PDA

View Full Version : Let's Just Eliminate the All Star Game Please



Edskin
07-10-2011, 02:25 PM
Wow, what an absolutely joke this has become. The players want to be recognized as all-stars but no one wants to play in the game.

Just today, David Price pulled out of the game despite pitching Saturday. He was replaced by James Sheilds who is ineligible to play because he is pitching today. Shields was replaced by Sabbathia who is inigible because he is playing today. So someone will get the nod.

Scott Rolen probably isn't one of the top 10-12 3B in baseball, but he is an all-star.

Oh, and just like little league, every team gets at least one rep.

The rosters keep expanding to absurd levels, cheapening what it means to make the all star game in the first place. It's become like the Pro Bowl where no one wants to play buy everyone wants the free trip to Hawaii. It's become an embarrassment.

The all star roster should look much like a regular roster and the game should be played much like it was in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's...

They play 162 games... It is extremely doubtful than one extra game is going to do some sort of major damage.

And if the response is that you just can't take the chance, then let's do away with the game and make it a day or two of various exhibitions.

By the 6th inning of the game the diamond is full of average players that no one really cares about.

Yuck.

RedsManRick
07-10-2011, 03:58 PM
I agree the roster expansion issue is ridiculous. You do not need 30 guys to play 9 innings. Give the best 3 SP in the league 3 IP each. Pitching problem sovled. Ask the starting position players to play the full game like they do every day. Problem solved.

But that's not what the game is really about. It's about a TV rating. And the more players you put on the team, the more incentive fans have to watch in hopes of seeing their favorite players. It's sad at this point. You have something like 12% of the league, 1 in every 8 players, on the rosters. It's stupid.

Edskin
07-10-2011, 04:09 PM
You know Rick, that might their reasoning, but I think it's based on a false premise. I don't think Royals fans are more likely to tune in because there might be a chance their average middle reliever might get to pitch an inning.

Unassisted
07-10-2011, 04:25 PM
I'd be OK with eliminating it. It seems like ever since Bud made the game "count" for something, it matters less.

Continue to name players to the teams, so that players can get their bonuses, but play it as a video game simulation for the highest bidding video game company. (How many millions would a video game system company and publisher be willing to pay for the rights to be the official proxy to the MLB All Star game?)

Televise the simulation and give every player on every team the 3 days off.

oneupper
07-10-2011, 04:25 PM
i haven't watched an All Star game in over a decade.

George Anderson
07-10-2011, 04:37 PM
I love baseball tradition and history, but the AS game bores me to tears.

cincinnati chili
07-10-2011, 04:41 PM
It's a good 3-day period for me to get caught up with work. Before I was a lawyer and had a toddler at home, I used to go to the movies for 3 days straight. I'll DVR it in case there's a bench clearing brawl or if Bud Selig gets humiliated in some way (I loved 2002!), but otherwise it's not very compelling and about 60% of the players chosen are not among the top 30 players in either league.

savafan
07-10-2011, 04:46 PM
Move it to after the World Series and fill out the rosters with the league leaders in stat categories.

remdog
07-10-2011, 04:54 PM
WOW! Thanks Ed for starting this thread. I can't tell you how silly MLB looks to me for putting on this farce.

Scott Rolen on the All-Star team!?! Who thought that up? His family at home will tune in for that but no one else will.

Making the 'little-star game' count to see who gets home field advantage in the WS!?! Bud has shot himself in the foot for about the 24th time. What a joke.

Players want to be named to the team so they get their bonuses but then they look for a way out. Not acceptable. If you don't play, you don't get the bonus---pretty simple in my estimation.

Come Tuesday I'll be watching reruns of Laverne & Shirley or something as equally inane but not as vapid as this farce.

Rem

MikeThierry
07-10-2011, 04:54 PM
I agree that the roster expansion has really dulled down the All Star game a bit but I still like it. Out of all the All Star games in the 4 major sports, the MLB All Star Game is the best. Giving players who don't play in the AS Game 3-4 days of rest in the middle of the marathon season is also a good idea, in my opinion.

RedsManRick
07-10-2011, 05:43 PM
You know Rick, that might their reasoning, but I think it's based on a false premise. I don't think Royals fans are more likely to tune in because there might be a chance their average middle reliever might get to pitch an inning.

I agree. I think they'd get better results with a real game between the real stars of the game.

nate
07-10-2011, 06:54 PM
Half-joke: have the game be a computer simulation where fans can vote on "key" managerial decisions online.

cincinnati chili
07-10-2011, 09:09 PM
I've figured out how to fix the all-star game, and it will only cost an extra $26 million per year... which by the way is chump change for an event where advertisers pay more than $1 million per 60-seconds of ad time (http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2153&Itemid=42).

The solution: pay the 25-man roster and the manager of the winning team a $1 million bonus each; pay the losers nothing except a hotel bill, less incidentals, and for a flight home

Why it will work:
There are two main reasons that the game is not compelling: 1. the players and managers aren't trying hard enough to win; 2. the best MLB players are, for the most part, not invited to the game.

My fix will correct both of these issues, and dramatically increase viewership. Even marginal sports fans will tune in if they believe that Coco Cordero can instantly lose $1 million by blowing a save and giving up a walk-off hit in the 9th. For the same reason, "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" and "Deal or No Deal" earn viewers, this plan will do the same, and will more than make up for the additional funds spent on the prize money.

Here are the particulars:

1. The managers of each team will consist of the manager-of-the-year winner from the previous year - not the manager of the previous year's world series manager.

2. No fan voting and no league involvement whatsoever. The managers get to pick the rosters in their sole discretion. Think the managers will just stock the rosters with fan favorites or players that they're chummy with? I've got a million reasons why they would be fools to do so. I'd only put one limit on the manager's discretion, and it's below.

3. No more of the stupid one-player-per team quota. If the Oakland A's suck. No A's in the game this year.

4. If the manager of a team is working for a major league organization, he can pick no more than "x" players from that organization. [Off the cuff, I think four is a reasonable number].

5. The roster can be of any composition of players as the manager sees fit, except that they shall consist of at least 6 pitchers who were primarily starters that year and 3 pitchers who were primarily relievers that year. This gives a maximum of 16 position players, which is plenty.

6. The managers shall send out invites to be on the team at least 3 weeks prior to the game, and the players shall have 24 hours to accept (which I assume they will almost always do, unless they're seriously injured; no player is going to forgo an opportunity to earn $1 for one day's work in favor of sitting on the couch for 3 days).

7. Any starting pitchers who are selected to the all-star rosters must be deactivated by their MLB teams for the 2 games prior to the all-star weekend. This will assure that all starting pitchers have at least 3 days of rest and that relievers have at least one day of rest. This will also assure that the manager can start the pitcher whom he thinks gives his team the best chance to win. [To make up for this, the teams can activate another player to take his place for the final 2 days of games prior to the all-star game]

8. Once a player accepts a spot on the team, he can't be replaced. If a player gets injured prior to the game.... too bad. Your roster slips to 24, which is still plenty for one game.

Comments? I know. It's perfect. But for comparison, here's a less aggressive how-to-fix-the-all-star game column:
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-passan_10_degrees_fixing_all_star_game_070411

I think he blows it with #2 though. First, it's not enough money. Second, in order to make the game compelling, we don't want to give a bonus to participants, but to the winners.

RedsManRick
07-11-2011, 12:30 AM
83 players have been named all stars this years. For reference.

- 242 position players have 200+ PA.
- 121 starters have pithed at least 80 IP
- 177 relievers have pitched at least 20 IP

That's 540 "regulars" using my rough math. That means that more than 1 in every 7 every day major leaguers is an all-star this year. For ONE GAME, we have more than 3 full teams worth of players.

Guess what, Bud? If everybody is an all-star, nobody is a star. I don't know who this game is supposed to appeal to, but somebody needs to talk to MLB's marketing department, because when it comes to marketing their product, their stars, they stink.

camisadelgolf
07-11-2011, 12:34 AM
If we end capitalism, the problem should be solved. Together, I think we can do it. Unite!

MikeThierry
07-11-2011, 01:34 AM
To me there is a simple way to at least make this interesting. Play the game like you would any other game. Who cares if every team isn't represented. Let the starting players play all 9 innings. The only exception I would make is on the pitching aspect of things.

cumberlandreds
07-11-2011, 10:38 AM
I guess I'm one of the few that still like it. I admit I don't have as much enthusiasm for it as I did when I was young. But isn't that the case for about everything? I do think expansion of the rosters and having every team have represenative has dulled it down quite a bit. Too many poor teams with a poor rep make it that way. A few seasons ago the Royals had a pitcher who had an ERA of about 5.00 and I think a losing record. That's just horrible to have that happen. Also I would like to see the starters play the majority of the game. Back when I was younger it wasn't uncommon to see a good chunk of the starters go the entire game or at least 7 innings. Now most are pulled after 3 or 4 innings. That really saps the life of the game IMO.
But I still like the magic of the night where most of the current stars are gathered in one place to show off what they can do. I also like what MLB has done more of recent years in honoring their past. This is a good time to bring back some of the "old" guys for one last standing ovation and remembering their great past.

IslandRed
07-11-2011, 11:26 AM
But that's not what the game is really about. It's about a TV rating. And the more players you put on the team, the more incentive fans have to watch in hopes of seeing their favorite players. It's sad at this point. You have something like 12% of the league, 1 in every 8 players, on the rosters. It's stupid.

Up until 1969, there were two 25-man rosters for two eight-team leagues. Same ratio. Didn't seem to hurt the game then.

Not saying I think the current setup makes a lot of sense, mind you.

Danny Serafini
07-11-2011, 01:05 PM
I guess I'm the opposite of some people here, but I like the one player from every team rule. Simply put, if there were no Reds in the game I wouldn't bother watching, and I would bet there are a whole lot of other people like me who are more interested in seeing how the players from their team do than the game in general.

Edskin
07-12-2011, 07:58 AM
Now Jeter won't even be at the game due to "exhaustion." Wow.

savafan
07-12-2011, 07:38 PM
I say that players chosen to be in the game who opt not to participate should have to forfeit any monetary bonus awarded due to a contractual clause for making the squad.

Edskin
07-14-2011, 08:01 AM
By the way, TV ratigs dipped again this year--- below last year which set a record for poor ratings. MLB has fallen so far behind the NFL and NBA in terms of popularity and there isn't anyone within MLB that seems to understand this or how to properly market their product. Holding a sham and calling it an all star game doesn't help.

cumberlandreds
07-14-2011, 09:05 AM
I think at least part of the reason for the ratings dip is that every game in on TV now. Used to be the only time you could see some of these guys was at the all star game. Now you can turn on your TV and/or computer and with the right package see a player from Seattle or Minnesota that you couldn't see a decade or so ago except for an all star or playoff/world series. I agree MLB does a poor job of marketing their product. The NFL trumps everyone in marketing and probably always will. MLB needs to put a better face on the current game and try to link it with their past in some way. Some really good marketing firm should be able to come up with something.

OesterPoster
07-14-2011, 10:22 AM
I think at least part of the reason for the ratings dip is that every game in on TV now. Used to be the only time you could see some of these guys was at the all star game. Now you can turn on your TV and/or computer and with the right package see a player from Seattle or Minnesota that you couldn't see a decade or so ago except for an all star or playoff/world series. I agree MLB does a poor job of marketing their product. The NFL trumps everyone in marketing and probably always will. MLB needs to put a better face on the current game and try to link it with their past in some way. Some really good marketing firm should be able to come up with something.

One of the solutions isn't even that difficult. Fix the archaic, idiotic blackout rules for TV.

cumberlandreds
07-14-2011, 10:24 AM
One of the solutions isn't even that difficult. Fix the archaic, idiotic blackout rules for TV.

Oh yes. It seems MLB goes out of their way not to let you view the games. If they would just black out games in a 100 mile raduis of the city that would go along way in fixing things.

It would also help if the games actually started around 7 pm instead of nearly 9 pm. Most east coasters can't stay up for the entire game. They have moved it up a little bit for the World Series but still way too late to cultivate fans from the young kids.

traderumor
07-14-2011, 11:20 AM
One of the solutions isn't even that difficult. Fix the archaic, idiotic blackout rules for TV.Preach it. :thumbup:

RedsBaron
07-14-2011, 01:07 PM
I would be happy if (1) the rule was eliminated that every team must have a representative and (2) the unwritten rule that everybody plays was eliminated.
I realize that most players would still make a token appearance but make it clear to the managers that their primary task is to try to win the game.
My favorite all star game was the 1970 game, best known of course for Pete Rose bowling over Ray Fosse to score the winning run. What is sometimes forgotten is how many true superstars and future Hall of Famers were still in the game in the late innings. The NL rallied from being down 4-1 in the ninth to force extra innings, lead by consecutive basehits off Catfish Hunter by Joe Morgan, Willie McCovey and Roberto Clemente, before Rose struck out.
In that game virtually every starter had at least three at bats, and Luis Aparicio and Carl Yastremzski had six at bats in the 12 inning game, with Yaz going 4 for 6 to win MVP honors. The AL used 7 pitchers, including starting pitcher Jim Palmer, while the NL used 5 pitchers, including starter Tom Seaver, Gaylord Perry and Bob Gibson.
One of the most famous all star games ever was the 1941 game, won by a HR by Ted Williams. Williams and Joe DiMaggio both played the entire game.

mth123
07-14-2011, 01:13 PM
My bigger gripe is that so many teams have a day off after the break is over. Teams sometimes go 30 days or so without a break for the pitching staff and then have a day off immeidately after the break when they need it least.

Keep the game. Get rid of the schedulemakers.

TeamBoone
07-14-2011, 09:55 PM
I really enjoyed the game this year.

Edskin
07-14-2011, 11:09 PM
Ah, the MLB blackout rules... I live in Oklahoma City. We do not have an MLB team in the city or the state. However, the following teams are subject to blackout rules:

Cardinals
Astros
Rangers
Royals

Yes, in a city with no MLB team we have FOUR teams blacked out. It's pure and utter lunacy to restrict your product to potential consumers like that. Just moronic.

The Cardinals don't affect us much because the overwhelming majority of their games are picked up by a local cable affiliate here. But the other three teams are only on occasionally via the local Fox Sports outlet. The worst is the Royals... If you happen to be a KC fan living in OKC, you will have access to 10 or fewer of the 162 games.

MikeThierry
07-14-2011, 11:30 PM
I heard an interesting idea from Joe Shehan the other day on how to fix the All Star Game. He proposes doing it towards the beginning of the season, around May, and going off of player results/stats from the previous year. That would never happen but I found it kind of interesting.