The Sports Broadcast Network

The All-Star Game shouldn't determine World Series homefield advantage

winner

VS

The All-Star Game shouldn't determine World Series homefield advantage

winner

VS

5 Comments

  • Just to interject, Yankees/Diamondbacks was the last World Series to go to 7 games, but that's as much as I will say about that one. As far as the game goes, it's been a joke for years anyway. I'm a huge baseball fan and I have trouble watching it. I truly don't care who wins and the fact that home field in the World Series is on the line makes absolutely no difference to me. To be honest, wouldn't it be interesting if the World Series were played on neutral grounds? Perhaps even outside the country since it is the WORLD series. Hell, the Super Bowl is neutral and that seems to work, why not baseball? Forget home field because the best team generally comes through anyway. But forget the all star game too, because with today's prissy athletes, everyone is afraid of getting hurt or messing with their schedule so no one takes it seriously anyway.

    • Thanks Mouth I completely forgot about Dbacks-Yankees. Dont know how I did but I did. I think it would be hard to do it neutral because of the length of the series. Super Bowl is only one game not 7. Both NBA and NHL do best record but no other sport has different rules per conference/league. I like the idea of a game 7 being on neutral so both teams get 3 games at home that might be interesting

      • Your last suggestion doesn't sound half bad. No one has tried it before, but it could be interesting to present a situation where if a game 7 arose, a neutral site would be home to it. THAT site could be chosen by the all star game (If AL wins, it's an AL park of their owner's choosing and same for an NL win). I think we're just throwing wood on the fire, but that could certainly be a fun way to settle things.

        • But whoever wins, wouldn't they pick their own ballpark? Homefield advantage is so important in the World Series. Having the home fans stimulates the home team. And batting last is a HUGE advantage. Homefield advantage is so important that it shouldn't be decided in one day like it is with the All-Star game. With the best-record idea, the teams in the World Series would have worked throughout the entire season for the honor of homefield advantage. And they wouldn't have to depend on other teams' players like in the All-Star game. Maybe if both World Series teams had the SAME record....maybe then you can count the All-Star game.

          • We were half kidding with our idea, but certainly I think we all can agree that the All Star game is a joke. Best record in the regular season works for me, but I was just thinking outside the box with the neutral idea, which I still think could be fun. Quite honestly, I just want to watch playoff baseball and I don't care where it is, so long as the Yankees are involved. If you can't win on the road, you probably aren't winning the world series anyway. The only time it truly matters is game 7, which isn't that common.

  • The All star game should not have any effect on the World Series. Bud Selig is a moron. I dont want Pittsburgh Pirates deciding who is going to have homefield advantage in a series they will not even play in. gibbsreport, I watched the last debate you had with this girl and this one as well, and you really are not funny. The age jokes are really stupid, and it makes you seem like you are the child here. Considering she kicked your butt in the previous debate maybe you should go get a life instead of making fun of girls' age over the internet with a webcam.

    • Was she alive when the Indians and Marlins went to game 7? The Santa title is because of her name. Is the all-star game deciding home field better then just switching it every here between NL and AL

      • Haha Gibbs I was 4 years old in the 1997 series. But Angels/Giants in '02 was the last 7-game series. Maybe the All-Star rule is better than the previous switching rule, but that doesn't mean it is right. Why settle for less than the best? Especially in something as important as the World Series. And for more information on why Brian Cashman is Santa, check this out. It's something I wrote in the offseason: http://southernbelle.mlblogs.com/archives/2010/01/ The Santa part starts under the picture of Mark Teixeira making a catch at 1st base.

    • I appreciate the compliments, but I understand that he's just joking around and I do think he's kind of funny :) But yeah I agree 100% with your first three statements!

  • Look at every league and how their all-star or pro-bowl game is constructed. People always forget that the FANS have the majority say in who goes to these games. Fans tend to vote for the most popular players of that certain time. Case in point: This year Ken Griffey Jr. was in the top ten on the All-Star fan voting. Griffey retired two months ago. What I'm getting at this: This game is not decided on the field because there are a lot of players on both sides who do not deserve to be there. Is it fair for either the NL or AL to have players on the roster, who are just there because of fan votes? How hard do you really think they are going to play? Fans, for the most part, choose the roster, so its the fans who are really choosing who gets home field. Both arguments have valid points though.

  • Just wanted to say that I stand corrected. I said that Yanks/Dbacks was the last to go 7 when it was actually Angels/Giants. In my defense, I didn't watch much of that series due to my own anger in regards to the Yankee failure, so I plead ignorance. Thanks for correcting me Virginia.

  • Awarding the winning league with home field advantage makes the All-star game worth watching. It means the players have something to play for and actually try, making the game worth watching. The NHL and NBA All-star games, as well as the NFL's Pro-bowl are hard to watch because the players have nothing to play for so therefore don"t try.