October baseball has arrived, and so has the annual debate about whether MLB’s postseason format is fair at all. This year’s American League Division Series (ALDS) features the top-seeded Toronto Blue Jays facing the New York Yankees and the second-seeded Seattle Mariners taking on the Detroit Tigers. On paper, both matchups look thrilling, but the pairing of the Blue Jays and Yankees has reignited debate over MLB’s playoff structure, with fans questioning whether the league’s current format truly rewards regular-season excellence.

Ryan Garcia summed it up on X: “The Blue Jays’ reward for winning 94 games and finishing as the no. 1 seed is the Yankees, while the Mariners, who finished as a lower seed, got the Tigers. Totally incentivizes winning regular season games, great format.” His post struck a chord with a fan, and they pointed out how the format unfairly pits the top seed against stronger wild-card teams while giving lower seeds easier matchups. Garcia responded bluntly, “It’s the dumbest format I’ve ever seen. What’s the incentive for being the one seed if you’re going to play a better team than the 2 seed?”

After grinding through 162 games to secure the top spot, the Blue Jays face a daunting opponent in the Yankees, who also finished the season with 94 wins and advanced by defeating the Boston Red Sox in the Wild Card round. Meanwhile, the Mariners, who finished with 90 wins, play the Tigers, a team with a comparatively weaker record that upset the Guardians to advance. This juxtaposition of a team with the best record being forced into arguably the toughest matchup, while a lower seed enjoys an ostensibly easier path, is what angers fans and analysts alike. But again, the actual problem begins with the playoff format itself– how did we get here in the first place?

Baseball once crowned its champions strictly through pennant races, with only the division winners advancing to the World Series. Iconic moments like the “Shot Heard Around the World” in 1951, when the Giants overtook the Dodgers to clinch the National League pennant, occurred under this simple, meritocratic system. Over time, playoff expansion introduced Wild Card teams, additional rounds, and more revenue opportunities, creating thrilling moments like the Royals’ 2014 comeback against the Athletics or the Giants’ 2012 NLCS road victories. However, each expansion also introduced new complications.

Under the current structure, the No. 1 seed faces the winner of the 4 vs. 5 Wild Card matchup, while the No. 2 seed faces the winner of the 3 vs. 6 series. Critically, MLB does not reseed after the Wild Card round, meaning the highest seed can end up matched against a stronger opponent than the No. 2 seed, and historical analysis reinforces this imbalance. 

In 2025, the bracket has already narrowed. The Blue Jays and Mariners secured byes into the Division Series, leaving the Wild Card matchups to decide their opponents. The Tigers edged out the Guardians 2–1 in their series, while the Yankees eliminated the Red Sox by the same margin. Now the ALDS pits Blue Jays vs. Yankees and Mariners vs. Tigers, beginning October 4.

In the first three years of the 12-team playoff era (2022-2024), the No. 6 seed, by definition the last team into the playoffs, has made it to the League Championship Series each year, often toppling No. 2 and No. 3 seeds along the way. Overall, 5- and 6-seeded teams have played 27 series in those postseasons and won 17 of them, a 63% success rate. Compare this to the top two seeds, which have won only 50% of their first-round series despite averaging nearly 100 wins in the regular season.

The current 12-team postseason, in place since the 2022 Collective Bargaining Agreement, brought a structured bracket that still refuses to reseed, creating the recurring issue where the No. 1 seed can face a stronger team than the No. 2 seed. The problem is further compounded by the five-day bye for division winners, which some argue disrupts momentum rather than providing an advantage.

Even last season, this structural flaw was at the center of heated criticism after the Braves, Dodgers, and Orioles– all 100-win teams–were sent home early. Reporters like Molly Knight and Carl Steward pointed out how the format “punishes excellence,” and several executives and players quietly echoed the same concern: that the best teams were going cold while the Wild Card winners stayed sharp.

MLB commissioner Rob Manfred defended the system at the time, urging patience and calling it “too early to judge” since the format was still new. “You need to give something a chance to work out,” he said, suggesting that the league would re-evaluate the format in the offseason. But that assurance hasn’t calmed critics or fans, especially after yet another year where the No. 1 seed faces a tougher opponent than logic would suggest.

“What the hell is the point?”… Fans sound off on the system

The first thread of reaction came from fans who felt that the season-long effort to secure the top seed had been made meaningless. “It’s insane this isn’t more of a talking point. What the hell is the point of getting the No. 1 seed if you have to pay an objectively better opponent?” While some fans research deeper and point to the specific rule that causes this mess, writing, “We’re even playing the higher seed too lmfao. How does it make sense that the #2 seed plays the worst division winner or the worst wild card team, while the #1 seed gets the two best wild card teams, who, like 90% of the time, are better than the worst division winner.” 

An analysis of MLB records from 2012-2022 shows the fans are right, as the top Wild Card team (the #4 seed) averaged 93.2 wins, while the weakest division winner (the #3 seed) or maybe the toughest competitor the #2 seed can face averaged only 91.8 wins in that period. This is definitely an imbalance.

Teams with the top two seeds coming off a bye have won only 6 of 12 Division Series since 2022, despite averaging 99 regular-season wins, while their opponents average only 89 wins. Higher-seeded teams in the Wild Card round have also fared poorly: in best-of-three series from 2022-2024, they went 4-8, proving that even home-field advantage and a stronger record don’t guarantee success.

Beyond the opponent, some argue the main reward can be a curse, not a blessing.  “I’ve been saying this for days, plus the fact that your lineup is now a week out of actual baseball action. Absolutely ridiculous.” If you claim it’s Brian Snitker’s fake account, we’ll not argue as they sound the same. For these fans, the five-day bye isn’t an advantage rather a momentum killer.

But not everyone thinks the system is broken. As one put it: “The thinking is sound. It just didn’t work out this year. The thinking is that the #1 seed doesn’t have to play a division winner. Turns out that the Yanks are better than the Tigers, who won their division. It worked out in the N.L. for the Brewers.” Yes, this fan has a point. But the “It just didn’t work out this year” claim is wrong. Because it almost did not work almost every next year since its implementation.

Then there’s the traditionalist take: the playoffs are supposed to be hard. As one fan said, “No… their reward for winning 94 games was advancing right to the ALDS. They got the bye and home-field advantage. Like, does the team just need a ticket straight to the World Series for you to be happy?” And we can’t argue that.

Even proposed solutions like making the Division Series a best-of-seven would only modestly improve fairness. Historical data shows that in best-of-seven series, teams with better regular-season records win 55% of the time, compared with 54% in best-of-five series– practically no difference. Theoretically, expanding to seven games rewards deeper rosters, but in practice, momentum and hot streaks among lower seeds often outweigh these advantages.

Then the solution? One fan wrote, “Let the #1 seed pick their ALDS matchup, the drama would be cinema.” Sounds interesting, right? What’s your take on it?