Comments on: Why I don’t like the WBC

By: zzyzx

zzyzx — Sun, 05 Mar 2006 15:50:06 +0000

JL – it’s kind of cheating though to qualify with one roster and then have a different one for the finals.

By: J.L.

J.L. — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 20:00:54 +0000

(that was in repsonse to #37)

By: J.L.

J.L. — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 20:00:05 +0000

That’s a very good point. However, since only the qualifying rounds would be played in the winter, I believe that the very best players do not necessarily have to participate. As of right now, even a collection of Double-A and Triple-A starts representing the Big Four (U.S., D.R., Japan and Cuba) can still qualify easily. Of course, 10 or 12 years down the road, that might be another matter. I would imagine that most players either (a.) currently play winter ball, or (b.) used to do so when they were still getting established. In any case, the tournament itself is paramount.

By: darrylzero

darrylzero — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 19:50:51 +0000

#30-31, while this may be neither here nor there, when Bergkamp declared he wouldn’t play (because he refused to get on an airplane, not because of anything to do with Arsenal, as far as I know), I think he was still a lock to start on the Dutch team. As it turned out, it didn’t matter because they didn’t even make the tournament, but it’s not impossible the two events are related.

However, the point that his example doesn’t really indicate the behavior of soccer stars when the World Cup rolls around stands, because Bergkamp is the clear outlier anyway. I think WBC has a long way to go (more than 10 years certainly) before it’s anything like the World Cup. But I don’t think we should assume that because some superstars sit it out the first time around that they would be likely to do so once it’s more established.

The first time is going to be wacky. But you can bet if the when either the DR or Venezuela or the U.S. doesn’t win, there’s going to be some people from those countries who sat this one out that will think a lot more seriously about the decision next time around. Well, I think so anyway.

By: zzyzx

zzyzx — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 14:50:56 +0000

J.L. – if players and teams have issues with playing a maximum of 8 games during a period of time where they would be playing games anyway, they sure as hell wouldn’t want to play 25 games when they should be resting.

Quality players aren’t allowed to play in winter leagues the way they used to. It gets written into contracts and everything.

By: J.L.

J.L. — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 08:56:15 +0000

I love the idea of the WBC, but I utterly despised the fact that it’s played in Spring Training. You want to know why so many stars are pulling out of this thing? Because when some of those guys went to camp for some light tossing, they thought, “Wait–I’m supposed to play at 100% capacity in TWO WEEKS for the WBC? Screw that!” These guys are paid handsomely to play for the MLB teams, and I think many would be very adverse to jeopardize their seasons for this. Right now.

I question for serious Selig and Co. take this thing. Do they look at it as another way to make a few extra bucks during Spring Training — when only a handful of people are usually tuning in to catch an M’s/Padres tilt over in Peoria — or do they really want it to succeed?

If they want it to catch on right away, then they’re going to need to sacrifice some regular season revenue to do it. To do so, just take the qualifying rounds, expand it to 15-25 games, and move it into the winter. A lot of quality players are already in Winter Leagues anyway, so if they play WBC games in Florida instead, no big deal. We then have the Big Four (U.S., Japan, Dominican Republic and Cuba) and plus four others picked out from the likes of Mexico, Venezuela, Canada, Korea, China, Netherlands…..or whoever else is involved. I think we can live with that. With the eight teams, you then expand All-Star Weekend an extra week (All-Star Double Weekend?), and have the quarterfinals, semifinals and finals played back-to-back-to-back in the same city. You give the WBC extra prestige doing that, you get more players available who are also in mid-season condition, and all you really lose is 4-7 days every four years. Is it just me, or is this idea infinitely better than what we have now?

By: ray

ray — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 04:34:57 +0000

34, lol!

By: Mock

Mock — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 02:53:37 +0000

RE: 33

Man, that’s a little harsh. It’s one thing not to care too much either way about who wins the WBC, but to actively campaign against the US by putting WFB on the team? Whew man, that could be grounds for a trip to Guantanamo under this regime.

And when you say “slip a few Franklins” you don’t mean Ryan do you? Because unless the head of US Baseball is Pat Gillick’s evil twin I don’t think it’ll get you anywhere.

By: ray

ray — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 01:22:23 +0000

On a side note, I figured out a way to get WFB out of ST: slip a few Franklins to the U.S. manager to put WFB on the team. WFB out of ST gives others a chance to replace him. I know it’s too late but anyway, it’s just a dream for another universe.

By: ray

ray — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 01:06:49 +0000

I’m enjoying it. I think this idea of the best of the best always playing will never work, I think money motivates more than “patrotism” — notice quotes. I think back when average salaries weren’t so overblown and guys were more into the my country thing, a thing like the WBC could have worked (better), but of course it would have been a joke as there would have been basically few teams in it. Anyway, I read somewhere that suggested the WBC be changed to November. I doubt that would have much of an effect either. There is just no easy solution except for the Bobby Valentine solution: the best teams play each other. In Asia they have the Konami cup (I think it’s called) where the champs of Taiwan, Korea, Japan, and China play each other for the title. I’d really prefer this idea where the U.S. champs get to play the other champs of other countries. For me, the best team playing against the best team is more interesting than he best players playing against the best players — Lotte vs. White Sox would have been great to see.