 The concept is something I have no problem with, and I recognize that baseball has to adjust to its new place in the sports marketplace and hold on to as much as it can of what it already has and expand beyond that. It can no longer rest on its laurels and it's been a while since they've been able to do that and say, look, we're the national pastime. We get a 30-plus rating for every World Series game. That's our youth. That's not now. And so they need to produce more inventory and more meaningful postseason inventory for television and stuff that appeals to people in an increasingly distracted short attention span world with more entertainment options. So with that in mind, I'm not resistant to changing it. I'm not resistant to expanding the number of teams in the playoffs as long as they do it intelligently. And I have no problem with the idea of allowing some of the teams to pick their postseason opponent. That could be interesting and spark interesting and valid postseason or baseball debates because there's some strategy involved. But what I would say is this, just because a general idea, the idea of more TV revenue, more postseason product, taking the wildcard round from a single knockout game to best of three, I like all of that. I like the idea or at least I have no problem with the selection type show for lack of a better term. But who's to say that this proposal that is out there is where we wind up? Maybe there should be some debate and some tinkering. What I would prefer right now, as long as we have 30 teams and three, five team divisions or league, I'd say add one more wildcard. So he have three wildcards and three division winners instead of seven playoff qualifiers, six, give the buy to the two division winners with the best record, throw the third best division winner in with the wildcards, let that division winner pick which team it wants to play. And then if you can cut the regular season to 156 games, which is just one three game series at home for team, then you create an up breathing room to do what I think would make sense beyond that, which is to make the division series, you want more postseason revenue and more postseason inventory, make the division series best of seven. I've said this forever, why should the one series once you get past the wildcard that's best of five, the only series that involves, by definition, the third best division winner and or wildcard teams? Why would you want that to be subject to the more fluky result? Make it best of seven and reward the teams that have received the buys by making it two, two, three. So they get five of a potential seven games at home. That's not an insurmountable hill for a wildcard or third best division winner to climb, but it is an appropriately more difficult path. And it does reward regular season success, which is a nod to the importance of the long season and baseball. So that should appeal to the traditionalists in us. But at the same time, you're modernizing, you're nodding in both directions. That's what I would do. And if and when they ever expand to 32 teams, which is inevitable at some point, you could have two 18 divisions in each league arranged geographically, and then have four wildcards and proceed accordingly. Give the two division winners a buy and let the four wildcards play.