the 20th team is added). Similarly, I think pro/rel is the same such goal. It would take a few years to get the 2nd division up and running to the point where I would be confident in setting it up, and even then in the first few years I would certainly regard more than just the previous year’s table to determine who would go up and down (something along the lines of setting up a multi-year coefficient system for competitive and financial performance).
It is easy to disregard this talk (myself, Dave, and K61) as self-important Seattle fans barging in and telling everyone else how things should be run after only two years in the League. I can certainly accept that criticism but I would also say that those people doing so are also perhaps not bothering to properly regard the nuances of what is being discussed. Like I said, I am as interested in long-term League health as i am in my Sounders winning, because the two go hand-in-hand…
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 4, 2011 10:41 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
