Should the All-Star Game count?

Many baseball fans are complaining about the inclusion of utility infielders like Omar Infante and Ty Wigginton on this year's All-Star rosters over players like Joey Votto or Kevin Youkilis. But the sad but true fact is, because the All-Star game counts for home-field advantage in the World Series, it might be more valuable to Joe Girardi and Charlie Manuel to have these players on their roster for late-game flexibility than the big boppers that already populate the rosters.

Which begs the question: Should the All-Star Game count? I know the 2002 tie was a huge travesty but making the game count has taken the MLB All-Star game from a spectacle for the fans (like any other league's All-Star game) to a way for the previous season's pennant-winning managers to use the rest of the players in their league for a shot at World Series home-field. Wouldn't it make more sense to give home field to the team that had a better regular-season record than to the team whose league won a single game?

I can guarantee that if the All-Star Game didn't count for anything, names like Infante and Wigginton would be nowhere near the rosters. I'm okay with middle relievers like Arthur Rhodes, Evan Meek and Matt Thornton being on the roster because they have all had excellent seasons and deserve recognition. But if you aren't even good enough to play every day for one of 30 MLB teams (I'm looking at you, Omar Infante, and Wigginton whenever Brian Roberts returns), then you aren't good enough to be an All-Star. I don't care how many positions you can play.

Now from one rant to another. How is Jason Heyward an All-Star? I know he started the season well but he has tanked since with his average down to .251. What about players like Chris Young and Corey Hart (who made it anyway) or Matt Kemp and Colby Rasmus (who didn't)? That's the only real beef I have with the fan voting, outside of the fact Ichiro should not be starting (Brett Gardner has better stats in every category except batting average (.326 to .314) and Alex Rios is enjoying a huge season, potentially 30-40). But the Japanese voters will push Ichiro into the starting lineup until the day he retires.

I understand why Marlon Byrd and Michael Bourn made the NL squad as the lone representative of the Cubs and Astros, but Matt Holliday over Carlos Gonzalez? Gonzalez is better in every category besides average (.298 to .295) and deserves a spot on the roster. But Holliday was voted in by the players and got credit for his years of solid MLB service. New flash: This is the 2010 All-Star Game, not the 2006-2009 Career Achievements Game.

Fausto Carmona and Matt Capps are two other curious additions. Both are also the lone representatives from their respective teams. If the game counts, shouldn't managers not be forced to take non-All-Star caliber players from terrible teams? Mat Latos and Jered Weaver would help these managers much more pitching an inning or two than either Carmona or Capps, who could eventually blow the game for their particular side.

The All-Star Game is really just one big contradiction. If you're going to have the game count for something, then some changes should be made. The major one is that there should be no requirement to choose one player from each team. If each manager is playing to win the game I'm fine with middle relievers and utility infielders, but the spots taken by players like Bourn, Byrd (who may be slightly deserving), Carmona and Capps should belong to players like Votto, Gonzalez, Latos and Weaver. Wouldn't the teams have a better shot at winning with better players available?

Fan voting should also be eschewed, but that kills the whole allure of the game to the fans, who fuel any sport. When the best idea is to leave the fans out of the voting, that's when you know THE GAME SHOULDN'T COUNT. It's an All-Star game and should remain as such. And to prevent ties, add one more pitching spot to invite an extra player on the premise that he will be saved in case the game goes deep into extra innings. And make it a starting pitcher.

My ultimate All-Star game would be one that didn't count for anything. Then the fans can vote for whoever they want to start the game and the managers can fill their bench with the most deserving players without having to consider position flexibility. And even if there has to be one representative from each team it doesn't matter, because the game wouldn't count. It would be nothing more than a spectacle, which is what an All-Star Game should be. Not a determinant for home-field advantage in the World Series.

Bud Selig, I know you were thoroughly embarrassed by what happened in 2002. But it's time to get over it and move on (like everybody else has) and let the All-Star Game be what it always has been and always should be: A show for the fans. Get on it for 2011.

Could LeBron end up a Knick after all?

Anybody who has discussed NBA free agency with me knows that I have been skeptical about LeBron James coming to New York from the day the Knicks started clearing cap space to make a big splash this summer. I thought there were just as many reasons for him to stay in Cleveland (money, past success, hometown) or play somewhere else like Chicago (better roster), Miami (play with Dwayne Wade) or New Jersey (ties to Jay-Z) than go to New York to play in the World's Most Famous Arena.

And as a Knicks fan, I didn't want to get myself too excited over the idea of James coming to New York, only to have my hopes dashed when he decided to go elsewhere. This follows one of my most important life mantras: Except nothing and you will never be disappointed; expect the world and anything less won't match it. Call me depressing or morose, but I'm just a realist.

But once talks broke off between Amar'e Stoudemire and the Phoenix Suns and rumors started locating Stoudemire in the Big Apple, the wheels in my mind began to turn. Knowing that Chris Bosh was most likely to go somewhere where he could play alongside LeBron or Wade, wouldn't the superstar not joining forces with Bosh feel the need to join Stoudemire in New York to compete?

For argument's sake, let's say Wade and Bosh end up in Chicago. James knows that he cannot compete with the Bulls if he stays in Cleveland alongside the likes of Mo Williams and Antawn Jamison. Miami wouldn't even have a roster if Wade left, the Clippers are the Clippers and the Nets, while rostering solid young talent, don't have a player like Amar'e Stoudemire (sorry Brook Lopez, maybe in a year or two). So that leaves New York as potentially the most viable option for James (or Wade if the roles were reversed).

Maybe I am starting to warm up to the vision of seeing James in a Knicks uniform, and the potential addition of Carmelo Anthony either via trade or through free agency next year is another way to intrigue LeBron to come to the concrete jungle.

It's still hard for me to put all my eggs in the LeBron-Amar'e basket just yet (see second paragraph above), but things are starting to look up for Knicks, especially since James' representatives had a second meeting with New York on Saturday. The odds are still good that he stays in Cleveland or joins Bosh with the Bulls, but the Knicks seem to be serious top-three contenders for LeBron's services.

Considering how I felt about this scenario playing out months ago and as recently as late last week, that's saying something coming from me.

Yankees back in first in AL East

I know, I know. The Yankees have been back in first for almost three weeks, so I'm behind the 8-ball on this one. But I haven't posted on the Yanks in over 2 months, so it's about damn time I give them some love!

The Red Sox slumped early in the season, finishing April 11-12 and standing at 20-20 in mid-May. The Rays have slumped lately, going just 14-20 in their past 34 games that started with a three-game sweep against Boston in late May.

While their major competition in the AL East has been up-and-down (and no, I don't include the Blue Jays), the Yankees have been a model of consistency with a 15-7 April record, a 16-13 May record and a 16-10 mark in June. Their steady play can be attributed to an offense that ranks second in the American League in runs scored despite injuries to Jorge Posada and Curtis Granderson and less-than-expected production from Alex Rodriguez and Mark Teixeira.

Robinson Cano has done more than enough to pick up the slack in the Bronx, leading MLB in batting average at .353 and hitting a team-leading 16 home runs, including an MLB-best 10 against left-handed pitchers. Nick Swisher is playing like an All-Star (.287, 13 HR, 47 RBI) and Brett Gardner's .317 average, 49 runs and 24 steals have been a pleasant surprise to many who thought he wasn't an everyday player. For the record, I wasn't one of them and I was very happy when we traded Melky Cabrera to Atlanta to open up playing time for Gardner, but even I didn't expect him to be THIS good.

Add in the Yankees starting pitching, which has three of the AL's top 10 winners (C.C. Sabathia and Phil Hughes have 10 wins, Andy Pettitte has 9) and you can see why the Yankees have played consistent baseball all season with limited contributions from their two highest-paid hitters.

A.J. Burnett and Hughes have struggled lately, but the resurgence of Javier Vazquez (who I told fans to be patient with in April) has made that easier to stomach. After allowing 25 earned runs in his first 23 innings this season, Vazquez has allowed just 21 in his last 58 (3.26 ERA).

The bullpen is still a mess, and that's something I expect the Yanks to address at the trading deadline. I've heard rumors about trading for Cliff Lee, but I don't think they have the prospects to pry him from Seattle and frankly, they really don't need another starter.

Injuries to Sergio Mitre and Alfredo Aceves have left the Yankees with no relievers outside of Mariano Rivera with an ERA under 4.00 except for Boone Logan, who I still don't trust. Joba Chamberlain has struggled mightily with his location despite just 12 walks in 32.1 innings.

He consistently misses within the strike zone and I can't count the times I've seen Yankee catchers set up on the outside corner only to have Joba miss a few inches off the inside part of the plate or vice versa. The constant moves from the bullpen to the rotation and back to the bullpen have obviously had an adverse affect on Chamberlain, but is it too early to think that he may never become the dominant pitcher (starter or reliever) that everyone thought he would be?

The bullpen struggles have been covered up by the fact that New York's starters have been able to work deep into games and bridge the gap to Joba and Rivera (or just Rivera). But that won't last into the summer and the Yankees will need to find a reliable seventh-inning pitcher and possibly a set-up man if Joba's struggles continue. San Diego's Heath Bell comes to mind, if the division-leading Padres decide to be sellers in the trade market.

I still fully expect the Yankees to come out on top in the AL East and even if they somehow don't, they should make the Wild Card. Rodriguez and Teixeira will start hitting like themselves soon enough and while players like Swisher and Gardner may tail off, Cano won't. He's a legitimate MVP candidate this season, right up there with Detroit's Miguel Cabrera. It's scary that this Yankees team might be even better than they were last season.

NBA stars aligning in Miami?

Anybody who follows the NBA has been waiting for this day since the NBA Finals ended (or since their team was eliminated). In less than 12 hours, LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh and numerous other NBA superstars will become free agents. Where will they all land? At this point, that's still anybody's guess.

Does any fan of an Eastern Conference team really want to see James, Wade and Bosh playing together in Miami? That rumor came out yesterday but today Bosh went on record saying he didn't know how that scenario would work. One ball, three stars and ZERO supporting cast, not to mention someone having to take a pay cut. Some would argue that with three of the top 10 players in basketball, you wouldn't need a supporting cast. But you still need to fill out a roster with rotation-worthy players.

I think Miami getting all three is nothing but a pipe dream; the logistics and the finances just don't work out. The Heat would likely need to trade Michael Beasley to afford three max contracts and they would have little other money to spend on the 4-5 other players they would need to fill out their rotation. It's just not feasible.

Then there's the argument of whether that triumvirate would lead the Heat to multiple championships. I'm inclined to say yes, considering the Celtics won two years ago with Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen. But those players were heading into the twilight of their careers and willing to make personal sacrifices for a ring. James, Wade and Bosh are all entering their prime (scary, isn't it) and may not be so willing to defer to the other two.

Also consider that the Celtics had a young point guard by the name of Rajon Rondo (who has become a household name two years later) and other valuable role players on that 2008 squad (Kendrick Perkins, James Posey, Eddie House and Tony Allen to name a few). The Heat would not be able to afford such players and would likely be stuck stocking their roster with players that don't deserve to be in an NBA rotation. Would three superstars and a bunch of no-names be able to hang with deep teams like the Lakers and Magic?

It's an interesting discussion, but one I'll stop since it's highly unlikely to happen. So now it's back to realistic possibilities.

There are so many that I could list, but one I will leave out is LeBron to the Knicks. I've been skeptical on his interest in coming to New York from the start and the recent rumors that have placed him everywhere else (Cleveland, Chicago, Miami) seem to support that. Then again, maybe that's a good sign for the Knicks chances of landing LeBron.

I don't know if LeBron wants to play in Michael Jordan's shadow with the Bulls or if he wants to share with Wade in Miami. That leaves Cleveland, his home and the team that can pay him the most. But the Cavs can't bring anybody else in to help him out, something he surely wants. So while I'm skeptical on him coming to New York, I see a reason for him not to go everywhere else as well.

I won't sit here and try to predict where everybody is going to land, that would just make me look silly. But I'll throw some thoughts out there nonetheless.

LeBron and Bosh could team up in Chicago or New York, or Bosh could go to Miami to play with Wade. The one constant I see is Bosh playing with either James or Wade; he has no reason not to. If Bosh doesn't go to Miami, I think the Heat will bring in Carlos Boozer as a nice inside complement to Wade, who I believe will stay with the Heat as long as they bring some players in, which they almost have to.

Dirk Nowitzki and Amar'e Stoudemire seem likely to stay put, leaving Joe Johnson to go to the Knicks if they don't get James and Bosh. I know I left out the Nets, but I don't really see any. of these players choosing New Jersey over other, more attractive destinations. When I revisit this post in two weeks, I'm sure I'll shake my head at these "predictions" and how wrong they really were.

FIFA could be going down the path of MLB

Soon enough I will stop pretending to care about soccer. But one thing I definitely care about is controversy, and the FIFA World Cup has been full of that so far.

It all started in qualifying, when France's Thierry Henry's obvious handball was missed by the refs and cost Ireland a shot at the World Cup. Karma's a killer though, as the French had their share of non-official related controversy once the World Cup began. As an American, I couldn't be happier about all the drama surrounding the French team and their exit from the tournament.

During the actual World Cup, there have been plenty of human-error issues with referees. The U.S. lost a victory against Slovenia after a spirited comeback due to a phantom foul call in the waning minutes and if it weren't for a Landon Donovan extra-time goal against Algeria there would have been a lot to complain about in the United States, especially since the refs wrongly took a goal away from Clint Dempsey in the Algeria game by calling him offside.

Sadly, these weren't the only blunders made by FIFA referees. On Sunday, England had a shot bounce off the crossbar and behind the goalline that would have tied their game with Germany, 2-2. Instead, the refs called nothing as the German goalkeeper snatched the ball out of the air behind the line and the Brits went on to lose, 4-1.

On the same day, Carlos Tevez was blatantly offside when he scored the Argentina-Mexico game's first goal, but it was also missed by the refs. Argentina went on to beat Mexico, 3-1. In both cases the better team won, but both missed calls drastically shifted the momentum of their games. England coach Stuart Pearce was quoted as saying his team could have played a different style if the game had been tied.

The most frustrating part about all of this for soccer fans (and Americans like myself who are pretending to like the sport only during the World Cup) is that FIFA is willing to do nothing about it. FIFA officials have consistently refused to consider replay as a viable option and after a half-time confrontation between players, coaches and refs in the Argentina-Mexico match, will even stop showing controversial plays on stadium big screens. Rather than addressing the problem head-on, FIFA is doing everything possible to avoid it.

Baseball fans, does this sound familiar? Didn't Bud Selig and the rest of the MLB brass ignore the steroid issue until it was too late? Now baseball has a black eye it may never recover from and an era that saw many talented players pass through the game is tainted forever. Is FIFA trying to let the same thing happen with the 2010 World Cup?

Apparently not anymore, as FIFA president Sepp Blatter has apologized for the officiating errors and said FIFA will re-open the discussion of using goal-line replay technology (and only goal-line technology) for the next World Cup. Out of the five controversial calls I've alluded to in this post, only one would be fixed by goal-line technology. Is this enough?

I don't believe it is and not surprisingly, I have a suggestion to make everything better. Goal-line technology is all well and good but all five of these controversial plays happened inside the penalty box. Limiting replay to controversial plays within the box would solve all the issues we have seen in this year's World Cup.

Although it would be difficult to find visual evidence to overturn the phantom foul call that cost the U.S. a victory against Slovenia, it would clearly help in the two offside cases as well as the Henry handball. Screw goal-line technology; if FIFA really wants to keep the integrity of its sport at a high level and not go down the same path MLB did with steroids, they need to adopt in-the-box techology. And if they call it that, I will demand royalties.

The Big 12: From Powerhouse to Power Outage?

The college football landscape is changing right before our eyes, as one of the nation's top conferences if not its best is on the verge of dissolving. Colorado made the decision today to leave the Big 12 for the Pac-10 and if Nebraska follows suit to the Big 10 on Friday as expected, the Big 12 will be down to 10 teams.

Losing Colorado, who went 3-9 last season and 2-6 in Big 12 play, is far from a death blow but Nebraska is a different story. Losing a program with the storied history of the Cornhuskers that is coming off of a 10-4 season and blowout bowl victory would do nothing to save the Big 12.

But the real team that will decide the conference's fate is the Texas Longhorns. Without last season's national championship game runner-up, everybody in the Big 12 might as well move to the Pac-10. The conference can survive with 10 teams if it includes the likes of Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State. Take the Longhorns out of that mix and a conference with nine teams doesn't seem to work, especially with no obvious top 10 or even top 20 team.

I could care less about the Big 12, especially if its destruction leads to what everybody has been clamoring for in college football for years: A playoff system.

Without the Big 12 there would be just five "power conferences:" Pac-10 (or Pac-16, whatever it's going to become), Big 10 (or the new Big 12), SEC, ACC and Big East. And to be honest, the ACC isn't even that powerful.

With five BCS bowl games and just five conferences to fill these games (discounting potential at-large teams like Boise State and TCU), it would be increasingly difficult for the committee to stick to the rule that a maximum of two teams from a single conference can play in a BCS bowl and just as difficult for bowls to maintain their allegiances, like the Rose Bowl pitting Pac-10 champion versus Big 10 champion.

Eventually I wouldn't be surprised if the ACC and Big East join forces into a super-conference like the Pac-10 is doing, not like there hasn't already been movement between the two conferences in recent years. This would leave the lower-level teams comparable to Kansas, Kansas State and Baylor from the Big 12 to join smaller conferences, making it even more difficult for those coaches to recruit without the attraction of playing larger big conference schools.

That would leave four major conferences in college football and set up a dire need for a playoff system, not like there already isn't one. If college football realignment leads to the institution of a playoff system, I think everybody will look back on this as a step in the right direction for college football. Too bad only time will tell if that's the case.

Allen, Rondo steal Game 2 show to tie NBA Finals

When people talk about the continued development of Rajon Rondo as a jack-of-all-trades point guard, they sometimes seem to forget just how good his supporting cast can be, even at their advanced ages. Ray Allen (age 34) proved that fact on Sunday night.

Allen hit the first seven three-pointers he attempted in the first half on his way to tying an NBA record for three-pointers made in an NBA Finals game. He would break the record late in the third quarter with his only three of the second half and finished with 32 points, 27 coming in the first half.

Allen is already well regarded by many (myself included) as one of the best pure shooters in NBA history and this performance will only cement his place among the Larry Birds and Reggie Millers of yesteryear. He has the game's quickest release (showcased on the record-breaking three with Shannon Brown closing hard) and it seems like most of his shots never hit the rim at all, instead splashing into the net like rocks thrown into the ocean.

His ability to come off screens is unmatched and he balances himself better on the fly than anybody else. Allen's body looks so contorted and off balance at times when he shoots, but everything that he needs to be in balance is there, every time he puts up a shot. Combine that with his lightning-fast release and there really is no way to stop him once he gets into a rhythm like he did last night.

Despite Allen's first half heroics, the Celtics were up just six heading into halftime after Kobe Bryant stole an outlet pass and drained a three-pointer to beat the buzzer. The Lakers went into halftime with enough momentum that anyone watching would have thought Allen would need to score 40 or more for the Celtics to win.

Allen scored just five points in the second half, but the Celtics ended up winning by nine. Rajon Rondo took over, scoring 13 of his 19 points in the second half and finished with his FIFTH triple-double of the playoffs, adding 12 rebounds and 10 assists, 8 of which came in the first half to aid Allen's shooting barrage.

Rondo also came up with key plays at key moments, including a late offensive rebound and putback around the rim that put Boston up for good. Just a minute later, he blocked Derek Fisher's three-point attempt from behind, ignited a fast break and hit a 20-foot jump shot to put the Celtics up 95-90. If there were any questions whether Rondo could step his game up on the road at the most important time, in the most important series, they have been answered.

The Celtics now go back home for three straight, but I don't see home court holding serve in those games. It's hard to keep the Lakers down for three straight games with a player like Bryant and their depth, even on your home court. I think Boston will ride the momentum to a Game 3 victory before the Lakers come back in Game 4, just because I don't see them falling behind 3-1.

Game 5 will be the pivotal one and a must-win for the Celtics. If the Lakers win that game I think the series ends in six although I wouldn't put it past the Celtics, who went 26-15 on the road this season and 6-4 in the playoffs, to force a Game 7. If Boston wins, I think they have a great shot to win their second NBA championship in three seasons. If you predicted that before the playoffs cheers to you, because I sure didn't! I'm still taking L.A. though.