Subscribe to
NSLog(); Header Image

QotD: All-Star Game

Question: Should the winning league of the All-Star game get home field advantage for the World Series?

My Answer: I say yeah, give those boys a little more to play for.

You are encouraged to answer the Question of the Day for yourself in the comments or on your blog.

4 Responses to "QotD: All-Star Game"

  1. I would agree with that. It definitely makes the game more exciting when its being played for something.

  2. I lean toward yes, because it makes the All-Star game more exciting, certainly. But there are hidden problems.

    There's an expectation that every man on the All-Star roster plays during the game. If the game's tied after the bottom of the ninth, this means we're basically screwed — among other reasons, because it means that Gagne and Rivera are stuck in the game for however many innings things end up taking, because starters like Mulder and Johnson are left in for 1 or 2 innings max, and the pen's exhausted.

    If you want the manager to play to win the All-Star game, either the expectation that all players have to play needs to go, or you need to let the manager recycle used players in extra innings.

  3. How is home advantage currently determined?

  4. Until this is played like a baseball game it shouldn't count for anything. I want to see the starter go six or seven innings, I want to see a middle reliever come in and I want one closer to come in in the ninth inning. I want to see the best players play nine innings - I don't want to see Carl Crawford come in because every team has to have an all-star.