Al Yellon
Editor
A New York Mets Quiz - May 25
Grant Brisbee
Editor
Lessons From Baltimore - May 25
Jeff Sullivan
Editor
How Close They've Come To The Sculpture - May 25
Rob Neyer
National Baseball Editor
Albert Pujols Finally Driving In Runs, Still Not Walking - May 25
Dan Moore
Contributor
Joey Votto And The Twilight Of The Giant First Basemen - Apr 14
Jason Brannon
Hot Corner Scribe
The 9th Inning Is Different - May 25
Jim Baker
Contributor
eBay Item Of The Day - May 25
Marc Normandin
Contributor
What's Wrong With Ike Davis? - May 25
Wendy Thurm
Contributor
Baseball On Par With Other Professional Sports In Dealing With Bad Umpires - May 20
Tony LaRussa's retired from baseball but will manage the National League All-Star Game. Which raises the question, again: Should the All-Star Game be just an exhibition or should it continue to determine home-field advantage in the World Series?
Jan 29, 2012 - Tony La Russa will manage the National League team in the 2012 All-Star Game, the Commissioner's Office announced last week. The decision follows tradition, which says the manager for the National League pennant winner manages the league's All-Star team the following season. La Russa managed the Cardinals in 2011 and the Cardinals won the National League pennant, so La Russa will manage the 2012 National League All-Stars.
That's all well and good, but La Russa is not an active manager. He stepped down as Cardinals manager after the World Series. He's not currently participating in any baseball-related activities, at least not officially. All of which would be fine if the All-Star Game were still purely an exhibition.
But it's not.
The winner of the All-Star Game gains home-field advantage for its league in that season's World Series. It's been this way since 2003, when Bud Selig decreed: "This time it counts!" Selig's declaration followed the infamous and inconclusive end to the 2002 All-Star Game when both managers -- Joe Torre and Bob Brenly -- ran out of pitchers in the 11th inning and the game was declared a tie. Which was unsettling for the few fans who were tuned in.
Ratings for the All-Star Game had been plummeting. There were concerns about the best players not showing up for the game, to nurse an "injury" or whatnot. Managers seemed more interested in getting everyone into the game than winning. And so on. Selig, and his TV partners at FOX, cooked up the "This time it counts!" slogan, linking the All-Star Game to the World Series, as a way to bring fans -- er, viewers -- back to the Midsummer Classic.
You know what? The ratings slide continued anyway. In 2002, more than 14.6 million viewers tuned into the All-Star Game. The next season -- the first of "This time it counts!" -- viewership was down to 13.8 million. Last season, only 11 million fans watched the All-Star Game on TV.
And the part about players not showing up? That was addressed in the new Collective Bargaining Agreement. Going forward, players chosen for the All-Star Game must participate, unless they are excused by the Commissioner's Office due to an injury.
"This time it counts!" didn't work and its purpose has largely been rendered moot by the changes in the new CBA. Strip away the gimmicks. Get the best players on the field. And if the action is compelling, maybe fans will start to tune in again.
But what about home-field advantage in the World Series? Should it continue to be tied to the All-Star Game?
A lot of folks don't like it. They think it's unfair. They think it's goofy. They think home-field advantage should be determined by events on the field, in real games, played by real teams. Others think we should revert to the system in place before 2003: the National and American Leagues alternate, each having home-field advantage every other year.
Count me in the camp of those that never liked home-field advantage being tied to the All-Star Game. That is, until I started researching this post.
"Blasphemy," you say.
Stay with me and you'll understand.
We've had nine World Series since the change was made. In the first seven (2003-2009), the American League won the All-Star Game and had home-field advantage. In the next two (2010-2011), it was the National League.
It turns out that in seven of the nine seasons, the team with the better regular-season record had home-field advantage in the World Series. The only teams that had a worse regular-season record and yet still held home-field advantage in the Series were the 2004 Boston Red Sox and the 2011 St. Louis Cardinals. In the case of the 2004 Red Sox, home-field advantage didn't matter much, as Boston won the Series in four games. With the 2011 Cardinals, home-field advantage may have played a role in helping St. Louis with its miraculous Game 6 comeback and Game 7 World Series-clinching victories.
Contrast that with the 33 World Series held in the expansion era, prior to 2003 (1969-2002). In seventeen of those Series, the team with the better regular-season record held home-field advantage. But in sixteen Series, the team with the worse regular-season record did.
In those sixteen World Series, the team with home-field advantage won the Series twelve times. Twelve out of sixteen. Seventy-five percent. Even though those teams had a worse record during the regular season.
Based on those numbers, alternating home-field advantage between the leagues seems a lot less fair than tying it to the outcome of the All-Star Game.
But there are other options, too.
Baseball could follow the path taken by the NBA and NHL, and grant home-field advantage in the World Series to the team with the better regular-season record. Bud Selig doesn't like this idea because -- apparently -- it's too difficult to plan logistics, like reserving hotel rooms in all of the cities that might host Games 1, 2, 6 and 7 of the World Series. Hogwash. In this day and age, you can plan elaborate events entirely on-line. Making plans in eight (or ten) possible cities doesn't seem insurmountable in the least.
One last option suggested to me during a Twitter exchange last week was to grant home-field advantage to the league whose team won the World Series the year before. Interesting in its novelty, but it strikes me as the least fair option of them all.
I lean toward granting World Series home-field advantage to the team with the better regular-season record. But I'm much more open-minded than I expected to leaving things just as they are.
But if the current plan stays in place, certain changes must be made. No retired managers coming back to manage the All-Star Game. Modifying the All-Star selection process to get the best players on the field. Revamping the schedule so the best pitchers don't sit out over concerns about rest days and over-use. Sounds like the beginnings of another post.
What do you think? Take our poll and share your thoughts in the comments.
26 comments
Yankees Sign John Maine To Minor-League Deal
Lance Berkman's Knee Surgery Will Have Him Out 8-10 Weeks
Orioles, Adam Jones Reportedly Agree To Extension +1
Ryan Howard Still Taking Batting Practice
John Danks DL'd With Shoulder Tightness
Austin Jackson Heading To Disabled List +1
Emilio Bonifacio Will Have Thumb Surgery +1
Brewers' Marco Estrada On DL With Quad Strain +1
Rumor: Yankees For Sale, Denied By Team +2
Brian Roberts Draws 2 Walks In Rehab Start
More News »
Comments
No.
I'd put it this way; if an offense is a sugar cookie, on base percentage is the pastry part of the cookie, power is the icing, and baserunning is like the jimmies that they sprinkle onto the icing. - Bill James
by J(O's)elskIL on Jan 29, 2012 10:30 AM EST reply actions
I'm more concerned about how long the damn thing will take.
Giving LaRussa a 15-pitcher bullpen will be like watching fat people browse the buffet at Golden Corral.
by bucdaddy on Jan 29, 2012 10:40 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
I have 2 suggestions.
1) I read this from another user on SBNation, though I can’t remember which article the suggestion was made. Build a site at a neutral territory, say in Las Vegas, somewhere warm where fall weather/rain/snow won’t be a deterrent. The park could then be used for rec games, college games, etc when not in use. Additonally, teams play in Vegas every pre-season, why not use that park?
2) Do what the NFL does and rotate the series to a different city every year. Thus elminating most “home field advantages” unless the team of the city in which the series would be held makes it to the fall classic.
"Whenever one finds himself in the majority, it is time to step back and reflect," Mark Twain.
by WindisBlowingOut! on Jan 29, 2012 11:24 AM EST reply actions
Owners would never agree to neutral site
Teams in the World Series make a ton of money on ticket, concession and merchandise sales from home games.
Contributor, Baseball Nation & FanGraphs
Twitter: @hangingsliders
by Wendy Thurm on Jan 29, 2012 11:47 AM EST up reply actions
They would still make money off merchandise
But I disagree. Owners aren’t guaranteed any money each season on playoff and world series appearances, all that is just icing on the cake. Perhaps a certain % off of ticket sales and concessions could go to each team if the series was at a neutral site. If nothing else, it could eliminate travel days, and the Vegas weather in October is surely better than the weather in Boston or Philly.
"Whenever one finds himself in the majority, it is time to step back and reflect," Mark Twain.
by WindisBlowingOut! on Jan 29, 2012 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
why should all of the fans have to travel to see their team in the world series?
tickets are expensive enough without having to take a week off work to go stay in vegas.
by craigws on Jan 29, 2012 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
You could do that with the All-Star break, but a neutral World Series would be a bad idea.
by Phrozen on Jan 29, 2012 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
…All-Star game. Not break.
by Phrozen on Jan 29, 2012 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
Tickets are expensive, agreed.
But people will travel for games regardless. Cardinals fans traveled to Arlington for the World Series, why wouldn’t they travel to Vegas? If anything, flights to Vegas are cheaper than flights anywhere else. And who wouldn’t want to spend a week in the warm weather in Nevada as opposed to the Bronx in the middle of October?
"Whenever one finds himself in the majority, it is time to step back and reflect," Mark Twain.
by WindisBlowingOut! on Jan 29, 2012 12:02 PM EST reply actions
yankees fans, probably.
nothing special about some stadium with no history in vegas.
fans want to see their team win in their own ballpark in their own city.
by craigws on Jan 29, 2012 12:04 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with you.
I’m just trying to come up with another option for the World Series instead of it being the winning league of the All-Star game, which I think we all agree is ridiculous.
"Whenever one finds himself in the majority, it is time to step back and reflect," Mark Twain.
by WindisBlowingOut! on Jan 29, 2012 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
no doubt.
by craigws on Jan 29, 2012 12:20 PM EST up reply actions
Overkill much?
“Hey, season-ticket holders! Would you like to have the World Series in your home city where we’re all fans and the energy is amazing, or would you like to have to arrange vacation time and plane tickets and a hotel room in the three days between the LCS ending and the World Series starting, all so you can watch your team win or lose in a soon-to-be ghost town amongst apathetic strangers?”
No fanbase would go for that and therefore no team will vote for it. No one wants Vegas. Moving the Series to Vegas to solve the (may-not-actually-be-a-)problem of the ASG winner getting home field advantage is like… I dunno, solving the mosquito on your arm with a house fire.
Solving a mildly bad idea with a screamingly terrible idea is no solution at all.
11 01 10
Veni Vidi Vixi
by WhereThere'sAWillieThere'sAMays on Jan 29, 2012 8:35 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed
There is no freaking way that fans would spend money to watch their team play in a best of seven game series. Of course that would be moot in the present environment. Tell a Dodgers fan that he or she is in the World Series with the Yankees with game one in the Bronx on a Wednesday night, and that Dodgers fan likely has his or her mind on telling the boss goodbye while searching Stubhub for Yankees Tickets and Priceline for a round trip ticket to New York. This would be followed by securing tickets for games three and four and maybe five at Dodger Stadium. At the same time that Yankees fan is planning his weekend trip to LA.
At first, putting the games in Vegas would seem like a good idea, but no fan would want to spend a week and a half in one place. Baseball prides itself on the need for there to be a World Series Home Field advantage. Also, every ballpark is unique because of the shape of the outfield and foul Territory. Translation, the fields are all different and the only thing that should really change is the patch on the uniform and logos on the field. In contrast, the fields of all the other sports are the exact same size everywhere. For example, you could build an arena and basically say that it is in Boston, but it is actually in Louisville. The same could be said for every football field in the country.
I'm a proud fan of the Minnesota Twins and Dallas Cowboys!
"Life is precious and time is a key element. Let’s make every moment count and help those who have a greater need than our own." – Harmon Killebrew
I would like to see Dallas vs the Giants on Thanksgiving, Make it happen NFL!
Check out my eBay items.
by Jessy S on Jan 29, 2012 9:20 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
huh?
by craigws on Jan 30, 2012 11:20 AM EST up reply actions
what the fuck?
"Rhubarb, if you wouldn’t mind, ram your taint into your monitor as hard as you can." - joewho112
by BoeJouma on Jan 31, 2012 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
Classic Jessy S stuff.
"Don't take life for granted, because tomorrow isn't promised to any one of us." -Kirby Puckett
"Tell Gardy there's nobody around to protect him now." Ozzie Guillen
by less cowbell, more 'neau on Feb 1, 2012 9:06 AM EST up reply actions
///
DUNK HIS ASS
by obnoxious american on Feb 1, 2012 4:07 PM EST up reply actions
Making it count may be the only Selig-era change that I like...
Without that added meaning, baseball’s ASG might already have gone the way of Chicago’s once-famous College All-Star Football Game, the Hall of Fame Game in Cooperstown or, most likely, the dreaded NFL Pro Bowl.
"Elder White! Look at the talent on those Cubs!" Harry Caray, KMOX Radio, 4/22/62
"And you have to wonder – What's the matter with Broglio?" Harry, KMOX, 5/24/64
by ernaga on Jan 29, 2012 12:30 PM EST reply actions
I think there are all kinds of things you could do to spice up the All Star Game, but tying it to the World Series was always a terrible idea. As for the notion that it’s too hard to handle the logistics of hotel reservations if they give it to the team with the best record — um, they don’t know who the teams are even going to be until after the LCS. So unless Bud is suggesting that the World Series is rigged, he needs to come up with a better excuse.
by chapman_123 on Jan 29, 2012 1:17 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Of course the series is rigged
They shake the drums and one team is drawn from each. Those two teams will play at the end of the month.
I'm a proud fan of the Minnesota Twins and Dallas Cowboys!
"Life is precious and time is a key element. Let’s make every moment count and help those who have a greater need than our own." – Harmon Killebrew
I would like to see Dallas vs the Giants on Thanksgiving, Make it happen NFL!
Check out my eBay items.
by Jessy S on Jan 29, 2012 9:22 PM EST up reply actions
Bloated rosters
The roster should be no more than 15 players. If you can’t manage one game with 15 players, there’s something wrong with you.
by Galley on Jan 29, 2012 4:31 PM EST reply actions
That would require a starting pitcher going at least 6 or 7 innings
Not exactly fair to his regular team
by Aly Edge on Jan 29, 2012 10:19 PM EST up reply actions
I voted the All Star game
but only if they make tweaks to the game making it less an exhibition. There is something I like about the best players in each league actually playing hard to get their league the home field advantage in the hopes that their team may be the one to utilize it.
Ross on Halladay: "I’d tried everything against him…going the other way, taking pitches, trying to walk…and nothing worked. I’d never tried going up there and just trying to hit a home run off him."
My boy has mad hops
I rant on Twitter
by scout6 on Jan 29, 2012 6:08 PM EST reply actions
I'd argue a related point, concerning not the individual teams but the leagues overall
Usually, the better league wins the All-Star game (the historical trend on this is quite clear). Thus, “making it count”, more often than not, causes the better league to get home field advantage.
I’m sure there are more prosaic and accurate ways of judging what league is best in a given year, but it’s clearly a better proxy than simply choosing HFA at random.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
by PaulThomas on Jan 29, 2012 7:42 PM EST reply actions
Better regular season record, obviously
by Aly Edge on Jan 29, 2012 10:20 PM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed