Why not make a rule that a division isn't represented if no team has a winning record? In that case, you take the next highest record among others if there's one with a winning record. If not, top team (or the top team that doesn't already have one) gets a bye.

After all, if you really can't produce enough teams with winning records, then the ones that have them must have been really good.

You'd have to eliminate inter-league play and you'd have to diminish division rivalries, and have each team play the same # of games against all the other teams in the league.

If you don't....you face a scenario where (for instance), the Padres could lead the NL West with a .498 record (maybe going 80-82), yet maybe they had a winning record against the NL East, or at least the winners of the NL East. It wouldn't be fair to penalize the Padres for having a losing record in their own division but winning at a higher % in fewer games against the East.

You'd have to completely level the strength of schedule for each team in each league - and that's not going to happen.

The 2006 St Louis Cardinals won the World Series, despite only going 83-78 in the regular season. (And if memory serves me, the 1973 Mets went to the World Series with just 82 or 83 wins). Sure, those teams had winning records...barely....but it just doesn't make any sense under the current format (or maybe even ANY format) to disqualify a division winner because they finished under .500.