World Series the new Super Bowl?
With the already tepid 2008 World Series turning out to be a historically full-blown boring and anti-climactic monstrosity, Major League Baseball may be forced to play its hand to see that events similar to Monday’s night suspension do not happen in the future. Shortening the regular season? A beautiful idea that would surely resonate with players and coaches, but repulse executives, who won’t be too wild about a scenario that takes money out of their pockets.
Eliminating spring training games? Once again, an idea that players would surely enjoy, especially veterans, but then you would undoubtedly encounter much the same weather-related problems if the season was to kick off in mid-March.
All things considered, the one solution to watching Jimmy Rollins playing ball in a beaver fur-insulated hunter’s cap in late October (or early November) is far superior, or officials would have us believe. ESPN’s Peter Gammons reported on his blog today that moving the Fall Classic to, sigh, a neutral site was once a tactic several owners entertained and presently may be baseball’s only viable option to cure the game’s postseason scheduling ills. Not surprisingly, this plan would cause many team and league executives’ pocketbooks to swell.
In the mid-’90s, several owners went to a Miami Super Bowl and discussed the notion of having a 10-day World Series at a neutral site. They’d have to get local fans to buy into destination and vacation packages. There wouldn’t be the feel in Anaheim, San Diego or Los Angeles that there is in New York, Chicago, St. Louis or Boston. But then the Cardinals are the only team since the 2002 Angels to win in front of their home fans. It would be a hard sell, but the notion of a World Series week has some advantages.