Boras Suggests Change to World Series

[swordsman]

An article in the New Yorker this week describes a suggestion Scott Boras made to Bud Selig about a change in the World Series schedule:

 

The Extortionist: Scott Boras, the Yankees’ bête noire, has changed baseball forever.

 

 

This spring, he mailed a letter to Commissioner Selig, in which he outlined a proposal to alter the format of the game’s most sacred ritual, the World Series. Why not make it nine games, instead of seven, he argued, and hold those extra two games—the first two games—at a neutral site? Cities all over the nation, or even the world, could compete for the honor of playing host, as with the Olympics. “It’s a fact that our game needs a forum that’s akin to the Super Bowl,” Boras explained to me not long after he’d sent the letter. “People don’t go to the Super Bowl for the game. Most Super Bowl games are not competitive, or good games. They go there for the event. They go there for the three-day weekend.” He described a vision of “corporate hospitality,” including a “gala, like the Oscars,” during which the M.V.P. and Cy Young awards, among others, would be announced, with all the finalists present and on view, and presumably walking the red carpet in sponsored menswear. Who could argue against such a change? It would mean more money for the owners, more “marketable content” for the media to broadcast, more attention for the stars—more everything.

 

Thoughts?

[Post Count Padder]

I think Scoot Boras should stick to taking team's money.

[anabiono]

i thought it was ridiculous when i heard about it months ago

 

it is bad enough that the allstar game decides homefield advantage in the world series

 

scott boras should retire

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I'd like to see the WS eliminated completely unless the Cubs ever won the NLCS

[daske17]

An article in the New Yorker this week describes a suggestion Scott Boras made to Bud Selig about a change in the World Series schedule:

 

The Extortionist: Scott Boras, the Yankees’ bête noire, has changed baseball forever.

 

 

This spring, he mailed a letter to Commissioner Selig, in which he outlined a proposal to alter the format of the game’s most sacred ritual, the World Series. Why not make it nine games, instead of seven, he argued, and hold those extra two games—the first two games—at a neutral site? Cities all over the nation, or even the world, could compete for the honor of playing host, as with the Olympics. “It’s a fact that our game needs a forum that’s akin to the Super Bowl,” Boras explained to me not long after he’d sent the letter. “People don’t go to the Super Bowl for the game. Most Super Bowl games are not competitive, or good games. They go there for the event. They go there for the three-day weekend.” He described a vision of “corporate hospitality,” including a “gala, like the Oscars,” during which the M.V.P. and Cy Young awards, among others, would be announced, with all the finalists present and on view, and presumably walking the red carpet in sponsored menswear. Who could argue against such a change? It would mean more money for the owners, more “marketable content” for the media to broadcast, more attention for the stars—more everything.

 

Thoughts?

 

Hmmm, baseball at a neutral site in which the best and brightest come to play, have numerous marketing tie-ins and festivities that enrapture the host city for a three-day period.

 

Hey, maybe they can just have one game that brings all the best baseball stars through the league for home-field advantage in the World Series.

 

Oh wait. . .

[swordsman]

And yeah let's have the first two games of the World Series in Moscow. Building bridges, man.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't hate the idea. I don't see it working if they play the first two in Europe or anything like that, and I don't really think this would work. But it's not a completely terrible concept, on the surface.

[seanimal]

I'd go a step further and call it a good idea. By increasing the number of games, you increase the likelihood that the better team will win.

[Careless]

I'd go a step further and call it a good idea. By increasing the number of games, you increase the likelihood that the better team will win.

you don't want the Cubs to ever win one, do you?

[CubinNY]

It's apples and oranges. Baseball can never and will never have the interest of a 1 game winner-take-all format unless they adpot that format. I don't know what possible long term benefit having the first two games at a neutral site would have on a series, especially a 9 game series. The only likely one I could see is short term profit for the business in the host city. I don't know why anyone would expect Superbowl level of excitement for one game in a series, unless it was a game 7 (or 9).

 

In theory I'd have no problem with a 9 game series but I suspect that ratings would plumet even further for the first two games (after the newness of the format wore off).

[Butterscup1679666578]

I think the winner of the NL Central should be declared the World Series winner, unless the winner of the NL Central is not the Cubs.

[CuseCubFan69]

They need about 600K people to watch these games in person because nobody is watching on TV. The WS goes into November and starts too late, those are the problems they need to address.

[treebird]

They need about 600K people to watch these games in person because nobody is watching on TV. The WS goes into November and starts too late, those are the problems they need to address.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=624

[CuseCubFan69]

They need about 600K people to watch these games in person because nobody is watching on TV. The WS goes into November and starts too late, those are the problems they need to address.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=624

 

Well color me wrong. I guess I'm the only one not watching. Thanks for the info Tree.

[Soul]

They need about 600K people to watch these games in person because nobody is watching on TV. The WS goes into November and starts too late, those are the problems they need to address.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=624

 

Well color me wrong. I guess I'm the only one not watching. Thanks for the info Tree.

 

It's because it's the Red Sox. People really do watch them, and they do have a ton of fans.

 

Plus the nationally broadcast football games have been such junk lately.

[Derwood]

the only way you can have a 9 game series is if you make the playoffs on a flex-schedule and don't have these stupid 5-10 day layoffs between series

[seanimal]

the only way you can have a 9 game series is if you make the playoffs on a flex-schedule and don't have these stupid 5-10 day layoffs between series

 

That and either shorten the season or voluntarily schedule double-headers. Or play the entire thing at a neutral site. In a dome, the outside weather won't matter.

[Sammy Sofa]

I do like the idea of awarding stuff like the MVP's and Cy Young award at some point during the series.

[erik316wttn]

I do like the idea of awarding stuff like the MVP's and Cy Young award at some point during the series.

 

I do too. You don't need to wait till mid-November to make the decision.

[Guest]

I do like the idea of awarding stuff like the MVP's and Cy Young award at some point during the series.

 

I do too. You don't need to wait till mid-November to make the decision.

 

 

The votes are cast before the playoffs so the decision is made - just not announced.

[Roast]

I do like the idea of awarding stuff like the MVP's and Cy Young award at some point during the series.

 

That would be cool, but the awards-ceremony thing would be incredibly lame.

[biittner77]

How about game 1 in a nuetral sight, keep the series at 7 games and eliminate homefield advantage? That would make it a 1-2-2-1-1 format. That would accomplish the whole "make it an event" idea without dragging it on an extra week.

[seanimal]

How about game 1 in a nuetral sight, keep the series at 7 games and eliminate homefield advantage? That would make it a 1-2-2-1-1 format. That would accomplish the whole "make it an event" idea without dragging it on an extra week.

 

Also a good idea.

[chuckywang]

How about game 1 in a nuetral sight, keep the series at 7 games and eliminate homefield advantage? That would make it a 1-2-2-1-1 format. That would accomplish the whole "make it an event" idea without dragging it on an extra week.

 

I'd make it game 7 (if necessary) at a neutral site, instead of game 1. Then it will have the appeal of a winner-take-all one game championship event.

 

Not sure if it will be logistically possible, however.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

How about game 1 in a nuetral sight, keep the series at 7 games and eliminate homefield advantage? That would make it a 1-2-2-1-1 format. That would accomplish the whole "make it an event" idea without dragging it on an extra week.

 

I'd make it game 7 (if necessary) at a neutral site, instead of game 1. Then it will have the appeal of a winner-take-all one game championship event.

 

Not sure if it will be logistically possible, however.

 

The problem of game seven at the neutral site is that a game seven isn't guaranteed.

 

I like the idea of game 1 at the neutral site though.