Should More Teams Make The Playoffs?

[PM5K]

I'm far from a football expert, but as far as I can tell there are 32 NFL teams, and 12 make it into the playoffs. In the NBA there are 30 teams and 16 make it into the playoffs.

I don't know that I'd change a thing but to me it sucks when a team can win ten games (.625%) and not make the playoffs.

I know it sometimes goes down that way in the NBA as well but it's a lot more rare. I know in 07-08 Golden State won almost 50 games and didn't make the playoffs, because there was so much talent in the West.

[LnGrrrR]

Nah, they already have 8-8 teams making the playoffs. Keep it as is. Baseball could make do with two more teams from each conference.

[gaKNOW!blee]

i was just thinking about this today, but i think the NFL got it right.

NBA should have less, MLB should have more...NFL is good.

[jack sommerset]

No

[Brodie Bruce]

No. More playoff teams takes a ton of pressure off of winning your division. It's bad enough that teams are crying because they're at home and 7-9 Seattle is hosting a playoff game.

[vander]

NFL needs fewer divisions, and fewer playoff teams

[Spurminator]

The NBA needs to have fewer teams in the Playoffs. Other leagues shouldn't be trying to catch up to their system.

[Blake]

I think the NBA is fine.

I think the NFL is fine.

I think MLB needs more playoff teams.

[JamStone]

I leave it as is. You expand the playoffs, then you lessen the value of each regular season game. Each game should be treated as a must-win game. That's what's great about college football. One loss can ruin a season so each game is treated as a must-win game. Better games, better effort. The NFL plays enough games as is. I guess you could add two more teams in each conference playoffs and get rid of the two byes, but I don't think it makes a huge difference. I like it as is.

I think MLB should go back to only divisional winners and take away the wildcard. They play 162 fucking regular season games. There are enough games for teams to make the argument they deserve to be in the playoffs. I don't hate the wildcard, but I'd definitely be opposed to adding more teams to the MLB playoffs.

[Blake]

I think MLB should go back to only divisional winners and take away the wildcard. They play 162 fucking regular season games. There are enough games for teams to make the argument they deserve to be in the playoffs. I don't hate the wildcard, but I'd definitely be opposed to adding more teams to the MLB playoffs.

Maybe just me. I think having a team like San Diego sit it out after winning 90 games is a waste of a 162 game season.

[JamStone]

Maybe just me. I think having a team like San Diego sit it out after winning 90 games is a waste of a 162 game season.

That's fine. Difference of opinion then.

The MLB regular season is unbelievably long. Over the course of a 162 game season, the best teams will rise to the top. It's not a 120 game regular season. It's 162. It's the Padres' own fault for blowing their division lead.

First 3/4 of the season (first 122 games): 73-49
Last 1/4 of the season (last 40 games): 17-23

Padres missed the playoffs by two games. They have no one to blame but themselves. And they didn't deserve to go to the playoffs.

Why the hell would we want the MLB playoffs to play through mid December by adding more teams?

[Blake]

Honestly, also, this is off topic but I would like to see NFL games played on Wednesday and Saturday nights also. Just one game, on NFL network would be cool on those nights.

They do play on Saturdays on a limited basis, but they don't want to share the night with NCAA football. Wednesday football would make for a very short week in between games.

fyi general football scheduling, give or take a game or two:

Wednesday: middle school teams
Thursday: JV high school teams
Friday: Varsity high school teams
Saturday: College teams
Sunday and Monday: Pro teams

[Blake]

Why the hell would we want the MLB playoffs to play through mid December by adding more teams?

The World Series is in late October as is.

How do you figure it would end up in mid December?

I have no problems with mid November myself.

[JamStone]

Sorry, you're right. Should have said mid November. Not mid December.

Point remains the same. Baseball isn't a winter sport. Once you get into mid November, you're talking about freezing weather and snow. It changes the quality of the game. Imagine the World Series being played in New York, Philly, Minnesota, other northern cities in 6 inches of snow. I think MLB baseball is the one major sport where playoffs should be minimized as much as possible. 162 games. If you can't find the top 4 teams in each league in that may games, then something's wrong. The only way I would agree with the idea of expanding the MLB playoffs is if the regular season is cut down by 2-3 weeks. So if the regular season is down to 140 games, or even 135 games like the Japanese pro leagues, then fine add another 2 teams to the playoffs. Otherwise, one wildcard team is more than enough. 162 games should be enough to determine who the top teams are without adding a luck factor just to make things more interesting.

[JamStone]

Sorry, you're right. Should have said mid November. Not mid December.

Point remains the same. Baseball isn't a winter sport. Once you get into mid November, you're talking about freezing weather and snow. It changes the quality of the game. Imagine the World Series being played in New York, Philly, Minnesota, other northern cities in 6 inches of snow. I think MLB baseball is the one major sport where playoffs should be minimized as much as possible. 162 games. If you can't find the top 4 teams in each league in that may games, then something's wrong. The only way I would agree with the idea of expanding the MLB playoffs is if the regular season is cut down by 2-3 weeks. So if the regular season is down to 140 games, or even 135 games like the Japanese pro leagues, then fine add another 2 teams to the playoffs. Otherwise, one wildcard team is more than enough. 162 games should be enough to determine who the top teams are without adding a luck factor just to make things more interesting.

[Blake]

Sorry, you're right. Should have said mid November. Not mid December.

Point remains the same. Baseball isn't a winter sport. Once you get into mid November, you're talking about freezing weather and snow. It changes the quality of the game. Imagine the World Series being played in New York, Philly, Minnesota, other northern cities in 6 inches of snow. I think MLB baseball is the one major sport where playoffs should be minimized as much as possible. 162 games. If you can't find the top 4 teams in each league in that may games, then something's wrong. The only way I would agree with the idea of expanding the MLB playoffs is if the regular season is cut down by 2-3 weeks. So if the regular season is down to 140 games, or even 135 games like the Japanese pro leagues, then fine add another 2 teams to the playoffs. Otherwise, one wildcard team is more than enough. 162 games should be enough to determine who the top teams are without adding a luck factor just to make things more interesting.

meh. just start a week or two eariler then in the spring then if cold weather is the concern.

[JamStone]

It snows in March in the norther states too. I've gone to games during the first week of the MLB at the beginning of April where it was snowing and/or the temperature was in the teens. Baseball isn't a winter sport. Cut the regular season, and I don't have a problem with adding teams to the playoffs. Why play 162 games if that's not enough to determine the best 8 teams who deserve to make the playoffs?

[Blake]

It snows in March in the norther states too. I've gone to games during the first week of the MLB at the beginning of April where it was snowing and/or the temperature was in the teens. Baseball isn't a winter sport.

it's the beginning of the season. They'll get over the cold quick enough.......but honestly, a week earlier in the spring and a week later in the fall is really not as big a deal as you are making it weather wise.



Cut the regular season, and I don't have a problem with adding teams to the playoffs. Why play 162 games if that's not enough to determine the best 8 teams who deserve to make the playoffs?

then why have 8? Why not just take the best records in the two leagues?

[JamStone]

it's the beginning of the season. They'll get over the cold quick enough.......but honestly, a week earlier in the spring and a week later in the fall is really not as big a deal as you are making it weather wise.

Doesn't seem like a big deal to you. Over the last 30 years, MLB has already added about 3 weeks to the baseball season. In 1980, the World Series ended on October 10th. This past World Series ended on November 1st. Just keep add another week, why not right? They're already playing in winter. One week doesn't seem big to you. But that one week actually makes it more like a month longer than it actually should be. The MLB season already lasts 7 months.





then why have 8? Why not just take the best records in the two leagues?

I would have absolutely no problem if they went back to the old way of just playing the World Series after the regular season with the two teams with the best record in each respective league. It would be a different story if it were like the NBA or the NHL and they only played 82 games in the regular season. But they play 162. The best teams have the best records after 162 games.

I understand the dynamics of the playoffs and how pro sports generate a shitload of money from playoff games. I also understand the regional logistics of giving teams in different regions of the country having a stake in a playoff team. It helps keep the sport afloat instead of for example in the mid 90s watching the Yankees and Braves play every year. Have to give other regions in the country have someone to root for. But I would think it perfectly fine if they took the two best teams and played the World Series after the regular season.

[Blake]

Doesn't seem like a big deal to you. Over the last 30 years, MLB has already added about 3 weeks to the baseball season. In 1980, the World Series ended on October 10th. This past World Series ended on November 1st. Just keep add another week, why not right? They're already playing in winter. One week doesn't seem big to you. But that one week actually makes it more like a month longer than it actually should be. The MLB season already lasts 7 months.

right, after 7 months, one more week is no big deal to me. Neither is the cold weather.

I'd rather have the extra playoff teams, especially for MLB which already is hard enough to watch during the regular season. It would make more games more meaningful imo.

[JamStone]

Good point. Winter isn't a big deal. One week, two weeks, five months isn't a big deal either.

Make the regular season 250 games, every team makes the playoffs, best of 15 series, they play from January 1st to December 31st. No big deal.

[Blake]

Good point. Winter isn't a big deal. One week, two weeks, five months isn't a big deal either.

Make the regular season 250 games, every team makes the playoffs, best of 15 series, they play from January 1st to December 31st. No big deal.

you're melting and going incredible hulk mode over this?

:lol

[JamStone]

It's pretty amusing when someone resorts to the "U mad?" type comments as if they can read emotion through posts.

Not at all. I'm making a point. You have to cut it off somewhere. 7 months is already a fucking long season. Why do you want to keep adding more and more length to a summer sport so that it's played in all four seasons? You have to cut it off at some point. Otherwise, using your logic of "another week isn't a big deal" ends up making MLB my hyperbole of a year round sport.

Nice attempt at the "U mad?" quip though.

[Blake]

It's pretty amusing when someone resorts to the "U mad?" type comments as if they can read emotion through posts.

Not at all. I'm making a point. You have to cut it off somewhere. 7 months is already a fucking long season. Why do you want to keep adding more and more length to a summer sport so that it's played in all four seasons? You have to cut it off at some point. Otherwise, using your logic of "another week isn't a big deal" ends up making MLB my hyperbole of a year round sport.

Nice attempt at the "U mad?" quip though.

Your mad posts are amusing. Why are you getting all worked up over my opinion?

It's a summer sport during the regular season......in between spring training and the Fall Classic.

Two weeks extra = no big deal imo.
My opinon = no big deal.
U being mad = :tu

[JamStone]

Aw once was so fun for you, I guess a second time is twice as nice.

Awesomeness. Lol do your "U mad bro?" dance. Woot woot.

[LnGrrrR]

It's pretty amusing when someone resorts to the "U mad?" type comments as if they can read emotion through posts.

Not at all. I'm making a point. You have to cut it off somewhere. 7 months is already a fucking long season. Why do you want to keep adding more and more length to a summer sport so that it's played in all four seasons? You have to cut it off at some point. Otherwise, using your logic of "another week isn't a big deal" ends up making MLB my hyperbole of a year round sport.

Nice attempt at the "U mad?" quip though.

Well, that's a bit of a slippery slope fallacy. Saying that MLB can go two more weeks is different than arguing for a 12 month season, obviously.

That's like taking your argument that 162 games is good enough to determine 2/4 playoff spots, and twisting it by saying why should there even be a World Series, when we could just crown whoever got the most wins total as MLB champion.

[Blake]

Aw once was so fun for you, I guess a second time is twice as nice.

Awesomeness. Lol do your "U mad bro?" dance. Woot woot.

once you went "just make it 250 games, every team makes the playoffs, Jan 1st -Dec 31st, no big deal" you lost it, imo.

Either that or youre just an idiot, bro.

[JamStone]

It's hyperbole. If you got lost over it, I can't do anything for you, son.

The point is when you keep adding teams to the playoffs, keep adding weeks to the season, where does it end? If you go two teams at a time, two weeks at a time, each of those times, it might not be "that big of a deal." At some point, the accumulation of added playoff teams, added weeks to the season becomes a "big deal." So when does it stop? You cut it off at some point.

Sorry for confusing you. It's not as complicated a notion as you interpreted it as. It was hyperbole. But don't be sad bro. I don't think you're not smart enough to get it now that I've explained.

[LnGrrrR]

It's hyperbole. If you got lost over it, I can't do anything for you, son.

The point is when you keep adding teams to the playoffs, keep adding weeks to the season, where does it end? If you go two teams at a time, two weeks at a time, each of those times, it might not be "that big of a deal." At some point, the accumulation of added playoff teams, added weeks to the season becomes a "big deal." So when does it stop? You cut it off at some point.

But couldn't someone take it the other way, and wonder why playoffs are even needed? If a regular season is so dispositive for you, then playoffs also seem unnecessary.

[JamStone]

But couldn't someone take it the other way, and wonder why playoffs are even needed? If a regular season is so dispositive for you, then playoffs also seem unnecessary.

Because until recent years, the National League didn't play the American League so you had two different leagues with unfamiliarity playing for a championship. But even now with interleague play, not every American League team plays every National League team. So there's a chance the best team in each league didn't meet in the regular season. A World Series makes sense because of that.

But even if they did play each other in the regular season, I understand the celebratory nature of a championship series, the pomp and circumstance that goes along with it. There's the climax of the final out of a playoff series as opposed to the final out of the last regular season game where the whole nation is watching as opposed to only some fans watching. How the World Series is the only focus as opposed to the final game of the regular season is played on the same day by all 30 MLB teams. There's obviously a difference. Then there's the TV ratings, the endorsement dollars, the playoff revenue. I understand why there are playoffs in all professional sports. For MLB baseball specifically, it doesn't need to be expanded though imo. It wasn't even meant to be as long as it is now. As I mentioned earlier, if they just had the best team in each league play a World Series, I'd be fine with that.

[Blake]

It's hyperbole. If you got lost over it, I can't do anything for you, son.

I didn't get lost. I stated "you lost it".

Apparently you still haven't found it.


The point is when you keep adding teams to the playoffs, keep adding weeks to the season, where does it end? If you go two teams at a time, two weeks at a time, each of those times, it might not be "that big of a deal." At some point, the accumulation of added playoff teams, added weeks to the season becomes a "big deal." So when does it stop? You cut it off at some point.

I got your horrible hyperbole.

As for your question, "where does it end?", I made it clear. Add a few more weeks and it ends there, imo. No big deal.

Not sure why you think adding two more weeks will end up in a never ending season.


Sorry for confusing you. It's not as complicated a notion as you interpreted it as. It was hyperbole. But don't be sad bro. I don't think you're not smart enough to get it now that I've explained.

No confusion about what you stated. It was a terrible hyperbole and you are still mad that I want to add a few weeks and a few more playoff teams.

Why are you so upset?

[JamStone]

When they started adding more playoff series, it was likely a similar argument. Hey, we're just adding one more week with the added playoff series. Then another. Now there are three playoff series and up to 3-4 weeks more than it used to be. You add one more now, then someone else in the future says the same thing: "one more week isn't a big deal." Then again in the future, "oh one more week isn't a big deal." That's how incremental additions accumulate into a "big deal." The season is long enough. The NFL already plays half of its regular season when the World Series ends now. The MLB should be done by early to mid October, not at the beginning of November. It's my opinion. You disagree with it, fine. It's merely an opinion. You don't have to get bent over it.

If they keep adding to the playoffs, then cut the regular season down to 135-140 games.

As for this "you're upset" shtick. If you think I'm upset and am not making any sense, why are you even responding? Let's try this out. U mad bro?

[Blake]

When they started adding more playoff series, it was likely a similar argument. Hey, we're just adding one more week with the added playoff series. Then another. Now there are three playoff series and up to 3-4 weeks more than it used to be. You add one more now, then someone else in the future says the same thing: "one more week isn't a big deal." Then again in the future, "oh one more week isn't a big deal." That's how incremental additions accumulate into a "big deal." The season is long enough. The NFL already plays half of its regular season when the World Series ends now. The MLB should be done by early to mid October, not at the beginning of November. It's my opinion. You disagree with it, fine. It's merely an opinion. You don't have to get bent over it.

So you actually believe that it's possible that there could be 250 regular season games and that all the teams could potentially be in the playoffs?

If you weren't just getting upset because I disagreed with you, and you really believe this, then you are just plain stupid.

Sorry for my confusion about your intelligence level.


If they keep adding to the playoffs, then cut the regular season down to 135-140 games.

Nah, they don't need to cut any regular season games, imo.


As for this "you're upset" shtick. If you think I'm upset and am not making any sense, why are you even responding?

Watching a poster get mad over my opinion is awesomeness.

If you aren't upset, why do you keep responding in this upset manner?


Let's try this out. U mad bro?

No, bro.

How did that work out for you?

[JamStone]

Nope, I don't believe there will ever be a 250 game MLB regular season or all the teams getting into the playoffs. Please refer to the definition of the aforementioned "hyperbole." You'll understand better. If you don't get the point by now, I can't help you bro.

I suppose thinking a poster is getting mad is awesomeness to you, probably in a similar fashion as you playing with your imaginary friends. Sounds like loads of fun actually.

I don't mind responding to posts. Using an exaggeration to make a point doesn't equate to being upset. Generating that notion that someone is upset based on them making a hyperbole isn't exactly correlative. That is on you. Shrugs. That's cool if that's what you resort to when you argue. I guess you have a pretty good imagination. And if you get a few shits and giggles thinking that way, more power to you.

[LnGrrrR]

Because until recent years, the National League didn't play the American League so you had two different leagues with unfamiliarity playing for a championship. But even now with interleague play, not every American League team plays every National League team. So there's a chance the best team in each league didn't meet in the regular season. A World Series makes sense because of that.

Just gonna play Devil's Advocate here.

If 162 games are good enough to determine who the best teams are to make the playoffs, then why aren't they good enough to determine the best team, period?

Your argument that the NL and the AL didn't usually play each other is somewhat weak. Do all AL teams play the same opponents/schedule? If not, then AL teams play different opponents just as NL teams do. And if all teams play different opponents, then why not just crown whoever wins the most out of the 162?

If you're willing to give the AL championship to a team that might have played a weak schedule without them having to defend it against another team, why not just give the MLB championship in the same way?

(I agree with you on the "pomp/TV ratings" argument, but feel that's a different argument.)

[JamStone]

Just gonna play Devil's Advocate here.

If 162 games are good enough to determine who the best teams are to make the playoffs, then why aren't they good enough to determine the best team, period?

Your argument that the NL and the AL didn't usually play each other is somewhat weak. Do all AL teams play the same opponents/schedule? If not, then AL teams play different opponents just as NL teams do. And if all teams play different opponents, then why not just crown whoever wins the most out of the 162?

If you're willing to give the AL championship to a team that might have played a weak schedule without them having to defend it against another team, why not just give the MLB championship in the same way?

(I agree with you on the "pomp/TV ratings" argument, but feel that's a different argument.)

Fair point. Didn't say any certain way is perfect without flaws. But we are talking different leagues. Sure in each league, some teams have tougher schedules than others. But they are still two distinct leagues. That's certainly a factor. Different leagues, with at least one major rule difference (DH/pitcher hitting).

You add the other part of the argument that you agreed with, having a World Series playoff series does make enough sense. Anything more than that, I think it's more or less just about generating more revenue for the sport.

[LnGrrrR]

Fair point. Didn't say any certain way is perfect without flaws. But we are talking different leagues. Sure in each league, some teams have tougher schedules than others. But they are still two distinct leagues. That's certainly a factor. Different leagues, with at least one major rule difference (DH/pitcher hitting).

You add the other part of the argument that you agreed with, having a World Series playoff series does make enough sense. Anything more than that, I think it's more or less just about generating more revenue for the sport.

Fair enough with the "two different leagues" argument, which is, AFAIK, unique to professional sports.

I sometimes wonder what if other sports did that... can you imagine if the AFC, for instance, had five downs to work from instead of four? Or if the NFC field was 120 yards long instead of 100? "Homefield advantage" means a lot more to the MLB than any other sport.

[Blake]

Nope, I don't believe there will ever be a 250 game MLB regular season or all the teams getting into the playoffs. Please refer to the definition of the aforementioned "hyperbole." You'll understand better. If you don't get the point by now, I can't help you bro.

Great, so we agree it was a stupid hyperbole since there is obviously a stopping point.

I guess you won't be crying out "when will it ever end" any more.


I suppose thinking a poster is getting mad is awesomeness to you, probably in a similar fashion as you playing with your imaginary friends. Sounds like loads of fun actually.

I don't mind responding to posts. Using an exaggeration to make a point doesn't equate to being upset. Generating that notion that someone is upset based on them making a hyperbole isn't exactly correlative. That is on you. Shrugs. That's cool if that's what you resort to when you argue. I guess you have a pretty good imagination. And if you get a few shits and giggles thinking that way, more power to you.

You admitting it to be an improbable hyperbole means you weren't really debating the issue any more, which most likely means you were just mad that you had nothing legit to dismiss my opinion with.

It was pretty entertaining. :tu

[Blake]

"Homefield advantage" means a lot more to the MLB than any other sport.

...and the all-star game determining who gets it might be the worst playoff idea in any sport.

[JamStone]

I must insist you look up the definition of the word "hyperbole" since obviously you haven't yet and still don't know the meaning of the word. Other than that, I'm glad you could entertain yourself. Good on ya, old lad.

[Blake]

I must insist you look up the definition of the word "hyperbole" since obviously you haven't yet and still don't know the meaning of the word.

I know the definition of the word and I saw the extreme hyperbole in your post.

Even though I clearly stated "two extra weeks is good for me" you used your hyperbole to cry "when will it end? 250 games? all teams in the playoffs?" etc.

There was no point to the hyperbole since we both agree that it's improbable. Since that's the case, it smells like butthurt imo.


Other than that, I'm glad you could entertain yourself. Good on ya, old lad.

You have been providing the entertainment, tbh. :tu

[JamStone]

Lol cool. It's good to be easily entertained.

Hyperboles are often improbable, sometimes impossible. Please, please look up the definition.

[Blake]

Hyperboles are often improbable, sometimes impossible. Please, please look up the definition.

No need, I know what hyperboles are. And again, I clearly recognized your lame hyperbole.

Hyperboles are very rarely used when making an argument and in this case, it did nothing but show what appeared to be butthurt on your part.

You should probably research how to effectively use hyperbole. :tu

[LnGrrrR]

Lol cool. It's good to be easily entertained.

Hyperboles are often improbable, sometimes impossible. Please, please look up the definition.

But the problem in this case was that the hyperbole wasn't an effective argument. Saying "when will it stop?" isn't a very effective to counter to Blake's "two more weeks is ok". Blake saying that two more weeks is acceptable is obviously a much different argument than saying they should play 250 games.

[JamStone]

As I mentioned very early on, over the last 30 years, it's not just one more week or two more weeks. Back in 1980, the World Series was over by early October. Now it's over in early November. One more week now in addition to the added weeks it's already had over time accumulates into a "big deal." You add two more weeks now. Then 5 years from now, someone else says, "hey let's add two more teams. What's one more week?" That's what I have been getting at. 1-2 weeks doesn't seem big. But when you already consider 3 weeks have been added over 30 years, it's really adding 5 more weeks than what it should be. That's why I said, when will it end? 2 weeks now. Then sometime in the future, another 2 weeks since "2 weeks isn't a big deal." When will it end? Blake saying "two more weeks is ok" leads me to the hyperbole because it isn't simply 2 more weeks. It's 2 more weeks plus the 3 weeks that has been added over time. The MLB already over extends it's season as is.

Hey, if you don't get that, fine. My point remains the same. If anything, they should cut the division back down to two, the two division winners in each league play a league championship series, then the World Series. Have the World Series over by mid October at the latest. And as pointed out earlier, I'd be perfectly fine if they just took the best team in each league after the regular season and play the World Series with those two teams.

[LnGrrrR]

As I mentioned very early on, over the last 30 years, it's not just one more week or two more weeks. Back in 1980, the World Series was over by early October. Now it's over in early November. One more week now in addition to the added weeks it's already had over time accumulates into a "big deal." You add two more weeks now. Then 5 years from now, someone else says, "hey let's add two more teams. What's one more week?" That's what I have been getting at. 1-2 weeks doesn't seem big. But when you already consider 3 weeks have been added over 30 years, it's really adding 5 more weeks than what it should be. That's why I said, when will it end? 2 weeks now. Then sometime in the future, another 2 weeks since "2 weeks isn't a big deal." When will it end? Blake saying "two more weeks is ok" leads me to the hyperbole because it isn't simply 2 more weeks. It's 2 more weeks plus the 3 weeks that has been added over time. The MLB already over extends it's season as is.

But that's the problem with your argument. The whole "when will it end?" isn't a valid argument when it comes to whether or not the two weeks Blake proposed is valid or not.

It's flawed logic. It's like saying we can't raise taxes on the rich by 5% now, because when will it end? 10 years from now, rates might be 50% higher than they are today!

Now, if you're arguing that those extra 2 weeks are excessive, that's different. You can use the evidence you've already cited (ie. that it's already been expanded, that weather plays a factor, etc etc). But proposing a hypothetical situation that no one thinks will happen does nothing for your argument.