Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CBL-Commish
Strike three: Which would you rather have, stadiums packed to the rafters with rabid Sox/Cards fans in their own parks, or a randomly selected stadium 2000 miles away filled one-third with fans, one-third full of people who just wanted to be part of the World Series, and one-third full of locals who won tickets from some contest?
|
Yeah - just look at many of the lower-tier college bowl games to see what might happen. Not as dramatically, but to some degree. Who wants to see a game between Louisville and BYU in the Metrodome? Who wants to see a World Series between the Cards and Sox in Safeco? Great place to watch a ballgame, but with a neutral city, the fans are, well, neutral. I know many people from around the midwest that are Cardinals fans who will drive 6 hours or so to get to St. Louis for one of the games this week. But I know almost none of those would fly to LA or Seattle or Tampa.
Neutral site is fine for a one-game championship setting, although even then, how much would you give to see the Pats or Eagles hosting the Super Bowl on a snow-covered field? Duke winning a national title in front of the Cameron Crazies? Home-field/court advantage is one of those things that can really be phenomenal for the fans and help them identify with the team.
My opinion is that baseball is just different. Quirky stadiums with different dimensions is part of that. I embrace the cold, or outfield hill, or green monster, or short porch, or minimal foul territory, or swirling winds.