Are you sick of watching the team with home field advantage win the World
Series? Do you wish there was a way to make the World Series more fair and
balanced?

Let's face it: the arbitrary "American League one year, National League next
year" home field flip-flop isn't fair to either league. Unfortunately,
there doesn't seem to be a fair way to choose who deserves the home field in
baseball's fall classic.

Well, here are a couple of proposals that I submit humbly to the house of
ideas, in the hopes that this will spark discussion that will lead to
positive change:

1. The All-Star game decides home field.
This would certainly make the mid-summer classic more exciting. No
more ties. The All-Star game would return to days where the players really
wanted their league to win -- after all, the loser gives up home field for
their league in the World Series.

Since majority of players will come from playoff contenders, both
teams will be eager to win. Teams will reserve their top pitchers for the
All-Star game. Pedro Martinez will actually show up if his Red Sox are
contending.

The All-Star game would be the season's first game with playoff
implications, which would set the tone for an exciting playoff race.

And, people would be talking about the All-Star game for the rest of
the season.

And imagine the heated debate over player selection....

Having the All-Star game decide home field in the World Series would
raise the stakes for the mid-summer classic, making the game more meaningful
and returning it to it's former golden-age glory.


2. Play the last three games of the World Series on a neutral field.
Each team would get two home games, and then off to the road for the
ultimate championship.

The last three games would be scheduled on a weekend -- so fans of
both teams would be able to fly in to watch their team and not miss too much
time from work.

Plus, the neutral site for the last three games would receive a
tourism boon. Considering how airlines and hotels are struggling right now,
It seems reasonable to believe that Major League Baseball could work out a
deal with travel sponsors guaranteeing refunds on airline tickets and hotel
reservations if any of the three games are not played.

This idea has the potential of creating a Superbowl-like atmosphere.
A third city would be included in the World Series concession profits.
Television could guarantee an East Coast game even if both teams are from
the West Coast.

This particular proposal seeks to make the World Series an event
again -- something that every fan would watch, even if their team is not
involved. Something that the casual observer would tune into, even if they
don't watch baseball during the year.

Finally, this would create an equal-advantage series. Both teams
would have the same amount of home games. If the series goes past four
games, then the final games would be played on a neutral field.

Ask yourself, if the Giants had home field advantage this year,
would the Angels have won? How about last year -- would Arizona have won if
game seven was in the Bronx? 

How about Minnesota in 1991? Or the Mets in 1986? Would these
teams have won, down 3 games to 2, if they weren't coming home for games six
and seven?

These questions cannot be answered. Since home field is apparently
an important factor in long series, it should be taken away -- in the
interests of fairness to both teams competing for the championship.