Some MLB Players May Actually TRY in the Future All-Star Games

Irrelevant. Players will vote it down. They like the R and R of this weekend, generally. How dare the owners request that they actually take the game seriously.

 

How dare Selig try to make the results of an exhibition game reflective in the World Series. This is the dumbest freaking idea ever. Bud, you screwed the pooch for the all-star game when you added inter-league play which was stupid to begin with. You are making stupid mistake after stupid mistake with you decisions and ideas. The game is an exhibition, leave it at that. Typically each World Series team has a few all-star players, so why would it effect the mentality of the teams as a whole going into the game?

Bud you suck and I want you gone.

 

how about this scenario?

The Boston Red Sox are about 15 back at the all-star break. Tehy're done, but they still hate the Ny Yankees of course.

Now, it's the ninth inning of the all-star game and the AL is leading by 1 run. Couple of men on and a Red Sox pitcher is on the mound. What's to stop this guy (and don't say "pride", these guys have none) from serving up the NL hitters some meatballs so the Yanks, if they make the Series, won't have the home field??????

Work for the Giants-Dodgers
Mets-Braves
virtually anyone-Yankees
etc.

 

You're letting your anti-Selig feelings (understandable) interfere with your reasoning. This is an excellent idea. The All-Star game used to be avidly followed, almost like a World Series game. Baseball needs to figure out a way to recapture some of that audience. It's true that inter-league play is partly to blame for the decline in interest, but that doesn't mean we should dismiss the game.

You claim that only a few all-stars are in the World Series, but you're forgetting that the WS participants are not known in the summer. A good portion of all-stars have a chance to make the series.

The important thing is to make this game intereting for the fans. Making it worth something is a good start.

 

That's the most absurd thing I've ever seen written about baseball.

 

Despite the fact that I don't think there is a chance in hell it will get passed the Union, I for one think it is a good idea. Instead of pointing out why the All Star game needs to be more meaningful, let me point out why the current system is flawed.

Right now home field advantage is determined by who has the best record. If this was soccer, it makes sense as each team would have played each other an equal amount of times. However, the divisions are broken up amongst NL and AL. As a result, the weaker league (in my mind the AL this year) benefits from getting to play weaker teams. As a result, you can't compare an NL team's record and an AL team's record, because they don't play similar enough schedules. I think there is just too many horrendous teams in the AL for this to be fair. The Tigers, Royals, Rangers, Rays, etc. I would much rather play them then the Rockies, Brewers, Cubs, etc.

 

The point is not to get the players to care; in any given year there are a lot more guys who know they're NOT going to the World Series than there are guys who winning MIGHT< MAYBE< POSSIBLY benefit.

From the players standpoint, it would appear pretty inconsequential.

The point is to make the game mean something so that the FANS will watch it; All Star games in general are on a slide, and they're trying to come up with a way to create a little interest other than the announcers prattling on about "League Pride" (forgive me while I gag)

 

So you write that true "pro" would never do what I propose, but then you immediately say these same "pros" are overpaid, spoiled and don't understand rivalries? Talk about typing outta both sides of your mouth! Which is it?

Mark my words, and remember, when something like this is talked about after an All-Star game, I warned you.