Guest phoenixrising Report post Posted May 2, 2003 http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2003/0501/1547970.html So now for two years the home team in the World Series will be determined by the winner of the All-Star game. This has been talked about for a while now. I'm still not sure where I stand on this, as I prefer that home field should go to the team with the best record. As for the roster expansion...eh. A couple more guys get in...there will still be deserving players left out I bet. And we'll still get marginal All-Stars because the one player from each team rule is still in place. The new system for picking the reserves is pretty cool though...I get tired of managers stacking the rosters with their own guys. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Grand Pubah of 1620 Report post Posted May 2, 2003 I'm not a big baseball fan, but I do watch the end of the season up to the World Series. I think that's cool, but if they want a more competitive AS game have the winning side get home field advantage in the WS! Just a thought. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CED Ordonez Report post Posted May 2, 2003 I just find a little humor in it because of who won the All Star Game last year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted May 2, 2003 I think the team with the better regular season record should get home field advantage, not the team whose league's all-stars won some meaningless exhibition game. Forget about expanding rosters, just treat the AS game as a regular game and your benches won't be depleted. Problem solved... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted May 2, 2003 Ugh. This won't fix a damn thing. Problem 1: The problem isn't player interest, its fan interest. The All Star games the last few years have had great moments. Pedro vs. Sosa & McGwire, Hunter robbing Bonds, etc. The players try to win. Problem 2: The best players are removed halfway through the game. That's not how you play a competitive game. If you're playing to win, then you would NEVER take your best players out of the game. Problem 3: Who the hell needs to see the 31st and 32nd best players in the league? Wow, I'm real excited now. Last year the NL had 30 players, and Brenly resorted to Mike Remlinger to fill out the roster. Problem 4: Lets say its the 13th inning, the game is tied, and both managers have run out of players. What happens? Best of all, who gets home field advantage? Now a tie becomes WORSE. Here's what MLB needs to do. Reduce the rosters to 25 players. Eliminate the one player per team rule. Tell the managers to play like a regular game. Minimal positional substitutions. And tell FOX not to whore their fall lineup every 30 seconds. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Bosstones Fan Report post Posted May 2, 2003 Problem 2: The best players are removed halfway through the game. That's not how you play a competitive game. If you're playing to win, then you would NEVER take your best players out of the game. Problem 4: Lets say its the 13th inning, the game is tied, and both managers have run out of players. What happens? Best of all, who gets home field advantage? Now a tie becomes WORSE. Here's what MLB needs to do. Reduce the rosters to 25 players. Eliminate the one player per team rule. Tell the managers to play like a regular game. Minimal positional substitutions. And tell FOX not to whore their fall lineup every 30 seconds. Gotta agree with you. I've been in favor of a rule that states that the players voted to start the All-Star game must play a MINIMUM of 5 or 6 innings before they can be taken out for several years now. The game is for the fans anyway, so why not let them see the players that they voted for actually play more than three innings. I think that would do a lot of good in getting some fan interest back. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MaxPower27 Report post Posted May 2, 2003 Home field? That's not going to make me want to watch it. I haven't watched the baseball All-Star Game since I was 7, and don't plan to anytime soon. This just makes it worse. So, if it's a tie, do they flip a coin to decide who wins? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted May 2, 2003 How about the All-Star game stays has is. If Mike Scoscia or Dusty Baker feel like playing every player, than fine, if not that's fine has well. This is a terrible idea. The Media deserves blame for acting like last years tie was the worse thing ever in Baseball, and Bud Selig shouldn't of caved in like he did. KTMB is right the team with the best record should have homefield advantage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted May 2, 2003 As far as home field advantage, its fine the way it is. I've yet to hear a single person make an argument that the current system is unfair. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Choken One Report post Posted May 3, 2003 Sadly, The best thing to do is too have a Payout with WINNER TAKE ALL... In this day and age...THAT will sell the players...Whom are always willing to take home a extra $75,000 for one game's worth... Just get Mastercard to pay for it and VOILA! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted May 3, 2003 As far as home field advantage, its fine the way it is. I've yet to hear a single person make an argument that the current system is unfair. Well shouldn't the team with the best record be rewarded with homefield advantage. Something like the last 6 Game 7 have been won by the home team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest alkeiper Report post Posted May 3, 2003 Excellent point, but how fair it is to judge on the best record, considering the teams play two completely different schedules? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RepoMan Report post Posted May 3, 2003 I would agree that with the two league structure, it's best to just rotate home field advantage. Best record is the next best way. Deciding it with an exhibition game is just stupid. I'd just like to see the managers care more about wining the game than getting everyone in, they hopfully the competitivness will rub off on the players. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted May 4, 2003 Excellent point, but how fair it is to judge on the best record, considering the teams play two completely different schedules? Good point. Maybe you do something with the interleague record. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
