Traditionally the leagues have taken turns in who hosts the All-Star Game. Last years game was at PNC Park, home of the Pittsburgh Pirates, a National League team. This year it is being played at AT&T Park, home of the San Francisco Giants, another National League team. Has MLB decided to just do away with tradition?
2007-07-04 15:59:29 · 14 answers · asked by patriotsfansfs 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Traditionally, that's been what has happened. However, chances are MLB gave into Barry Bonds* mania and decided to let them host it there just because of him. After all, even though he is the most controversial player in the game right now, he always draws a ton of fans wherever he goes.
2007-07-04 16:08:08 · answer #1 · answered by Jason P 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Seligula addressed this in the press conference announcing the Giants selection as host team, a few years ago. MLB likes to showcase its newer parks, and right now there's a backlog of new NL parks and a dearth of new AL parks which have not hosted recently. So MLB decided to have this one-time (that's the official plan, anyway) break with the traditional rotation to try and catch up a bit.
AL parks
Baltimore -- Camden Yards, opened 1992, hosted ASG 1993
Boston -- Fenway Park, 1912, 1999
Chicago -- Comiskey/US Cellular, 1991, 2003
Cleveland -- Jacobs, 1994, 1997
Detroit -- Comerica, 2000, 2005
Kansas City -- Kauffman, 1973, 1973
LA/Anaheim -- Angels, 1965, 1989
Minnesota -- Metrodome, 1982, 1985
New York -- Yankee, 1923, 1977 & scheduled 2008 (closing season)
Oakland -- Coliseum, 1968, 1987
Seattle -- Safeco, 2000, 2001
Tampa Bay -- Tropicana, 1998, never hosted
Texas -- The Ballpark/Rangers Field, 1994, 1995
Toronto -- SkyDome/Rogers, 1989, 1991
Look at the candidates -- the three teams that haven't hosted since the 1980s don't have new parks so there's nothing special to show off, and two of them -- Minnesota and Oakland -- have new parks coming soon, making them better ASG candidate sites later than now. Yankee is scheduled. That leaves the Trop, where no one really wants to put an ASG if there's another choice, and Kauffman, which is quite pretty but also, in ballpark terms, gettin' pretty old. Better to break tradition and showcase a new park, really.
I'm just guessing, but the AL half of the ASG site rotation might look like this:
2010 - Minnesota
2012 - Oakland
2014 - Anaheim
2016 - Tampa Bay (having run out of other good options)
2018 - start revisiting the early 1990s sites -- Baltimore, Texas, Toronto. Or (heh heh) maybe one of the new expansion teams...
2007-07-04 16:24:43 · answer #2 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
who knows?
and not only that - Pittsburgh just had the All Star game in 1994 at Three Rivers, why did they go back in 2006? Again who knows?
MLB probably figures Frisco will get mad if they have to wait one more year to show off ATT Park. I'm not that impressed with it quite frankly. It's like the Metrodome, without the dome and on the waterfront. It's not a great park, the dimensions are awful - I dont know why they want to show it off.
It could also be they did that so that it would just so happen that 2008 would be wide open for the AL - whereby the Yankees would get to host a sentimental farewell to Yankee Stadium - as we now know, they are going to do - as they will host in 2008.
2007-07-06 06:59:09 · answer #3 · answered by luke_r1996 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am surprised at how many wrong reasons you are getting. It has nothing to do with Barry Bonds. You are correct in that the process used to alternate.
But as one respondent alluded to, Bud Selig has decided to get away from alternating to use hosting the All-Star game as a way to reward cities and teams with new ballparks. I am sure he ideally wants to keep it reasonably balanced, but showcasing new parks is the focus.
The exception is next year when Yankee Stadium gets one because it is the last year for the stadium. But then my Cardinals get it in 2009 - it will have been 43 years since they last hosted and it was all due to the new ballpark.
Rumors have Kansas City getting one soon if they put in millions of rennovations in their park. And I think San Diego will get one soon.
Hope that clarifies a bit.
2007-07-05 05:09:23 · answer #4 · answered by Matt G 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are a lot of A.L. teams that are getting new ballparks in 1-5 years so they are waiting for those. The Twins will get a new park next year and the Yankees will get a new one in two years.
2007-07-04 16:29:47 · answer #5 · answered by Ace 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Basically it has to do with the glut of new stadiums. Showing them off has ruined the rotation of the all star game between leagues. That trend should continue over the next few years as new stadiums are built in new york(both yanks and mets)and elsewhere.
2007-07-04 16:28:35 · answer #6 · answered by mopjky 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The owners and MLB officials get together before the season starts and decide who will host the events. It's just a coincidence that 2 NL ballparks were chosen back-to-back. Hasn't been in SF since 1984.
2007-07-04 16:22:32 · answer #7 · answered by Brandon 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
American League. The pitching is just that much better.
2016-05-18 03:41:36 · answer #8 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no want to accommodate the yankess next year when the new one opens in Bronx .
Everything is done for the Yanks
2007-07-04 16:32:05 · answer #9 · answered by Michael M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
cuz people want," the cheating Bonds to hit a homy! but thats not gonna happen! A-Rod allday
2007-07-04 17:47:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋