and it actually means something in the season, home field advantage to the league winner.
Plus most All-star games are so boring!
Question on the side.....How much would you pay for a ticket to watch one of these?
Thats okay Big Dave... I still missed the translation!
care to explain that?
your the baseball fan, why don't you? cuz I think it's a bad system.
What is there for me to explain?
You made the statement and I am supposed to explain it. Why is it a bad system? I dont even know what you are talking about?
Old System: World series home field advantage (4 games played at home rather than 3) rotates between the NL and AL
New (Current) System: World Series home field advantage goes to the winner of the All Star game.
"Early July marks the midway point of the season, during which a three day break is taken when the Major League Baseball All-Star Game is staged. The All-Star game pits players from the NL, headed up by the manager of the previous NL World Series team, against players from the AL, similarly managed, in an exhibition game. The 2002 contest ended in an 11-inning tie because both teams were out of pitchers, a result which proved highly unpopular with the fans. As a result, for a two-year trial in 2003 and 2004, the league which won the game received the benefit of home-field advantage (four of the seven games of that year's World Series taking place at their home park). The 2005 contest, played in Detroit, followed this format, and it is expected that it will remain that way until the MLB says otherwise, since it has become popular with fans but has upset purists over the previous format of the two leagues alternating home-field advantage every other year. The Boston Red Sox and Chicago White Sox took some advantage of the rule in 2004 and 2005 respectively, as each team started the Series with two home victories, giving them good momentum for a sweep. The rule did not help the Yankees in 2003, as they lost the Series to Florida in 6 games."
So what is wrong with it?
one game decides the champion home advantage? no thanks, rather it be up to the regular season record, which is better because it decides by more than one game.
How many people from Toronto do you think would go? After the Grey Cup, people loose interest in the game. It's then hockey time. A football game where the rules are changed to prevent injuries take the intensity out of the game and therefore make the game boring. Been there, done that.
A CFL/NFL All-Star game would be great, I think the Pro Bowl is getting tired. But I doubt this will happen.
Found this on web which confirms what I think - the Pro Bowl is a stinker. A CFL/NFL all-star game of some type, even if it would be a touch game of some sort, would be excellent I think:
"The Pro Bowl is boring touch football."
Sporting News, article by Joe Buck.[url=http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_16_227/ai_100393356]http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ ... _100393356[/url]
The NHL All-Star Game is also a big stinker. It has no intensity whatsoever. If there are a few Americans who might decide to give hockey a shot by watching the All-Star Game, you won't see many start to follow the sport.
Maybe I should start a petition on this subject, that way All Star game wannabes can go their and voice their opinion.
Here ya go.http://www.petitiononline.com/CFLASPKK/petition.html