Do we seriously need 66 total All Stars? Is this a case of making sure there are enough players to finish the game, or just cheapening what used to be a pretty prestigious honor? Isn't this starting to get a little out of hand?
i think they wanted to do that to allow for more pitchers, in case we have a possible 25 inning game sometime in the future... even though there is only one All-Star game in a year...
They wouldn't have this problem if these morons at the MLB office didn't decide to make this game count towards the World Series...Otherwise they could set a 12 inning limit...What a total joke this has turned out.
But at the same time, there are several UNdeserving players who ARE on the roster every year. Shouldn't we be fixing both problems at once?
And if we have to expand the rosters to get someone on the All Star team, then do they REALLY deserve it?
Only fix I see for undeserving players being left off is to eliminate the fan vote, which I'm kinda wishy washy about. I think its good for fans to have input, even if way too many dont research who actually deserves to be an all star.
Only fix I see for undeserving players being left off is to eliminate the fan vote, which I'm kinda wishy washy about. I think its good for fans to have input, even if way too many dont research who actually deserves to be an all star.
And the "every team gets an All Star" rule, as well.
*Yawn* All-Star games in the four major sports have become a waste of time, and I lost interest in the MLB All-Star game after the infamous "tie". Since they made the stakes high (winner gets home-field in the 'Series) they need to tweak the game. Having a player from every MLB team needs to be done away with. Why? Because you overlook a solid player on a good team to reward the best player on a bottom dwelling team.
There should be at least two more spots on each team.
Poor fan balloting, spots with several legit candidates, the one player per team rule(i like it), and the need for bench player to be there in case of extra innings.
This change has been long overdue. It will help the game.
The fansmust vote for the All-Star Game.!
Baseball is fueled by fans like us each and every day. You may not agree with the voting, but it keeps the chatter about the game strong.
Baseball is America's National Pastime...driven by it's fans.!
The fansmust vote for the All-Star Game.!
Baseball is fueled by fans like us each and every day. You may not agree with the voting, but it keeps the chatter about the game strong.
Baseball is America's National Pastime...driven by it's fans.!
I agree to an extent, but when you see someone like Alfonso Soriano (in 4th place among NL Outfielders while hitting below .230), you wonder if people are paying attention.
Yes - I would say that it has gotten WAY out of hand. The All Star game just doesn't hold the same appeal for me NOW as it did back in the 1970's, and 1980's.
I agree to an extent, but when you see someone like Alfonso Soriano (in 4th place among NL Outfielders while hitting below .230), you wonder if people are paying attention.
Good point. I think the main problem in the fan vote is as simple as a boy, and his dad...they go to the game, bonding about baseball, and the boy's favotite player is, let's say... Soriano. The dad is going to show his son, just like we did, how to watch the game, how to keep score, and vote for the all-star game. The boy is going to punch Soriano's name, period. The whole ballpark experinence as a child is what fuels the game of baseball.
Yes, you are also going to have "name" players punched automatically...like Manny, A-Rod, Jeter, Pujols, etc.
Another problem is the stadium sizes, and fan attendance. The Yankees for instance...huge park, lots of fans to vote. They will overwhelm, say, Kansas City, or Tampa. A-Rod, Jeter, Texiera, Damon...they are all going to get lots of votes.
Your fandom is duly noted...and yes. Soriano is a no for me.!
Who really cares so long as the games are fun to watch. When you have to start making real work out of it, it really takes a lot out of what the All Star Game is supposed to be, i.e. the fan's game with the players the fan's want to see, regardless of how well they have played. The MVP awards, Rookie of the Year awards, HOF votes... fans have no say in that. So that is when "stats" get their due, IMO. Otherwise, who cares if fans vote for a guy who didn't have great stats? The All Star Game isn't the same thing as being on the All MLB 1st team at the end of the year, you know?
Good point. I think the main problem in the fan vote is as simple as a boy, and his dad...they go to the game, bonding about baseball, and the boy's favotite player is, let's say... Soriano. The dad is going to show his son, just like we did, how to watch the game, how to keep score, and vote for the all-star game. The boy is going to punch Soriano's name, period. The whole ballpark experinence as a child is what fuels the game of baseball.
Yes, you are also going to have "name" players punched automatically...like Manny, A-Rod, Jeter, Pujols, etc.
Another problem is the stadium sizes, and fan attendance. The Yankees for instance...huge park, lots of fans to vote. They will overwhelm, say, Kansas City, or Tampa. A-Rod, Jeter, Texiera, Damon...they are all going to get lots of votes.
Your fandom is duly noted...and yes. Soriano is a no for me.!
Let's hope more dads (and moms) are teaching their kids how to "keep score." I see fewer and fewer people doing that at the ballpark.
Comment!