A Few Quick Reactions to the 2011 MLS Playoff Format

MLS has finally released their 2011 playoff format, and I certainly have a few ideas based upon my series I did on their past playoff formats and outcomes.  I dealt with my recommendations for the 2011 format in this post.

1. The format largely follows what I outlined in my "Recommendations for 2011" in this post.  The top six get a bye, the Supporter's Shield winner gets the lowest seeded team out of the wild card round, and we generally eliminate all the crossing over from conferences found in the last few seasons.
2. What I don't understand is why the wild card round is one match, then the conference semifinals are two legged, and then the conference finals and MLS Cup are back to single matches.  This makes no sense, and it just seems like MLS is trying to follow previous playoff formats in some desperate attempt the provide continuity.  A much better, and natural, approach would have made the wild card round a two legged series of matches.  This would not only provide a natural progression via a reduced number of matches each round, but it would also add two critical matches to the lower seeds and close the likely gap in matches played between them and their second round competition.
3. Yet again, the Supporter's Shield winner gets minimal benefit.  If the two-legged series was played in in the wild card round, the Supporter's Shield winner would be guaranteed to play all their playoff games at home and benefit from MLS's outstanding home field advantage.
4. MLS didn't announce the location for the MLS Cup yet, so we'll reserve judgement on my recommendation to allow the highest seeded team of the final two to host it.
5. MLS needs to stop making excuses for this awful playoff format.  The story on their website is chock full of excuses from the league.  Here are a few samples:

"It will mean that the battle and the race for the playoffs will have added intensity and last longer through the regular season. And that, on balance, should be a good thing for the play on the field, and for the fans in the stands and at home."

This statement defies logic.  Letting in the highest proportion of teams to the playoffs in over five years won't enhance competition, it will dilute it.  You can't have the lowest standard of admission, with the greatest number of teams admitted in the history of the league, and think that it won't bring more parity and a lower standard of playoff team as a result.

“There are so many variables that any system is imperfect in that regard,” Rodriguez said. “You could be facing the lowest-remaining seed who’s on a 10-game winning streak to close the season and they’re the hottest team in the league. … Any playoff system has, within it, some fault or a flaw that could easily be pointed to.”

Not if you followed my recommendations and kept the two-legged series in the Wild Card round!  MLS is seriously trying to blame "the random nature of the playoffs" to excuse their failure to properly design a playoff system over which they have total control.

“At the end of the day, you try to create a playoff system that is fair and relatable to the regular season,”

This is only the case if MLS's goal is the complete random nature of a league that exhibits the most parity of any US pro league (too much parity, in my opinion).  Perhaps it's that parity and the random results it produced that led to the awful MLS Cup ratings last year?

I can only hope MLS is serious in their desire to "spend the next bit of time trying to finalize a long-term playoff situation that can take us into the future."  We deserve a better system for determining the MLS champion.