PDA

View Full Version : And an idiot shall be Emperor


Daver
01-10-2003, 08:21 PM
Bud is back at it,proving once again that his IQ ranks just slightly below how the world thinks of him. (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/allstar/2003-01-09-homefield-series_x.htm)

soxtalker
01-10-2003, 08:41 PM
It appears that Bud's motive is simply to make the All-Star Game important. The relevancy of the game has been declining over the past several years. While I'm no fan of Bud, that's not a terribly bad motive.

Now, there are lots of problems with doing something like this. The only players (and coaches) who will be positively motivated are those who think that they have a chance at making the series. Since every team needs to be represented, there will be a lot of players who won't care. So, I wonder if this will cause other rules for the All-Star Game to change (e.g., the requirement that all teams be represented).

Isn't an All-Star Game appearance a common metric in lots of players' contracts?

Chisox_cali
01-10-2003, 08:51 PM
Not related to the topic, but does Dusty Baker still coach the NL All-Stars? Or does the new coach of SF coach them?

OfficerKarkovice
01-10-2003, 08:57 PM
Originally posted by Chisox_cali
Not related to the topic, but does Dusty Baker still coach the NL All-Stars? Or does the new coach of SF coach them?

Dusty Baker still coaches them.

WinningUgly!
01-10-2003, 09:20 PM
Originally posted by daver
Bud is back at it,proving once again that his IQ ranks just slightly below how the world thinks of him. (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/allstar/2003-01-09-homefield-series_x.htm) It just wouldn't make sense to award World Series home field advantage to the team with the best record, would it?

Tragg
01-10-2003, 10:31 PM
What an assinine idea. There is absolutely no nexus between the two.

gogosoxgogo
01-10-2003, 10:44 PM
I like this idea. Baseball has the only All Star game which still means something out of all the major sports. This would make it mean even more. Let's get rid of that notion of it just being an exhibition game. I also agree that certain changes need to be made if this goes into effect.

No, not every team should be represented. I've always hated that rule, it is just some cheap way to gain revenue with TV ratings. Let the best players go! Robert Fick an All Star? Randy Winn!? You've got to be kidding me! Players like these simply waste valuble roster space for more deserving players.

Also, this could pose quite a big problem. What if the manager of one of the teams who makes the World Series in the previous year is now managing a team in the opposite league? Are you still going to let him manage the opposite league, despite the fact that he now obviously wants home field advantage for the league he's in now. Obviously, something would need to be done with that. I propose something along the lines of whichever manager in each league currently has the best record. Then they are really going to fight for something since they will have a better chance of making the World Series. But then there's the question of what to do when there is a tie for the best record. You'd have to go with something like record against each other, home/away record, etc.

I do like the format of determing home field advantage by who has the best record like the NBA does (certainly better than alternating it every year!), but I think that this idea would be a nice alternative which would be unique to baseball.

TornLabrum
01-10-2003, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by gogosoxgogo
I like this idea. Baseball has the only All Star game which still means something out of all the major sports. This would make it mean even more. Let's get rid of that notion of it just being an exhibition game. I also agree that certain changes need to be made if this goes into effect.

No, not every team should be represented. I've always hated that rule, it is just some cheap way to gain revenue with TV ratings. Let the best players go! Robert Fick an All Star? Randy Winn!? You've got to be kidding me! Players like these simply waste valuble roster space for more deserving players.

Also, this could pose quite a big problem. What if the manager of one of the teams who makes the World Series in the previous year is now managing a team in the opposite league? Are you still going to let him manage the opposite league, despite the fact that he now obviously wants home field advantage for the league he's in now. Obviously, something would need to be done with that. I propose something along the lines of whichever manager in each league currently has the best record. Then they are really going to fight for something since they will have a better chance of making the World Series. But then there's the question of what to do when there is a tie for the best record. You'd have to go with something like record against each other, home/away record, etc.

I do like the format of determing home field advantage by who has the best record like the NBA does (certainly better than alternating it every year!), but I think that this idea would be a nice alternative which would be unique to baseball.

The one thing that has made the All-Star Game meaningless is that there are no longer two leagues. Only Major League Baseball with two conferences going by the name of leagues. When there were real leagues with separate offices, there was actually a rivalry. Now there is as much rivalry as there is between the AFC and NFC or your pick of any of the other conferences.

Still the idea of tying the home field advantage to the winner of an exhibition game in which the starters are selected by the fans is ludicrous. It could only have come form the mind of the Idiot Emperor of Baseball, Commissioner Budlight.

Daver
01-10-2003, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
It could only have come form the mind of the Idiot Emperor of Baseball, Commissioner Budlight.

I prefer Buglight,a true reference to his intellegince is the ZZZZZWAPPPPP sound that is made every time a flying insect comes into contact with bugkiller.

:)

SouthSideHitman
01-11-2003, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by gogosoxgogo
I like this idea. Baseball has the only All Star game which still means something out of all the major sports. This would make it mean even more. Let's get rid of that notion of it just being an exhibition game. I also agree that certain changes need to be made if this goes into effect.

No, not every team should be represented. I've always hated that rule, it is just some cheap way to gain revenue with TV ratings. Let the best players go! Robert Fick an All Star? Randy Winn!? You've got to be kidding me! Players like these simply waste valuble roster space for more deserving players.

Also, this could pose quite a big problem. What if the manager of one of the teams who makes the World Series in the previous year is now managing a team in the opposite league? Are you still going to let him manage the opposite league, despite the fact that he now obviously wants home field advantage for the league he's in now. Obviously, something would need to be done with that. I propose something along the lines of whichever manager in each league currently has the best record. Then they are really going to fight for something since they will have a better chance of making the World Series. But then there's the question of what to do when there is a tie for the best record. You'd have to go with something like record against each other, home/away record, etc.

I do like the format of determing home field advantage by who has the best record like the NBA does (certainly better than alternating it every year!), but I think that this idea would be a nice alternative which would be unique to baseball.

Right on! Having every team represented is what kept Mags off last year and the only reason to keep it is that MLB thinks it increases viewership in places like Tampa and Detroit. Here's an idea, having the best players play a real game instead of 30 random people making cameos for each side would increase viewership all around. Making the game have some stakes would also boost ratings. Another idea in the indomitable Mr. Seligs brain is to take some power away from the managers in selecting the remainder of the roster, yet another good idea (he really should pace himself). I'm sick of seeing Yankees galore and Tony Womacks and it would again add to the competition. These changes would make baseball's the best all-star event of any major sports' (well maybe the Pro-Bowl), now if we could just keep Bud out of the park.

MisterB
01-11-2003, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Still the idea of tying the home field advantage to the winner of an exhibition game in which the starters are selected by the fans is ludicrous. It could only have come form the mind of the Idiot Emperor of Baseball, Commissioner Budlight.

You give him too much credit. Lots of sports writers were espousing this idea after last year's All-Star Debacle. We all know Bud is incapable of an original thought...

TornLabrum
01-11-2003, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
You give him too much credit. Lots of sports writers were espousing this idea after last year's All-Star Debacle. We all know Bud is incapable of an original thought...

You're write. Tying home field advantage in the Series to who wins the All-Star Game could only come from the brain of a sportswriter. (Apologies to Phil Rogers.)

StepsInSC
01-14-2003, 12:42 PM
Obviously I'm in the minority on this but, me likey!