I read a column lauding the wildcard, touting the great race in the American League and bashing "pesky purists" who had opposed the wild card. I for one, don't like the wild card. I think the best way to choose the best teams in the league is to play the entire season.

The problem with this guy's argument is the specific piece of evidence he cites: the race in the American League. The race actually shows the weakness of the wild card. As he notes, the Sox, Yankees, and the Tribe are all tied with a week to go. It's going to be a close finish. Two teams will advance, one team will go home.

Now imagine if there was no wild card? Well, the American League would have an even *better* race. The Sox, Yankees, and the Tribe would be all tied in the old American League East with a week to go. It would be a fantastic finish. One team would advance, two teams would go home. Note the difference: only one team would advance. More pressure; more tension.


But hey, the guy's a sports columnist. No need for actual substantive analysis! In fact, the guy will probably write the exact same column next year.