OK, we'll ask again: Are we ready for any, or all, of those scenarios? Better think hard -- because Major League Baseball is getting ready to consider every one of them.

When the players agreed last week to a two-year "experiment" allowing the All-Star Game to determine home-field advantage in the World Series, you might not have noticed that wasn't all they agreed to. There's another shoe out there for the dropping. And you could be surprised by all the places it might drop.

As Rumblings reported two weeks ago, the players have many ideas -- about both the All-Star Game and postseason play -- that they want baseball to explore. And over the next two years, while the All-Star Game "experiment" is being tried out, those ideas are going to get kicked around by the powers that be.

Among those proposals: Expanding the playoffs. Changing the AL-vs.-NL format of the All-Star Game. Shortening the season. Lengthening the Division Series to best-of-seven. Giving teams with the best record home-field advantage and a first-round bye. And that isn't all.

But baseball isn't ready to rush into any of it. And that's a good thing, because no one wants to destroy the traditions that make baseball special -- and certainly not in the name of changes that fix something that ain't broke.

"Change is good," says the commish, Bud Selig. "And change is necessary. But change has got to be right and thoughtful, and it's got to be consistent with our history and our traditions."

So let's look at some of these ideas, and see whether they fit those traditions.

1. North America vs. The World
Nothing could be as non-traditional as blowing up the NL-vs.-AL format of the All-Star Game, except maybe turning the whole deal into a big Wiffle Ball game.

The Pros: Players who like this idea say it's time to admit the All-Star Game is just an exhibition, anyway. And if baseball is so big on making its sport international, then "let's give them international," says one player, on one of MLB's biggest stages.

The Cons: It's obvious why many folks in the game hate this idea, whether they're AL or NL people. One AL executive says, "I don't think we want to be following (the model of) the NHL right now." And Astros catcher Brad Ausmus worries that baseball could get itself into a mode where it's constantly tinkering with this game just for the sake of ratings. "Baseball needs to maintain a modicum of tradition," Ausmus says, "We don't want to be the NBA."

The Commish's Take: Selig doesn't want to blow up this, or any, proposal too fast. But after working feverishly to restore meaning to the All-Star Game with the home-field-advantage plan, it's hard to imagine he'd be in favor of an idea which essentially tells however many AL and NL aficionados are left: "Aw, never mind."

2. Add one more wild card per league
Three teams won at least 92 games last year and missed the playoffs (Mariners, Red Sox, Dodgers). Two years ago, Arizona won 92 and won the World Series. So it was only a matter of time before somebody wanted more wild-card teams.

	John Olerud, right, and the Mariners missed the playoffs last year despite winning 93 games.

The Pros: In the other sports, fans have been conditioned to think playoff games are "big games," no matter how many teams get to play them. And baseball would try to do the same selling job. Adding one more wild-card team per league would also give baseball a chance to reward the best teams with a bye to get their pitching in order.

The Cons: Baseball has had a tough enough time selling the Division Series to either viewers or advertisers. And this would be a further erosion of the pennant races that once separated baseball from all the other, playoff-crazy sports. As one club official puts it, "We play 162 games for a reason."

The Commish's Take: Selig is hesitant, but interested, in this idea. But here's as much as he'll say publicly on it: "Do I think we need to do some things different? I do. But we need to do a lot of studying."

3. Make the wild-card round a one-and-done game
This is an idea we actually wrote about as far back as last October. It's a proposal originally made by Steve Hirdt of the Elias Sports Bureau: Add a wild card in each league. Then have them play each other on what used to be the final Sunday of the regular season. Winner advances to the next round. Loser goes home.

The Pros: There are more benefits to this than meet the eye. It's a better way to reward first-place teams than home-field advantage because those teams get a bye to set their rotations. It forces the wild-card teams to use their best pitchers just to get past this game -- meaning it will be harder for one great pitcher (all together now: "PEDRO") to pitch a wild-card team to a big upset in the next round. And this kicks off the playoffs with a tense, NCAA-hoop-style, one-and-done game. "Think you'd get some ratings in those four cities?" Ausmus muses.

The Cons: Nothing is more unfair in baseball -- or more unlike the long-haul nature of the previous six months -- than one game to decide a whole season's work. One AL front-office man says this system would be an injustice for a team that made the mistake of winning 98 games in the wrong division. Then to have that team's entire season's work come down to one game, he says, would have about as much to do with seeing the better team win as "picking one team out of a hat after playing 162 games."

The Commish's Take: This idea is gaining support, but it would have its logistical complications. So those need to be looked at. But even Selig says this is "something to think about."

4. Best regular-season record decides home field in all rounds
The other sports do this. Why can't baseball? That's the argument. And it's a tough one to counter, on a pure sporting level.

The Pros: It may make for better ratings in July to have the All-Star Game decide home-field advantage in the World Series. But to players, it makes more baseball sense to have the season decide that advantage. Players are nearly unanimous on this one.

The Cons: One GM says he opposes this just for baseball reasons, because the unbalanced schedule makes one team's 95 wins more difficult than another team's 99 wins. But the biggest objection within baseball is the logistical difficulty in planning for the World Series when no one knows where it will be held until the last minute.

The Commish's Take: Selig understands the appeal of having best record determine home field. But logistically, he says flatly, "it's not workable." By having the All-Star Game decide the advantage, it gives baseball four months to book World Series hotel rooms in a handful of potential cities. But if a dozen cities are still alive to host the Series until late in the season, planning for all scenarios "doesn't work." Selig insists: "We need 10,000 to 12,000 hotel rooms, and you can't get them in two days." As for that unbalanced-schedule argument, Selig wonders why no one in the NFL makes the same complaint. And he's right.

5. Shorten the season to 154 games to expand the playoffs
Nobody wants to eat Thanksgiving turkey before a World Series game. So if the playoffs get longer, it would seem logical that the season has to get shorter. But how?

The Pros: Shortening the season would enable baseball to lengthen the Division Series to best-of-seven, which many club officials support strongly. And nobody wants to see baseball games played in, say, Chicago, Boston or Cleveland in November. Some players, incidentally, want this only if it paves the way for a series between the World Series winner and the Japanese Series winner.

The Cons: Two problems: 1) What one AL club official calls "the continuity of records." And 2) the old $$$$$$$ questions. One GM says he'll go for this only if players are willing to take 8/162nds (or about five percent) less salary.

The Commish's Take: "If we want to add playoffs or take the first round to seven games, we've got to think about 154 games again," Selig says. The commish has often expressed support for a best-of-seven first round (if TV is interested). But that means studying all the money issues, from salaries to the potential added revenue from more playoff games. "We need," he says, "to go over everything."

Where it's all leading
These aren't even all the ideas out there. There will be others, from a best-of-three wild-card round to having interleague play decide home-field advantage in the World Series.

Baseball's new marketing committee -- which includes officials from MLB, the union, clubs and baseball sponsors -- will have the fascinating job of sifting through all these futuristic brainstorms. It's hard to imagine that none of this will be enacted in the end. But it won't be a lot. And it shouldn't be a lot.

"These are all things we're going to discuss," Selig says. "But we need to be very thoughtful. Change needs to come slowly. So I want us to thoughtfully go over everything over a long period of time."

Nevertheless, the players made a big concession on the All-Star Game, so they expect to be listened to. And they deserve to be listened to.

"If we're going to have the partnership that Bud always talks about," says one AL club official, "then we've got to listen to the players. They're part of this, too."

Jayson Stark is a senior writer for ESPN.com.