PDA

View Full Version : World Series Home Field Advantage...


100 Year Itch
07-12-2006, 02:35 AM
Here's a idea to replace the ridiculous system currently in place to determine whether the AL or NL has home field advantage in the World Series.

I believe home field advantage should go to the pennant winner with the best playoff winning percentage during the respective year.

For example, if the White Sox, er, the AL pennant winner goes 7 and 0 and the NL pennant winner goes 7 and 5, the AL team receives home field advantage.

To appease Selig, and maintain some significance and relevance to the All Star Game, if both teams have equal playoff records, then the winning League during the All Star Game determines the tie breaker.

By instituting this system, theoretically the most deserving team is guaranteed home field advantage at the World Series; replacing the current system which is -- one need not look any further than Manny Ramirez for proof -- a ****ing joke.

Thoughts?

ZachAL
07-12-2006, 02:40 AM
Here's a idea to replace the ridiculous system currently in place to determine whether the AL or NL has home field advantage in the World Series.

I believe home field advantage should go to the pennant winner with the best playoff winning percentage during the respective year.

For example, if the White Sox, er, the AL pennant winner goes 7 and 0 and the NL pennant winner goes 7 and 5, the AL team receives home field advantage.

To appease Selig, and maintain some significance and relevance to the All Star Game, if both teams have equal playoff records, then the winning League during the All Star Game determines the tie breaker.

By instituting this system, theoretically the most dominant team is guaranteed home field advantage at the World Series -- replacing the current system which is -- one need not look any further than Manny Ramirez for proof -- a ****ing joke.

Thoughts?

This is funny because I had this same exact thought myself today while at work. Thought a playoff record based homefield advantage system would be great. I thought one problem may be that it would be such short notice as sometimes the WS starts shorty after NL and ALCS. But this problem is no different than the old system where it depended on which team won a few days earlier. Is there a reason people could think of why this couldnt work?

HotelWhiteSox
07-12-2006, 02:46 AM
Then why not just do regular season record? You have the same issue of quality of opponent not being the same and screwing you over

dcb56
07-12-2006, 02:52 AM
Here's a idea to replace the ridiculous system currently in place to determine whether the AL or NL has home field advantage in the World Series.

I believe home field advantage should go to the pennant winner with the best playoff winning percentage during the respective year.

For example, if the White Sox, er, the AL pennant winner goes 7 and 0 and the NL pennant winner goes 7 and 5, the AL team receives home field advantage.

To appease Selig, and maintain some significance and relevance to the All Star Game, if both teams have equal playoff records, then the winning League during the All Star Game determines the tie breaker.

By instituting this system, theoretically the most deserving team is guaranteed home field advantage at the World Series; replacing the current system which is -- one need not look any further than Manny Ramirez for proof -- a ****ing joke.

Thoughts?

The probelm I see with the idea is it rewards teams who happen to be lucky enough to get matched against weak teams that qualify because they won a bad division or got the Wild Card becuase the league they play in is weak.

RealMenWearBlack
07-12-2006, 02:58 AM
I'm not sure what anyone else here thinks of this idea, but I think the league that has the best interleague record should have home field advantage. If Bud wants the All Star Game to still count, maybe he could make it count towards the winning sides interleague record as 10 wins.

EDIT: Or maybe they could do a best of three taking into account interleague record by league, the All Star Game, and regular-season record of the teams.

TDog
07-12-2006, 06:11 AM
How about having the AL play the NL in one game at midseason with World Series homefield advantage on the line.

I fail to see the problem people have with this. The Series rarely goes seven games anyway.

ChiSoxRowand
07-12-2006, 06:41 AM
just go back to the old way

soxfan13
07-12-2006, 10:04 AM
WHy not go with some stupid thing called "team with best record gets homefield." I think its horrible that a team could possibly win 110 games and not get home field if it makes the WS because its league lost the All-Star game.

cbotnyse
07-12-2006, 10:20 AM
WHy not go with some stupid thing called "team with best record gets homefield." I think its horrible that a team could possibly win 110 games and not get home field if it makes the WS because its league lost the All-Star game.isnt every other professional sport run this way?

downstairs
07-12-2006, 10:32 AM
I believe you're close... but it should be TOTAL (all teams) record AL vs. NL. That way a single team doesn't get punished for being matched up to better interleague competition.

So the AL cleaned the NL's clock this year... whoever is the ALCS winner gets home field in the World Series.


And why exactly should the all-star game have significance again, Bud? I mean... its a silly exhibition.

Railsplitter
07-12-2006, 10:36 AM
Alternate between the two leagues. It worked without a fuss for 99 years.

Thome25
07-12-2006, 10:51 AM
How about the team with the better record in the regular season AND the playoffs gets home field advantage?

That way the team that has home-field will take pride in their regular season record and not tank any games if they clinch a playoff-birth earlier than the rest of the teams.

Also, it adds a little more urgency and drama if you add the playoff record to the equation as well as regular season record.

batmanZoSo
07-12-2006, 11:29 AM
Here's a idea to replace the ridiculous system currently in place to determine whether the AL or NL has home field advantage in the World Series.

I believe home field advantage should go to the pennant winner with the best playoff winning percentage during the respective year.

For example, if the White Sox, er, the AL pennant winner goes 7 and 0 and the NL pennant winner goes 7 and 5, the AL team receives home field advantage.

To appease Selig, and maintain some significance and relevance to the All Star Game, if both teams have equal playoff records, then the winning League during the All Star Game determines the tie breaker.

By instituting this system, theoretically the most deserving team is guaranteed home field advantage at the World Series; replacing the current system which is -- one need not look any further than Manny Ramirez for proof -- a ****ing joke.

Thoughts?

Absolutely not. It's too small of a sample and the competition can vary drastically for one team to another. We might play Boston and the Yankees while the Mets might play San Diego and Cincinatti. Part of the reason they never went with "best record" is because the leagues were completely separate and therefore the records of teams in each league weren't considered comparable (although I still think best record would've always been a much better idea than what we have now or "taking turns"). But nowadays, the two leagues play each other--a lot.

Just make it best record. The season's long as hell. Twice as many games as any other sport. Make it mean a little more.

Milw
07-12-2006, 11:36 AM
I'm with T Dog. This system, while admittedly a tad bizarre, is fine. It made for an exciting game last night, and unlike the former method of alternating each year, this format isn't entirely arbitrary. At least it's based on SOMETHING.

While I concede that awarding homefiled to the pennant winner with the better record is a more logical format, I really like that the All Star Game now means something. I'd be disappointed to lose that.

viagracat
07-12-2006, 12:05 PM
I'm not sure what anyone else here thinks of this idea, but I think the league that has the best interleague record should have home field advantage. If Bud wants the All Star Game to still count, maybe he could make it count towards the winning sides interleague record as 10 wins.

EDIT: Or maybe they could do a best of three taking into account interleague record by league, the All Star Game, and regular-season record of the teams.

I like this idea. You have a total of 252 regular-season games deciding WS homefield instead of ONE exhibition game. If it's a tie the ASG would decide it.

Uncle_Patrick
07-12-2006, 12:29 PM
I think that the team with the best record during the regular season should have the home field advantage.

I heard someone (I think it was Dan Patrick) yesterday suggest that MLB use interleague records to determine home field advantage (the contender with the best interleague record get it). I thought it was an interesting idea.

fuzzy_patters
07-12-2006, 12:39 PM
I think that the team with the best record during the regular season should have the home field advantage.

I heard someone (I think it was Dan Patrick) yesterday suggest that MLB use interleague records to determine home field advantage (the contender with the best interleague record get it). I thought it was an interesting idea.

I think your idea is unfair. Let's say that the White Sox are to play the Mets in the World Series this year, and the Mets will have the best record. Interleague play proved that there is a big disparity between the AL and NL this year. Would it be fair to give the Mets homefield advantage because they beat up on the inferior league? Why should the White Sox be punished because of the league they play in?

As for Patrick's idea, it makes a lot more sense. There are enough interleague games to establish which league is superior. If you won the more difficult league, you have done something worthy of homefield.

KMKsuburbannoise
07-12-2006, 12:57 PM
I was hoping that the national would win the allstar game so that when the sox win the series, they win it at home

Uncle_Patrick
07-12-2006, 01:13 PM
I think your idea is unfair. Let's say that the White Sox are to play the Mets in the World Series this year, and the Mets will have the best record. Interleague play proved that there is a big disparity between the AL and NL this year. Would it be fair to give the Mets homefield advantage because they beat up on the inferior league? Why should the White Sox be punished because of the league they play in?

As for Patrick's idea, it makes a lot more sense. There are enough interleague games to establish which league is superior. If you won the more difficult league, you have done something worthy of homefield.

You have a good point about beating up on an inferior league, but that only assumes that the teams with the 2 best records make the World Series. The last few years have seen at least one Wild Card team make the Series. Also, while the Mets might beat up on the National League all year (we'll see how it pans out), that's not going to be the case every year.

Ol' No. 2
07-12-2006, 06:51 PM
How about having the AL play the NL in one game at midseason with World Series homefield advantage on the line.

I fail to see the problem people have with this. The Series rarely goes seven games anyway.For all the carping about how "it counts" we've seen something in the All-Star game the last few years we hadn't seen in a long time - teams playing to win. That's not a bad thing.

slobes
07-12-2006, 06:58 PM
Then why not just do regular season record? You have the same issue of quality of opponent not being the same and screwing you over

Yeah this has always been my opinion.

TDog
07-12-2006, 09:49 PM
For all the carping about how "it counts" we've seen something in the All-Star game the last few years we hadn't seen in a long time - teams playing to win. That's not a bad thing.

Apparently some people believe that's a bad thing.

TornLabrum
07-12-2006, 11:39 PM
Apparently some people believe that's a bad thing.

That's not what a lot of people think is wrong. This is. http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=2&id=3196

Railsplitter
07-14-2006, 10:36 AM
This current "It counts" nonsense is based on the falacious notion that players didn't give it thier all in the 2002 All-Star game, when in fact the mamagers got so caught up in the "everybody plays" mentality they ran out of players.

If "Home field advantage" were a truism, then every team would be .500.

Case in point, the 2003 Marlins didn't have the "home field advantage" in any series, yet they won all three.

SouthSoxFan
07-14-2006, 12:28 PM
If "Home field advantage" were a truism, then every team would be .500.
If you examine historical stats, you cannot deny the home field advantage exists in baseball. If you study the last 100 years of MLB, you'll find that slightly over 4 out of 5 teams (about 83%) each season will have a better win% at home than on the road. Also, the overall win% of home teams is about 54-55%. And you'll find that stats such as BAVG, OBP, SLG, Runs scored are measurably better for teams when they play at home than when they travel.

We can debate the reasons for this, but you cannot deny it exists. And the advantage likely increases when you throw in the DH rule change for AL vs. NL games.