Do you like the new All-Star Game format?

[Darth_Ole]

Where the league that wins gets home field advantage in the World Series?

I don't really like it. I think they should just alternate every year. Besides, a lot of these players playing in this game aren't even going to be on teams in contention for the World Series. Why should they care?

I realize, though, that Bud Selig is just trying to cover his ass for last year's All-Star Game fiasco and the league's low ratings as a whole. But still, I wasn't more excited when I watched this year's game. It kind of took the fun out of it, IMO.

[bluestateguy]

1. It will take a few years before we can tell how it plays out

You have to assume that the managers of both squads have teams in contention, though the Angels are probably out of it, but usually the last year's pennant winner is a contender the next year.

You're right that only the contenders are going to care who wins home field advantage. That being the case, I think the result might be that the managers stack the squads with players from contending teams, even mediocre players. Also, you might see managers give more playing time to players from contending teams, as they have more of an incentive to play hard in a game that will have meaning for them. I don't see All-Stars from the Tigers and the Padres exerting too much energy in a game to determine if the Yankees or the Braves will have home field advanatge in November.

[DrGonzoLives]

2. Only if

they get rid of the guideline that says that each team must be represented, which they should do regardless.

The team in the World Series with the best regular season record should get home-field advantage.

[GOPisEvil]

3. I agree with your last statement.

To revive a little interest in interleague play, the overall interleague record couple be used to break ties for best record, or they could make the all-star game the tie-breaker. Either way, as long as the best team (record-wise) gets home field.

Don't get me started on 1987...