I'm still not a fan of the second wild card but can live with it. If it was best of 3 I'd be more for it. I just can't stand playing 162 games, and then possibly being 1 and done before the real playoffs start because the other team was able to start 2015 2nd half Arrieta. (I know, odd pointing out an example of a time that greatly benefitted us but still, doesn't sit right with me) But again, its not the worst thing ever, I just prefer it not be 1 and done. Sure until you are in a division where one team wins 100+ games virtually every year a la the AL East and West with the Yankees and Astros. The A's have had one of the more enjoyable and good teams in the league the last 2 seasons and all they have to show for it is 2 playoff losses. I know, if they want to advance they should win the game. But when you play 1 game playoffs, luck can play a huge factor. I agree about the 97 wins not making the playoffs thing sucking. Would have been absolutely devastating to see that team, as awesome as they were playing in August and September not make the playoffs. But there's not a perfect system. To me, the best case scenario is a best of 3 series. Heck play all the games at 1 location and make them play a double header on the 2nd day. Either way, its better than having a 1 gamer where you don't even feel like your team made the playoffs if they lose. Anyways, I realize that there are many people on this board that I could never convince that the 1 game format sucks, and that's fine. Like I said, I don't HATE it, I just don't prefer it.