Baseball is DYING Oh noes!

[msgkings322]

Well, no, although they've been saying it for 120 years now

Baseball is dying? Nonsense: The Case for Baseball?s Vitality | HardballTalk

Maybe should put this on the MLB General Discussion board

 

[SF11704]

Interesting observations .... but can't really say if they are right or wrong ,... as a super senior (68) ... some of my observations over the years ...
1. As a kid (and a young adult) all I had was television or radio. If you wanted to see or hear a sporting event they were your primary avenues. A live event was the best option but also rare for me. Now as an adult I spend more time on our community forum board and MLB Gamecast then I do on actual TV. I personally like the community interaction. Makes me feel as if I'm part of something. More than a spectator. I will spend tonight's game reading through our GDT and looking at Gamecast .... I like the interaction and feeling of involvement
2. Baseball and football are different animals. Football games are individuakl games. Baseball is played in 'series'. One sport has 162 regular games while the other has 16. I reaely if ever watch baseball games for teams other than the Giants. I will watch football games for teams I don't follow. I watched SEA and WAS last night.
3. I think that the emergence of social media has changed the way that today's kids follow sports. TV and radio are not main stream avenues for kids today. In most cases whatevr they are following is somehow or someway linked into their phones ...

I don't think the baseball has lost fans .... I just think they the media just doesn't know how to find them anymore ... it's not as simple as 'the number of people watching .... "

 

[msgkings322]

Interesting observations .... but can't really say if they are right or wrong ,... as a super senior (68) ... some of my observations over the years ...
1. As a kid (and a young adult) all I had was television or radio. If you wanted to see or hear a sporting event they were your primary avenues. A live event was the best option but also rare for me. Now as an adult I spend more time on our community forum board and MLB Gamecast then I do on actual TV. I personally like the community interaction. Makes me feel as if I'm part of something. More than a spectator. I will spend tonight's game reading through our GDT and looking at Gamecast .... I like the interaction and feeling of involvement
2. Baseball and football are different animals. Football games are individuakl games. Baseball is played in 'series'. One sport has 162 regular games while the other has 16. I reaely if ever watch baseball games for teams other than the Giants. I will watch football games for teams I don't follow. I watched SEA and WAS last night.
3. I think that the emergence of social media has changed the way that today's kids follow sports. TV and radio are not main stream avenues for kids today. In most cases whatevr they are following is somehow or someway linked into their phones ...

I don't think the baseball has lost fans .... I just think they the media just doesn't know how to find them anymore ... it's not as simple as 'the number of people watching .... "

Some good points. The article does note that LOCAL baseball TV revenues are booming, the media finds the fans plenty but it's a local phenomenon. The national TV ratings decline in baseball actually matches the national TV ratings decline of EVERYTHING else (except football). There's no doubt that football is a bigger deal than baseball (although total sport revenues for baseball are only a bit less than football, $8.5 bil vs $9 bil). But that in no way = baseball is 'dying'

The article also made a point I liked about the 'showboaters' like Puig...the same people that lament baseball not being 'cool' for young fans also rag on guys like Puig and Carlos Gomez etc for having some fun out there and flipping a bat once in a while. I like that stuff, the more characters and weirdos and emotional goofballs the better. I suppose it could go too far that way but we're nowhere near that point.
Baseball is just fine and likely always will be.

 

[Cyder]

Some good points. The article does note that LOCAL baseball TV revenues are booming, the media finds the fans plenty but it's a local phenomenon. The national TV ratings decline in baseball actually matches the national TV ratings decline of EVERYTHING else (except football). There's no doubt that football is a bigger deal than baseball (although total sport revenues for baseball are only a bit less than football, $8.5 bil vs $9 bil). But that in no way = baseball is 'dying'

Baseball is just fine and likely always will be.

People look at football's popularity and ratings (One game per team per week) against baseball and jump to conclusions. The World Series doesn't do the numbers it used to either but there's more rounds now. In the old days the W.S. was done by mid October. Now it stretches 2 more weeks (At least) and those who's teams aren't in it have their basketball and hockey teams in action as well as the heart of the football season

 

[calsnowskier]

People look at football's popularity and ratings (One game per team per week) against baseball and jump to conclusions. The World Series doesn't do the numbers it used to either but there's more rounds now. In the old days the W.S. was done by mid October. Now it stretches 2 more weeks (At least) and those who's teams aren't in it have their basketball and hockey teams in action as well as the heart of the football season

Good points, and they are probably the MAIN reasons why the ratings for the World Series have dropped, but I do believe that inter-league has played a part as well.

It used to be the ONLY way for the Yanks and Mets to ever play a non-spring training game was if they met in the Series. Now they play 6 games every year. Same for the Cubs/White Sox; Giants/As; Angels/Dodgers; Nats/Orioles; etc etc. 1989 was HUGE in the Bay Area because it was the first time the As and Giants had ever played games that meant something. If it were to happen again, it just wouldn't have the same "OMG" feeling to it.

 

[jeep99tj]

Good points, and they are probably the MAIN reasons why the ratings for the World Series have dropped, but I do believe that inter-league has played a part as well.

It used to be the ONLY way for the Yanks and Mets to ever play a non-spring training game was if they met in the Series. Now they play 6 games every year. Same for the Cubs/White Sox; Giants/As; Angels/Dodgers; Nats/Orioles; etc etc. 1989 was HUGE in the Bay Area because it was the first time the As and Giants had ever played games that meant something. If it were to happen again, it just wouldn't have the same "OMG" feeling to it.

Interleague play and the "everyone deserves to play" attitude in the allstar game are factors to me. I hate interleague play, especially now with the 15 teams in each league which ensures an interleague game at all time. But the allstar game used be where you saw the starters play 7 or 8 innings and the SP went through the order at least twice. Now they've added players and you may get to see the starters hit once and then shower. Thank you Bud Selig.

 

[SF11704]

Major League Baseball?s 19 Weirdest Players Of All-Time

 

[msgkings322]

Major League Baseball?s 19 Weirdest Players Of All-Time

Awesome, SF, thanks!

 

[calsnowskier]

Interleague play and the "everyone deserves to play" attitude in the allstar game are factors to me. I hate interleague play, especially now with the 15 teams in each league which ensures an interleague game at all time. But the allstar game used be where you saw the starters play 7 or 8 innings and the SP went through the order at least twice. Now they've added players and you may get to see the starters hit once and then shower. Thank you Bud Selig.

I am OK with making the ASG a scorers nightmare. It is (should be) an exhibition.

Making it determine home-field advantage in the Series is an absolute joke, though. IT IS AN EXHIBITION GAME! Bring back the light-heartedness of Johnson vs Kruk or Rodriguez giving way to Ripkin. The game should be a fun celebration of the game and its history. Bring in a HOFer to pinch hit every inning. If you want a little competition, make it so the winning team gets 10K bonus per player (then advertise which charity each players donates his money to; "Coming out of the Pen is San Francisco Giants pitcher, Tim Lincecum, playing for Legalize Now...").

 

[msgkings322]

Good points, and they are probably the MAIN reasons why the ratings for the World Series have dropped, but I do believe that inter-league has played a part as well.

It used to be the ONLY way for the Yanks and Mets to ever play a non-spring training game was if they met in the Series. Now they play 6 games every year. Same for the Cubs/White Sox; Giants/As; Angels/Dodgers; Nats/Orioles; etc etc. 1989 was HUGE in the Bay Area because it was the first time the As and Giants had ever played games that meant something. If it were to happen again, it just wouldn't have the same "OMG" feeling to it.

The article mentions that baseball national TV ratings decline has been pretty much the SAME as the decline in ratings of ALL TV. They give the example of The Big Bang Theory, TVs biggest network show, which has ratings about 1/3 as strong as the big show of the 70s All In The Family.

It's not interleague or longer seasons, TV has simply changed from 3 channels to choose from to hundreds, plus the internet. People watch less of EVERYTHING, or rather watch less of any one shared thing. They watch lots of things now. Except football, the ultimate TV show.

And again, it's only NATIONAL baseball ratings. Local ratings are stronger than ever, local game broadcasts outdraw most hit network shows in those local markets.

 

[Cyder]

I am OK with making the ASG a scorers nightmare. It is (should be) an exhibition.

Making it determine home-field advantage in the Series is an absolute joke, though. IT IS AN EXHIBITION GAME! Bring back the light-heartedness of Johnson vs Kruk or Rodriguez giving way to Ripkin. The game should be a fun celebration of the game and its history. Bring in a HOFer to pinch hit every inning. If you want a little competition, make it so the winning team gets 10K bonus per player (then advertise which charity each players donates his money to; "Coming out of the Pen is San Francisco Giants pitcher, Tim Lincecum, playing for Legalize Now...").

The only reason I didn't care about the All Star game determining home field was because the previous method of alternating years also sucked. God forbid the team with the better record gets home field. That would make too much sense

 

[Mays-Fan]

Ask the Dodgers' Manager of Revenue Accounting if he thinks baseball is dying.

 

[calsnowskier]

The only reason I didn't care about the All Star game determining home field was because the previous method of alternating years also sucked. God forbid the team with the better record gets home field. That would make too much sense

I grant you that. Alternating the HFA was arguably a WORSE solution.

But if we HAVE to have interleague, why not have THAT determine HFA? The league with the better record in interleague gets HFA. How difficult is that?

Or, if interleague somehow gets discontinued (aint gunna happen), than have the previous year's World Series determine HFA (either winner or loser gets it -- I am OK with either, just make it consistent).

 

[powerchord86]

Well, no, although they've been saying it for 120 years now

Baseball is dying? Nonsense: The Case for Baseball?s Vitality | HardballTalk

Maybe should put this on the MLB General Discussion board

Nah dude.. Nah dude...

 

[Cyder]

I grant you that. Alternating the HFA was arguably a WORSE solution.

But if we HAVE to have interleague, why not have THAT determine HFA? The league with the better record in interleague gets HFA. How difficult is that?

Or, if interleague somehow gets discontinued (aint gunna happen), than have the previous year's World Series determine HFA (either winner or loser gets it -- I am OK with either, just make it consistent).

I still prefer the team with the better record having HFA.

 

[Mays-Fan]

I still prefer the team with the better record having HFA.

Definitely better than it going to the league that wins the ASG. That was a noble attempt, but the little extra integrity it may bring to the ASG does not exceed the WTF factor it brings to the World Series HFA.

 

[calsnowskier]

I still prefer the team with the better record having HFA.

Like Mays said, that is better than the ASG determining HFA, but the competition is too different between the leagues. I think you keep it league-wide and go with interleague record.

Either solution is better than what it is now, and I think we both agree 100% on that...

 

[msgkings322]

Like Mays said, that is better than the ASG determining HFA, but the competition is too different between the leagues. I think you keep it league-wide and go with interleague record.

Either solution is better than what it is now, and I think we both agree 100% on that...

I like the interleague record idea, the games already 'count', and it makes sense: if your league was 'better' that year your league gets HFA that year.