ExiledInIllinois Posted October 25, 2004 Posted October 25, 2004 Home Field Advantage didnt help the Yankees much last year did it when they lost the world series to a WILD CARD team. You still have to play the game no matter where you are. 84843[/snapback] I think you hit the nail on the head... WILD CARD. It is really beneficial to be the wildcard. Since it has been instituted, I have said that I would rather be the wild card team... You got nothing to lose. The team plays looser. Is it me or does it seem like the wild card has won more championships over such a short span, then say the NFL? I think the best of 5 in the divisional playoffs has something to do with that. Anybody could win. Another big thing is the wild card should play the best team in the league regardless if they are in the same division. It only makes sense. This year, the Yankees should have played the Sox in the divisional and the Twins played the Angels. I would rather see no divisions, everybody in the league plays each other evenly (still mix in interleague play). The two best records play a best of 9 WS. Baseball and playoffs don't mix... Just like in hockey... Everybody has a chance if you make it.
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 25, 2004 Posted October 25, 2004 In some ways, it would be great to win it in Boston...too bad we have a 2-3-2 schedule, a 2-2-1-1 schedule would improve the chance to win it at home. 84909[/snapback] T-Bone, I agree... I said it in the Yankees-BoSox series, If a team is going to come back... It is easier in the 2-3-2 format. It is a real hope booster. The only format for 7 has to be 2-2-1-1-1. It gives the home field "back" to the home field team. I would be a real scared BoSox fan if the Cards take 3 and 4.
eball Posted October 25, 2004 Posted October 25, 2004 the 2-3-2 format was instituted to almost guarantee a 6 or 7 game series. it's all about TV and stadium revenue, and playing the most games. usually, it only blows up if the home team loses the first 2 games. saying that the 98-win red sox are THAT much worse than the 105-win cardinals (such that it is some huge injustice for them to have home field) is a joke in any case. nobody bitched about home field that loudly when it was an alternating thing. and i don't see any asterisks in the record book for "teams-with-worse-records-who-won-the-world-series-just-because-they-had-home-field-advantage." BF, your ridiculous bias towards every team you root for is really transparent. stick to what the players do on the field and you'll have a lot more credibility. nobody is "out to get" your cardinals.
Thurman's Helmet Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 Game 3 is the critical game. Pedro Martinez needs to keep the boot on the Cards' throat. Its highly unlikely that Schilling makes another start so its best to wrap things up as soon as possible.
gmac17 Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 Went to the game last night and liked what I saw from the Sox. Just hoping pedro "classic" shows up tomorrow, not pedro "light"
BF_in_Indiana Posted October 26, 2004 Author Posted October 26, 2004 It's funny that the Red Sox fans here think that this homefield advantage "rule" is fair. What would they think if it was working against their team??? I'm sure they wouldn't like it. It's always easy to say you like something when it favors you. I have a feeling I wouldn't be hearing this if the situation was reversed. I know my guys aren't doing it when it counts right now, but that doesn't mean I have to like the injustice that has been done to my team. I said the same thing about this situation all year, it's not right, nor will it be right until the team with the best record gets homefield advantage. That would be like awarind homefield in the NFL playoffs to the team that finishes 9-7. What sense does that make?
wwovince Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 jeez give it a break already. You have to find some reason as to why they are kicking your asses right. The red sox didnt make the rule but Ortiz and Manny sure did there part in the Allstar game to win it though. And if it was the old way the red sox would have it anyway.
Duke Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 As A diehard Sox fan, i'm happy with the position they are in and with Petey going tommorow I feel pretty good about thier chances. That said, until they make the last out of victory #4, I will still be A nervous wreck.
BF_in_Indiana Posted October 26, 2004 Author Posted October 26, 2004 Like I said, twist it anyway you want, but you all know it's bs.
Thurman's Helmet Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 BF, were you not aware of how they decided who gets Home Field Advantage over the last 2 years? You knew full well going into this series who had the home field edge and I didnt hear you whining then. This series is NOT over and frankly, I'm still scared to death that guys like Rolen and Edmonds are going to start mashing. (Pujols is starting to find his groove) Baseball is the sport where home field has the least advantage in sports anyway. You still have to pitch, hit and field.
SeanO Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 What makes you think the ASTROS had a line up just as good as the SOX?? ADvantage Cards at home but the Cards need to find some playoff style starting pitching. Suppan is the type of pitcher that could cause some problems to the SOx bats. BF....advantage Cardinals. No DH = David playing first and one less bat in the lineup. Pedro is going to be tough....but let's not forget Suppan shut down the Stros lineup....which is just as good as the BoSox. 84730[/snapback]
BF_in_Indiana Posted October 26, 2004 Author Posted October 26, 2004 BF, were you not aware of how they decided who gets Home Field Advantage over the last 2 years? You knew full well going into this series who had the home field edge and I didnt hear you whining then. This series is NOT over and frankly, I'm still scared to death that guys like Rolen and Edmonds are going to start mashing. (Pujols is starting to find his groove) Baseball is the sport where home field has the least advantage in sports anyway. You still have to pitch, hit and field. 85700[/snapback] If I could pull up the posts from July when the All Star game was going on I could show you that I had just as much problem with it then as I do now. It's just not the right way to determine home field advantage. I also hate interleague play as well.
BillsFanNC Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 Gee BF is whining. What a complete and total shock. You claimed to KNOW the Cards were going to win the World Series (which they still might) all season long knowing they would not have home field advantage for the series. Why is it suddenly an issue now?
BF_in_Indiana Posted October 26, 2004 Author Posted October 26, 2004 You stupid !@#$, I complained about this at the all star break. That was July. I'm trying to go back and pull it up.
BF_in_Indiana Posted October 26, 2004 Author Posted October 26, 2004 I can't get anything prior to August 20.
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 You liked the idea about just letting everyone into a tourney and flipping coins for homefield? LOL. I just think the impact of playing 162 games is minimized when a team that finished almost 10 games worse then the Cardinals has homefield because Roger Clemens got shelled in a meaningless all star game. 84785[/snapback] Man, enough whining about it. As someone said before under the previous system the Cards would still not have had homefield. And if the Cards are truly the best team then no handicap should hurt them. They did get to have an extra bat in the lineup in Boston, which should have been a plus for them, assuming their extra batter can hit better than a pitcher. If the Cards are meant to do it, they will. No more excuses.
BillsFanNC Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 You stupid !@#$, I complained about this at the all star break. That was July. I'm trying to go back and pull it up. 85951[/snapback] Doesn't matter when you complained about it. I think it's a ridiculous way to determine home field as well. The issue here is that you knew your team would not have home field advantage all the while you were making bold, grandiose predictions about your team. You stupid !@#$.
BF_in_Indiana Posted October 26, 2004 Author Posted October 26, 2004 I think they are the best team in baseball. Homefield is an advantage for any team. Minnesota in 1987 is a great example. My whole point is, why even bother to play for the best record when it doesn't mean stevestojan?
gantrules Posted October 26, 2004 Posted October 26, 2004 and I agree with BF on that point. The problem is that typically the team with the best record hasn't been playing for anything over the last month because they locked up the playoff spot a while back. As much as BF can be a pain in your ear...I don't think he's whining about this. Now, when Boston was down 3-0 against the Yanks and most folks around here were complaining about the Yanks payroll it was supposedly "justified".
Recommended Posts