Should the MLB All-Star game determine home field in the WS?

[malachicrunch]

No. imo it should go back to rotating the home field advantage.

I will add that if players today don't want to play in an all star game (that the fans that really pay thier salary) voted them nto then they imo are in the wrong business. I remember players in the past not only considering it an honor to be voted an all star but the game didn't have to have any incentive put on it. They played for pride in their league and themselves. In other words, they appreciated the honor to be named an all star and believed Herman Edwards now repeated line before he even said it......"you play to win the game" along with another old one............."if winning wasn't important then why do they keep score."

 

You hit the nail on the head. Guys back in the day would have run you over to win this game. Today they couldn't care less.

[Getslow]

You could have an AL Wild Card team win 84 games and advance to the World Series and get home field advantage over an NL team that won 101 games simply because a Mariners outfielder drove in an Orioles runner with a winning run.

 

And I would submit in response that the 84-game-winning AL team might well have had a better season. The teams have not played the same opponents (in fact, I would say that the NL team has more than likely played inferior competition all year long), so what does one team's record being better have to do with anything? It's just as arbitrary as assigning it to the league that wins the all-star game.

 

I'm fully in favor of rotating it year to year. It just makes sense.

[Jim Schue]

Best overall final record should be the determinant, so as to ensure even teams that clinch early will still play with a purpose all the way to the finish line.

[GO CATS]

Yes, it makes it more interesting!

[Jim Schue]

And I would submit in response that the 84-game-winning AL team might well have had a better season. The teams have not played the same opponents (in fact, I would say that the NL team has more than likely played inferior competition all year long), so what does one team's record being better have to do with anything? It's just as arbitrary as assigning it to the league that wins the all-star game.

 

I'm fully in favor of rotating it year to year. It just makes sense.

 

It works for the NBA and would even itself out over time in the MLB.

[SvFan4life]

I disagree with having the overall wins leader getting home field in the world series. Look at Boston, played in an extremely weak conference while the Lakers had to play in a very tough Western Conference. Who knows, the NBA title coulda switched hands if home court was with the Lakers.

 

 

I think best way to solve it is just to alternate each year or leave it the way it is.

[Jim Schue]

I disagree with having the overall wins leader getting home field in the world series. Look at Boston, played in an extremely weak conference while the Lakers had to play in a very tough Western Conference. Who knows, the NBA title coulda switched hands if home court was with the Lakers.

 

 

I think best way to solve it is just to alternate each year or leave it the way it is.

 

It evens itself out over time. Without a neutral site, there's no other feasible way to do it.

[cvillecat]

No. imo it should go back to rotating the home field advantage.

I will add that if players today don't want to play in an all star game (that the fans that really pay thier salary) voted them into then they imo are in the wrong business. I remember players in the past not only considering it an honor to be voted an all star but the game didn't have to have any incentive put on it. They played for pride in their league and themselves. In other words, they appreciated the honor to be named an all star and believed Herman Edwards now repeated line before he even said it......"you play to win the game" along with another old one............."if winning wasn't important then why do they keep score."

 

:thumb::thumb::thumb:

[oldrambler]

You hit the nail on the head. Guys back in the day would have run you over to win this game. Today they couldn't care less.

 

:thumb: Thanks, if a guy has to have incentive to play in an all star game then imo he is in the wrong line of work and really shouldn't be playing anywhere.

I will say that not all of today's players are this unappreciative though. There are still some "real" baseball players, just not as many as in year past.

[super]

No, let the All Star Game be what it is a All Star Game.