Does MLB need changing?

[Nasty_Magician]

In the US? Never. Unless we're invaded by Mexico. Soccer will never even be as popular as hockey in the US because the scoring system is too flawed and there's a very limited base of interest here, relatively.

Without getting too off topic, I dunno, the MLS is expanding and doing well and with an increasing latino population and success at the world level popularity is def on the rise for it. And with all of the football injuries and everything we're discovering about it, I could see a lot of kids going the soccer route as opposed to football. Could be wrong but don't be surprised if it happens.

 

[bravesfan]

If a lockout in baseball brought the season from 162 down to 120's how and if that would even help out interest in a season. But it seems that other pro sports have done a relatively decent job at capturing the casual sports fans attention or viewership, NFL has done an incredible job at this. But it seems baseball hasn't really done that.

And to say that the MLB doesn't care about the casual fan tuning in, you are wrong as of course ANY pro sport wants the casual fan tuning in from time to time because that means more $$ and it is all about $.

Last year, the braves sold around 2 million tickets. The falcons only sold roughly 700000. As bad as the Marlins are, they are still on pace to sell over 1 million tickets. Where's the dilemma in attendance and viewership?

Football is a different breed of sport b/c it has to be limited, you can only play so many games. So the supply side is limited, it drives demand. So more people will watch when the game is on b/c another would not be on till next week. Baseball is far more casual in regards, so there's not as much pressure to watch. But I guarantee that just as many households tune into atleast one MLB baseball game during the week as they would an NFL game.

A casual fan is one that already has short patience with the sport, so they wont put up with overpriced tickets and over commercialized broadcasts. Look how much the NFL has had to commercialized itself just to make any money. By shrinking the games, you are shrinking supply and making it much harder for casual fans to attend games. NFL football is not made for a casual fan, you have to spend more money if you want to attend a game or put up with a ton of commercials to watch a game on TV. Most football fans i've met are die hard about the sport in general. I am more likely to see a casual sports fan at Turner field than I ever would at the Georgia dome.

 

[rmilia1]

Don't change anything. Period. Don't start tinkering with things that have worked since the Civil War.

They have already had a plentitude of changes, they raised the mound, they introduced the DH, they lengthened the season, they instituted replay. All I want is for baseball to enforce the actual rules of baseball AND use something they are already using ( replay) but use it with some damn common sense. I promise you the technology exists to have balls and strikes monitored by technology as well. In tennis they can tell you if a serve hit 145 MPH that bends 8 feet is in or out and it takes about 5 seconds and thats including the time it takes a player to challenge the call. Would be nothing to set up the strike zone as well. Only variation would be the players size that was batting, that may need some looking into but IM SURE they could hammer it out in a matter of months

 

[romeo212000]

Lol at this fail of a thread.

 

[romeo212000]

In the US? Never. Unless we're invaded by Mexico. Soccer will never even be as popular as hockey in the US because the scoring system is too flawed and there's a very limited base of interest here, relatively.

I see soccer overtaking hockey sooner rather than later.

 

[Nasty_Magician]

Lol at this fail of a thread.

The over the top nonsense aside, there are actually some interesting ideas being thrown around here.

 

[romeo212000]

The over the top nonsense aside, there are actually some interesting ideas being thrown around here.

I agree but some of these ideas are just lane as hell and come from pure ignorance.

 

[apachef4]

They have already had a plentitude of changes, they raised the mound, they introduced the DH, they lengthened the season, they instituted replay. All I want is for baseball to enforce the actual rules of baseball AND use something they are already using ( replay) but use it with some damn common sense. I promise you the technology exists to have balls and strikes monitored by technology as well. In tennis they can tell you if a serve hit 145 MPH that bends 8 feet is in or out and it takes about 5 seconds and thats including the time it takes a player to challenge the call. Would be nothing to set up the strike zone as well. Only variation would be the players size that was batting, that may need some looking into but IM SURE they could hammer it out in a matter of months

I remember watching something about the tennis hawkeye system. Basically, they have the info on whether a ball was in or out instantly, but they purposely delay it a few seconds, then show the graphic of the ball flying in the air and where it hit on the court to build the anticipation and atmosphere in the stadium. If you ever watch, the whole crowd gets into it (in the grand slams, anyway) and they start the rhythmic clap that gets quicker until the result is shown. Kinda neat.

 

[OregonDucks]

Last year, the braves sold around 2 million tickets. The falcons only sold roughly 700000. As bad as the Marlins are, they are still on pace to sell over 1 million tickets. Where's the dilemma in attendance and viewership?

Football is a different breed of sport b/c it has to be limited, you can only play so many games. So the supply side is limited, it drives demand. So more people will watch when the game is on b/c another would not be on till next week. Baseball is far more casual in regards, so there's not as much pressure to watch. But I guarantee that just as many households tune into atleast one MLB baseball game during the week as they would an NFL game.

A casual fan is one that already has short patience with the sport, so they wont put up with overpriced tickets and over commercialized broadcasts. Look how much the NFL has had to commercialized itself just to make any money. By shrinking the games, you are shrinking supply and making it much harder for casual fans to attend games. NFL football is not made for a casual fan, you have to spend more money if you want to attend a game or put up with a ton of commercials to watch a game on TV. Most football fans i've met are die hard about the sport in general. I am more likely to see a casual sports fan at Turner field than I ever would at the Georgia dome.

You are right about football and the limited amount of games equates to a larger demand from the fans. So, couldn't that formula work for baseball as well? Shorten your season and now every game becomes meaningful.

NBA season is too long as well, IMO, 82 games really only a portion of games are really meaningful, you can afford to lose 5 straight games and be fine with a bounce back. However, in baseball, you can lose 10 straight and it is completely meaningless.

Opening day is a funny day, everyone gets so excited about it and get stoked if their team wins opening day, yet, it is the most meaningless game of the season. The first 3 months are sorta pointless in the long haul, this is shown by teams who make late surges in August end up in the playoffs.

Baseball doesn't start getting interesting until the end of Summer. God, August rolls around and you still got 60 something games left, almost as many games in an entire NBA/NHL season!

 

[bamabear82]

You are right about football and the limited amount of games equates to a larger demand from the fans. So, couldn't that formula work for baseball as well? Shorten your season and now every game becomes meaningful.

NBA season is too long as well, IMO, 82 games really only a portion of games are really meaningful, you can afford to lose 5 straight games and be fine with a bounce back. However, in baseball, you can lose 10 straight and it is completely meaningless.

Opening day is a funny day, everyone gets so excited about it and get stoked if their team wins opening day, yet, it is the most meaningless game of the season. The first 3 months are sorta pointless in the long haul, this is shown by teams who make late surges in August end up in the playoffs.

Baseball doesn't start getting interesting until the end of Summer. God, August rolls around and you still got 60 something games left, almost as many games in an entire NBA/NHL season!

Every win is important, regardless of where it comes in the season. If your team lost on opening day and finished one game out from making the playoffs I'm sure they'd like to have that one "meaningless" loss back.

 

[bravesfan]

You are right about football and the limited amount of games equates to a larger demand from the fans. So, couldn't that formula work for baseball as well? Shorten your season and now every game becomes meaningful.
[\QUOTE]

It's like you having 162 oz. of steak on your plate, what's the difference in cutting to 64 oz.? you still have way too much steak to eat. To create that kind of meaningful relevance to every game you would have to shrink the season by 80%, and in the process you made games longer with more commercials and jacked up ticket prices.

The allure of baseball is that the best team doesnt always win on a game to game bases. The Angels are 2-7 right now and one of the more talented teams in baseball. So you need a lengthy season to statistically divide the good from the bad

 

[HammerDown]

They have already had a plentitude of changes, they raised the mound, they introduced the DH, they lengthened the season, they instituted replay. All I want is for baseball to enforce the actual rules of baseball AND use something they are already using ( replay) but use it with some damn common sense. I promise you the technology exists to have balls and strikes monitored by technology as well. In tennis they can tell you if a serve hit 145 MPH that bends 8 feet is in or out and it takes about 5 seconds and thats including the time it takes a player to challenge the call. Would be nothing to set up the strike zone as well. Only variation would be the players size that was batting, that may need some looking into but IM SURE they could hammer it out in a matter of months

But you'd negate to whole human touch of baseball that is an integral ingredient. And once you start down that road, we'd see how computers could improve on humans in almost every aspect and the next thing you know, someone would have a robot in the bullpen. I just don't like it. Leave the human touch alone.

 

[Nasty_Magician]

Robot baseball? Now we're talking. Forget 500+ foot home runs, how about 700-800 foot home runs? And 250 mph fastballs! I'm in.

 

[bone3421]

season doesnt need to be shortened.....the answer was already posted in this thread by me

dbl headers every other week.....thats about 14 dbl headers a year(28 games).....shaves two/three weeks off of the season

the only thing that would change is teams would probably have 6th starter for the dbl header games so the rotation stays the same

 

[tabascojet]

eliminate the 5th playoff team and subsequent 1 game playoff series.

 

[powerchord86]

Robot baseball? Now we're talking. Forget 500+ foot home runs, how about 700-800 foot home runs? And 250 mph fastballs! I'm in.

Could it really happen?

 

[powerchord86]

season doesnt need to be shortened.....the answer was already posted in this thread by me

dbl headers every other week.....thats about 14 dbl headers a year(28 games).....shaves two/three weeks off of the season

the only thing that would change is teams would probably have 6th starter for the dbl header games so the rotation stays the same

I like that idea. Might not hurt to expand the 25 man roster to allow a few more arms too.

 

[calsnowskier]

eliminate the 5th playoff team and subsequent 1 game playoff series.

I am a traditionalist, but I am actually a big fan of the second WC team. I actually think it adds a lot to the game, ESPECIALLY for traditionalists.

Having the one-game playoff diminishes the benefit of getting a WC berth, and increases the benefit of winning the division. It also achieves the desired affect of making more games meaningful into September. Total Win/Win.

However, I want to take it one step further. I think that the winner of the WC round should have to face the #1 seed, but with a 4-1 home field disadvantage. This further incentivizes teams to win the #1 seed and further diminishes winning the WC.

 

[herky]

I am a traditionalist, but I am actually a big fan of the second WC team. I actually think it adds a lot to the game, ESPECIALLY for traditionalists.

Having the one-game playoff diminishes the benefit of getting a WC berth, and increases the benefit of winning the division. It also achieves the desired affect of making more games meaningful into September. Total Win/Win.

However, I want to take it one step further. I think that the winner of the WC round should have to face the #1 seed, but with a 4-1 home field disadvantage. This further incentivizes teams to win the #1 seed and further diminishes winning the WC.

That's not a bad idea. And, as a Cubs fan, I know that I'll rarely have to bitch about it.

 

[herky]

season doesnt need to be shortened.....the answer was already posted in this thread by me

dbl headers every other week.....thats about 14 dbl headers a year(28 games).....shaves two/three weeks off of the season

the only thing that would change is teams would probably have 6th starter for the dbl header games so the rotation stays the same

This is a great idea. This way, they would be finishing up the week after Labor Day and the playoffs would be over around mid October before the weather turns completely shitty.