Baltimore Sun

Should the World Series be held at a neutral site?

I'm still in Philadelphia as I write this, but I am coming home soon.

Have a frosty Natty Boh while you're waiting for me.


At Wednesday's pre-game news conferences, the World Series managers were asked whether they would endorse a neutral site for the Fall Classic -- either a warm-weather city or a domed stadium -- to guarantee weather won't be a factor.

Both Tampa Bay's Joe Maddon and Philadelphia's Charlie Manuel said no way. Rainouts (and windouts and snowouts) stink, but they are all part of the game.


I couldn't agree more, though there is something to be said about having a set World Series schedule each year. (Don't believe me? Try to make hotel and flight arrangements at midnight for the next day. I've been there.)

So my vote is to never turn the World Series into something similar to the Super Bowl. Still, I thought I'd seek out another opinion. And who would be a more unbiased voice on World Series matters than an Orioles fan? You know, someone who won't have to worry about the Fall Classic for years to come.

Seriously, is there anyone out there who wants to see the World Series at a neutral site, like the Super Bowl?

Daily Think Special: Should the World Series be held at a neutral site?