NL misery continues

The team from the Al that goes to the world series should send Young a case of champagne and a big thank you card. Incredible that one strike away from ending the AL dominance that the NL could be defeated again.
The game may have been a boring low scoring game for an all star game but i do have to say that for all Bud Selig has done wrong as commissioner that his idea to have the winning league get the homefield in the World Series is by far the brightest thing he has done in his tenure. It has truly restored the all star game to the level it was at for years. In the old days players truly felt it was an honor to be in the all star game and took winning it very seriously. It was before everyone was a zillionaire who played the game and guys played for pride and there was a real grudge there. Then a period existed where all it meant to the guys being paid so much was that they got the bonus built into their contracts for making it to the all star game.
I remember the games of the mid 70's and early 80's and those guys were playing hard and wanted to win. It had become a joke like the Pro Bowl and NBA all star game for awhile and its nice to see guys play hard and managers manage like they want to win now.
The all star game has truly been restored to its prior status as the only great all star game in sports and I really think that adding the incentive of home field in the World Series had a lot to do with it.

[stevepopyak]

Agree with you about the home field advantage, think it adds some incentive to the game. Can't stand Selig though, think he has been horrible.

[Gander]

Disagree about how one game, an exhibition game, should decide the home field advantage in the World Series. I think its a no brainer and the team with the better overall regular season record should have home field advantage. Or the team with a better interleague record should have it. These guys play way too many regular season games for something like the home field advantage to come down to 1 exhibition game where only a fraction of players play.

On the flip side, lately home field advantage in the world series hasnt meant a damn thing. So it hasnt really mattered too much. The last time I think they even played a game 7 was in 2002 when the Angels beat the Giants.
Best team usually wins the World Series, esepcially over the last 10 years. Only year I can say that I think the better team lost was when Florida beat the Yankees in 2003.

Originally Posted by Gander

Disagree about how one game, an exhibition game, should decide the home field advantage in the World Series. I think its a no brainer and the team with the better overall regular season record should have home field advantage. Or the team with a better interleague record should have it. These guys play way too many regular season games for something like the home field advantage to come down to 1 exhibition game where only a fraction of players play.

On the flip side, lately home field advantage in the world series hasnt meant a damn thing. So it hasnt really mattered too much. The last time I think they even played a game 7 was in 2002 when the Angels beat the Giants.
Best team usually wins the World Series, esepcially over the last 10 years. Only year I can say that I think the better team lost was when Florida beat the Yankees in 2003.

Tim you can't do interleague because its not fair, each division only plays one other division, its not a fair sample. The regular season record doesnt cur it for me either. Leagues can be of completely different strength. The only fair way would be to alternate it. But your stats are way off on home team winning the WS.

[Gander]

How are "my stats" way off Mike? All I said was home field really hasnt mattered. The best team has won. The White Sox and the Red Sox won their world series in sweeps, how did home field advantage help them? Please explain?

The year before that the Marlins won 3 games at Yankee stadium, including the deciding one. The Yankees won 2 in Florida.

In 2001 & 2002 the series came down to a game 7, with the home team winning both. But the 3 priior years, Yankees dominated 3 very weak NL teams in the World Series. They had a winning record away in those World Series, in fact they only dropped 1 game on the road in 5 attempts.

[Gander]

So you are saying Interleague is not fair because of the potential of one very strong division getting to prey on on very weak division like this year with the AL East crushing the NL East? Yes, I get your point but its still more fair to let 20 games decide home field over 1 exhibition game where about 2-3% of the total players are represented.

Say the Red Sox make it back to the World Series this year and have home field advantage.

Your telling me that the fact that the AL won the all star game because of a total breakdown of one pitcher (with 2 outs) is a better reason for them to have home field than the fact that they went 16-2 against NL teams?

Huh?

Originally Posted by Gander

How are "my stats" way off Mike? All I said was home field really hasnt mattered. The best team has won. The White Sox and the Red Sox won their world series in sweeps, how did home field advantage help them? Please explain?

The year before that the Marlins won 3 games at Yankee stadium, including the deciding one. The Yankees won 2 in Florida.

In 2001 & 2002 the series came down to a game 7, with the home team winning both. But the 3 priior years, Yankees dominated 3 very weak NL teams in the World Series. They had a winning record away in those World Series, in fact they only dropped 1 game on the road in 5 attempts.

Tim you don't think starting at home helps?