I like the new rules for 5th place, but can you explain the rational behind the 50-50 split in gate revenue for all playoff games. The way I see it, all teams will lose money in the playoffs because you have to spend close to your maximum revenue to make the playoffs in competitive leagues.
The playoffs should be financially rewarding for all. Why not add a bonus to all play off teams to ensure this?
Thanks!
Teams only pay salary when the team plays a competitive match during that week. The first playoff round starts on Tuesday, the second round (conference finals) are played on Saturday. This means that independent of winning the 1st round, playoff teams will have to pay full salary during the first playoff week. As #3 or #4 seeds often lose the first round, many perceived finishing in these positions as being less financially rewarding than not playing playoffs at all (5th), despite long term effects on the fan survey.
In the new system seed #1 will expect to earn about 25% less gate receipts. If #2 or #3 play 1 home and 1 away match they will expect the earn the same amount as in the old system, while #2 earns 25% less if they lose the first match. The #3 and #4 will both expect a 50% increase in gate receipts for both 1 and 2 away matches - assuming about equal arenas income in all scenarios. So, in the new system mainly the #1 is worse off (and in 1 scenario #2), all other teams will either profit or earn the same due to the change.
During the regular season teams usually receive gate receipts once per week, i.e. 100% of the expected revenue. During this first playoff week, again the #1 ranked team will still receive 100% arena revenue if the team wins the 1st match (as compared to 133% in the old system).
We believe the rewards for finishing #1 (and in lesser effect also #2), such as having a higher chance of winning playoff matches due to home court advantage and thus higher title chances, higher promotion chances and a higher chance of playing the second playoff week which gives another week of gate receipts are substantial already.
So in short, we agree with your statement that playoffs should be rewarding for all and since the new system takes a little of the profit of #1 and distributes it to the #3 and #4 so that their risked loss of playing playoffs decreases, we believe that the new system is actually much more in line with your statement than the old one.
I believe this also answers to some other people in this topic that raised about the same question,
Regards,