The World Series and neutral locations

[SackAttack]

With all of the talk about last night's game and whether or not the game should have been ended after five innings with the Phillies declared champions, the question springs to mind: should the World Series continue to be held in the cities of the participants, or would it be better to follow the NFL template and hold the Series in cities with warmer/drier weather or roofs to minimize the impact of weather?

[DeToxRox]

With all of the talk about last night's game and whether or not the game should have been ended after five innings with the Phillies declared champions, the question springs to mind: should the World Series continue to be held in the cities of the participants, or would it be better to follow the NFL template and hold the Series in cities with warmer/drier weather or roofs to minimize the impact of weather?

Has to be held in the participants cities. The Superbowl is able to be held anywhere because it's a two week event. Would the Phillies/Rays really garner a few, if any, sellouts if it was being played in Arizona?

[cartman]

If it were one game, then neutral location would work. But no way would it work in a series.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Why would anyone in their right mind want to move the WS to a neutral site? It's not a one-off event like the SB and it's not as though the scenario from last night occurs on a regular basis.

The whole topic borders on the absurd AFAIC.

[DeToxRox]

Dola - Owners would veto the crap out of it. Why cut in another owner on revenue? If the Phillies can sellout three games in Philly, it's all their money. Now they'd have to split money with the Rays, who maybe can't sellout if it's in Tampa, plus the park the game is being held in, whoever the owner is, is getting a slice.

It just has too much working against it.

[Karlifornia]

This would not work, in my eyes. The World Series is 7 games, not one. It's not the spectacle the Super Bowl is. The Super Bowl is just the culmination of a weeks worth of entertainment.

You put a Phillies/Rays WS at Petco Park for 7 games, you're alienating two fan bases, the only two fan bases that really care at all about who wins.

[stevew]

I also wear affliction clothing.

[DeToxRox]

I'd be all for starting the season like two weeks earlier and holding some neutral site games for Northern teams to avoid potential snowstorms. That's about it.

[DeToxRox]

I also wear affliction clothing.

I'm the style guru of FOFC. Thanks for playing.

[MikeVic]

No way. I don't see how this makes sense.

[DeToxRox]

This would not work, in my eyes. The World Series is 7 games, not one. It's not the spectacle the Super Bowl is. The Super Bowl is just the culmination of a weeks worth of entertainment.

You put a Phillies/Rays WS at Petco Park for 7 games, you're alienating two fan bases, the only two fan bases that really care at all about who wins.

It wouldn't work .. like your Xbox controller.

[Karlifornia]

It wouldn't work .. like your Xbox controller.

I hope you have some excuses ready on a laminated sheet or something after we come into the Big House and annihilate you :)

[lordscarlet]

I would argue that the Super Bowl should not be at a neutral site, if it weren't for the fact that it is one game. That is the only reason it works for the Super Bowl. The idea that it is always played in a dome or warm climate is absurd.

[Kodos]

I hope you have some excuses ready on a laminated sheet or something after we come into the Big House and annihilate you :)


Set phasers on Annihilate!

[stevew]

They could generate so much more cash by playing this Sunday-Saturday on a neutral field. With all the rediculous jacked up prices on StubHub, I highly doubt the common fan can even attend anymore. And I'd much rather the league make more money on tickets than scalper fans.

[RedKingGold]

Dream Scenario: Start the season on May 1st and end it on October 1st; using as many regularly scheduled double-headers as needed.

Will never happen, but this would be nice to see.

[Mustang]

Any way we could make polls pop ups?

[lordscarlet]

They could generate so much more cash by playing this Sunday-Saturday on a neutral field. With all the rediculous jacked up prices on StubHub, I highly doubt the common fan can even attend anymore. And I'd much rather the league make more money on tickets than scalper fans.

And who exactly is going to pay those prices to go see the Rays and the Phillies duke it out in San Diego?

[molson]

Way too dramatic a change in response to something that hasn't happened in baseball history until now.

[digamma]

As others have said, it's not about tradition, it's about being able to fill a stadium seven times over 10 days.

[molson]

I'm sure you fill any baseball stadium in America for a World Series. Sox/Yankee/Philly/Cub/etc fans would fly to wherever it was to be played. And most Sox fans (and probably fans of other teams) have learned that its cheaper, even with the cost of airfare/hotel, to see your team on the road in some instances.

But to move games away from these places because of potential weather issues is ridiculous.

[JediKooter]

No reason at all to have the World Series played at a neutral site. Like others have said, it's not a 1 game event. It's at least 4 games with the potential for 7 games, so having a neutral site doesn't make much sense, plus, I like the tradition of it being played in the NL and AL champs cities.

[rowech]

Here's the bottom line...

Football fields are universal dimensions...ballparks aren't. Teams are often designed because of the way their ballpark plays. To take away that advantage to play at a neutral park is a terrible idea.

[samifan24]

It's a tradition for a reason.

[Galaxy]

I hope you have some excuses ready on a laminated sheet or something after we come into the Big House and annihilate you :)

He'll be too depressed after we take them down in the Big House.

[astrosfan64]

I would argue that the Super Bowl should not be at a neutral site, if it weren't for the fact that it is one game. That is the only reason it works for the Super Bowl. The idea that it is always played in a dome or warm climate is absurd.

AGREED 100%

[Lathum]

Here's the bottom line...

Football fields are universal dimensions...ballparks aren't. Teams are often designed because of the way their ballpark plays. To take away that advantage to play at a neutral park is a terrible idea.

I made this point n the MLB thread last night

[Oilers9911]

Neutral site World Series is a terrible idea. The Super Bowl is one game, WS is potentially 7 games. It's an overreaction becaus eit isn't like this happens every World Series. In fact this is the first time that a World Series game has not completed 9 innings. A better idea would be to go to 154 games and have the World Series a couple weeks earlier.

[DaddyTorgo]

all i have to say is: domed stadiums? domed-baseball isn't real baseball. fuck that shit.

[flere-imsaho]

I would argue that the Super Bowl should not be at a neutral site, if it weren't for the fact that it is one game. That is the only reason it works for the Super Bowl. The idea that it is always played in a dome or warm climate is absurd.

:+1:

Witness the rainfest that was the Indy-Chicago SB in Miami.

I'd love to see a SB played at Soldiers' Field or Lambeau IN THE SNOW. :D

[lordscarlet]

Here's the bottom line...

Football fields are universal dimensions...ballparks aren't. Teams are often designed because of the way their ballpark plays. To take away that advantage to play at a neutral park is a terrible idea.

While I agree with most of the sentiment, if the Super Bowl was played on more than the handful of fields it is played on, there is a huge difference between turf and grass, indoor and outdoor.

[Fighter of Foo]

Here's the bottom line...

Football fields are universal dimensions...ballparks aren't. Teams are often designed because of the way their ballpark plays. To take away that advantage to play at a neutral park is a terrible idea.

The biggest advantage of home field is batting last, not the park dimensions.

If there weren't as many off days in October as there are in the entire regular season this wouldn't be an issue.

[MizzouRah]

Definite NO - I've been to two World Series games and I'll never forget them.

I'm all for a 150 game season and the WC series should be a 7 game series instead of 5.