All Star game...reward

[Sheephead Slayer]

That was a great game to watch! Santana and Nathan were better than their numbers will show.

So my question is.. what do you think about the winner getting home field advantage in the world series? I'm kinda mixed on this, I would hate to see it getting competitve to the point of players posibly getting hurt. On the other side I like the idea of their being something to play for.

Kevin

[Eric Wettschreck]

Now that the game counts the commish will never say,"Just end the game."

[CNY Tim]

I agree with Sparky Anderson, that the better overall record should have the home field advantage in the world series. Why not just be happy to be nominated to an all-star team without playing the game I think 162 regular games plus the post season is quite enough. The homerun derby was way to long in my opinion.

[genegodawa]

My feelings on the all-star game have changed over the years. As a young fan, it used to mean so much more before inter-league play and how big free-agency (before which the real stars were lifers with one team) has become.

As long as there are a few big hits and a few good plays and they play as hard as possible to win and the announcers don't get on my nerves, then I'm ok with it whether or not it means home field to the winner. I don't really believe that motivates these guys too much more than their pride does though.

[TNFL]

I'm fine with the reward. One rule I would like to see is a reinsertion rule. That way if the game goes into extra innings you can put your starters in and not have the game decided by the backups. Plus it would ensure that all position players would be able to get in the game.

[juggs]

It shouldn't come to this. I can still remember Pete Rose taking out Ray Fosse at home in the 1970 game. If something like that happened now I'm sure there would be a huge controversy over whether players should put themselves in harms way at the risk of hurting the rest of their season or career. The game meant MORE then than it does now in spite of the home field advantage rule simply because the players took it a whole lot more seriously. I'm with Sparky--give home field to the team with the better record, they deserve it. Forget this alternating garbage, it means nothing. Every time I see that "this one counts" slogan it makes me nauseous.

[Windy City Walleye Hunter]

I would have to agree with my baseball brethern above. I don't like it, never have, even though my beloved Pale Hose may benefit from the rule this year. I heard an interesting angle. Take a huge pot of money from the TV, tix sale, etc. And make it a winner take all. That's what this whole thing is about anyway, making money. I think that the team with the best record should have the home field advantage, period. But what do I know, I'm just old school.

YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE BOARD...YES! Windy

[fishyguy]

Although, I agree with you Windy, wouldn't old school in this case mean we go back to alternating years. Baseball going by the best overall record would be new school unless I missed something in my youth or before my youth (or yutes, as I know you like to quote movies and song).

[Windy City Walleye Hunter]

Fishy,

Now that's way old school. You know, one room log cabin, walking to school in 4 feet of snow, 10 miles, uphill...both ways!

YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE BOARD...YES!

Windy