Baseball in Trouble per USA Today

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

Brian - Do you think there is an issue with the pace / lack of action currently?  From the tone of your posts, I think you do, but I'm curious.  I say this because we are fans (maybe we are in the minority on this site) who obviously are invested in the sport and passionate about the sport (we've spent how much time commenting on it over a 15 year horizon) yet see this type of decline and recognize it.

By no means am I saying I hate the game of baseball, I still absolutely enjoy the game...I just enjoy the game less than I did in the past. 

Yes I think there is an issue with the pace of this game and, along with the number of teams that start the year saying they can't keep up with the top few teams, those are the 2 things I think hurt baseball's watchability the most for me. It's gone up by about 20  minutes per game since the mid-oughts. These 3:15, 8.5 inning games really do seem to drag on a ton more than a 2:45 minute game.

[southsider2k5]

At the end of the day, I will swear to my grave it is all about marketing.  I think out of the Big 3 sports, baseball is by far the worst marketed sport, while football at least WAS the best, at least until the flag crap came along.  Football has built itself into a million cottage industries built around the experience, the NBA has continued to market its stars like no professional American sport, meanwhile baseball...  Well, what?  They have these incredible stars, but if you aren't in NYC, you barely hear about them.  The experience of baseball is also like no other, but instead you have the media selling the story that this downtime is a bad thing, meanwhile NFL game times are up as well, and you barely hear anything about that.

[Jack Parkman]

I like my baseball the way it is, and it would frustrate me as a fan if teams did things that statistically made it less likely for my favorite team to win a game just because some people are bored. The goal is winning the WS and changing rules that make it less likely for a team to take advantage of the data they have accumulated is unfair to fans and teams. There really is no way to deal with this, without affecting teams putting themselves in the best position to win. That is against the spirit of competition. You'd harp on a player for not hustling, etc. So why don't you harp on MLB for enacting rules that prevent the game from being played in the most efficient manner. Let's face it guys, walks, Ks and HRs win baseball games, and stealing, bunting and hit-and-runs actually decrease a team's run expectancy. Knowing this, why would anyone want to give their team a lesser chance of winning the game they paid money to see just because it is *slightly* more entertaining in the process.

 

I go to games to see the following: 1. My team win, if they're expected to do so 2) Players that are great at baseball being great at baseball and 3) Progression of young pieces into players that are great at baseball, if my team is rebuilding. I don't always care about Wins and Losses. To me, it is more exciting to watch a 2-1 game where both pitchers strike out 10 plus batters, than it is to watch a 12-10 slugfest. In a 2-1 game there is so much riding on every pitch and that alone is exciting to me. The tension and pressure is there on each and every pitch. In a similar vein, I'd rather watch a 17-14 football game than a 41-38 game because the lower scoring game the level of execution and precision is higher, and any mistake could cost the game. That is more exciting to me. In lower scoring games, every pitch and play needs to be executed precisely, and that, to me is a better vision of the "essence of the game" type thing. I'd probably absolutely love soccer if I knew more about that sport but I much prefer hockey so I do that. Again, to me, higher scoring games mean that the game was sloppy and teams aren't executing properly and that takes away a lot of my enjoyment of any sport. I like golf too, my favorite major is the US Open and I like that because the level of play needed to win is so high because the courses are so tough. Every mistake is magnified, and that is just the way I like my sports. 

Edited June 25, 2018 by Jack Parkman

[illinilaw08]

32 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

At the end of the day, I will swear to my grave it is all about marketing.  I think out of the Big 3 sports, baseball is by far the worst marketed sport, while football at least WAS the best, at least until the flag crap came along.  Football has built itself into a million cottage industries built around the experience, the NBA has continued to market its stars like no professional American sport, meanwhile baseball...  Well, what?  They have these incredible stars, but if you aren't in NYC, you barely hear about them.  The experience of baseball is also like no other, but instead you have the media selling the story that this downtime is a bad thing, meanwhile NFL game times are up as well, and you barely hear anything about that.

I think this is pretty spot on.  I look at a guy like Mike Trout and it's ridiculous to me how little traction he has with casual sports fans.  Market your superstars, even if they are kind of quiet guys who play on the West Coast on a team that has only made the playoffs once in his career.

[caulfield12]

If the White Sox had the Cubs’ run over the last three years, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, arguably.

Maybe it would be better to ask Mariners and Padres fans, the only two fanbases waiting longer for a return to the playoffs.  For some reason, their (SD) games continue to be well-attended despite being in a long rebuild and facing dominant franchises like the Dodgers and Giants in the same division.

 

Back to the marketing point...except for iconic franchises like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs and Dodgers, the sport has evolved into a “regional” one, with teams like the Cardinals still having quite limited appeal on a national basis.  Forget about the Sox, Royals or Indians.  That’s something adding teams in Canada and Mexico won’t fix.

Otoh, the opening up of baseball gambling and the demographic trends of more Asians and Hispanic Americans are largely positive for baseball (well, except Chinese!) and football/soccer.

[caulfield12]

11 minutes ago, Tony said:

What? This isn't about a fan perspective, it's facts and numbers across the league. 

Sure, but baseball is also about emotion and sentiment...trying to put everything into numbers or metrics does it a disservice.   

Do we all need to watch The Sandlot, Bull Durham or Major League?  Something’s not getting translated from the boyhood wonder and awe at the sport...there are no longer iconic “heroes” like Roberto Clemente you could look up to for inspiration.  There used to be a time where everyone would listen to World Series on the radio or skip school to watch the games during the day.  It was an essential part of the fabric of the country, like baseball, apple pie and Chevrolet.  It’s the James Earl Jones speech in Field of Dreams, or father’s playing a backyard game of catch with their sons.

And when’s the last time you heard of anyone skipping something for baseball...maybe just the World Series parades in Chicago?

Edited June 25, 2018 by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Tony said:

It's not all about marketing, but it plays a role. Specifically, two issues stand out. 

1. The social policy of MLB needs a big change, and quick. Twitter just launched their own #NBATwitter campaign because over the last 5+ years, NBA Twitter has become it's own community, sharing plays almost instantly with each other, social media influencers talking about not only action on the court, but the drama off of it. Guys like Wob, Trill, Shae, etc. have formed something so unique and fun. On top of it, Adam Silver has come out and discussed that he doesn't care about "snackable" NBA content on social, that if some monster dunk is posted on Twitter by someone streaming the game 45 seconds after it happened, that's good for the league. They'll still consume the "meal" from the NBA. Meanwhile, the MLB content police are out in full force, and want everything coming from them, and will shut accounts down that don't follow the rules. 

2. Shoes. Shoes and fashion are SUCH a big deal, and the MLB has totally missed the boat. Not totally their fault, but a kid can't wear the Mike Trout 4's to school, they are cleats. There is no culture around MLB, it's just boring old baseball. 

This is a huge conversation that MLB I'm sure is having on a daily basis, but those two really stand out. 

I can't really argue either of those.

#1 definitively fits into marketing though.  You have a chance at all of that publicity, but are crushing people for wanting to share your highlights?  How stupid can you be.  Someone mentioned Bill Wirtz earlier, but this is Wirtzian in its antiquities as a way of thinking.  Take advantage of people wanting to be excited about your product.  Anything else is ignorant.

#2, kind of goes towards what I was talking about with cottage industries.  For football the big one is fantasy football, but you could also include gambling in general.  There are a fair amount of people who watch for those reasons, and really aren't connected to a team or city.  Baseball just doesn't have that extra thing that draws people to watch.  Again no one has been able to figure out a good draw to the game outside of the game itself.

And as a bonus, I think by and large the people who have traditionally covered baseball are for the most part crusty old white guys who don't like change.  There is more negativity that comes from baseball writers, than any other sport's own writers.  If there were the level and enthusiasm for baseball as there was for other sports, the people reading about baseball would get a different feel for the game.

[illinilaw08]

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I can't really argue either of those.

#1 definitively fits into marketing though.  You have a chance at all of that publicity, but are crushing people for wanting to share your highlights?  How stupid can you be.  Someone mentioned Bill Wirtz earlier, but this is Wirtzian in its antiquities as a way of thinking.  Take advantage of people wanting to be excited about your product.  Anything else is ignorant.

#2, kind of goes towards what I was talking about with cottage industries.  For football the big one is fantasy football, but you could also include gambling in general.  There are a fair amount of people who watch for those reasons, and really aren't connected to a team or city.  Baseball just doesn't have that extra thing that draws people to watch.  Again no one has been able to figure out a good draw to the game outside of the game itself.

And as a bonus, I think by and large the people who have traditionally covered baseball are for the most part crusty old white guys who don't like change.  There is more negativity that comes from baseball writers, than any other sport's own writers.  If there were the level and enthusiasm for baseball as there was for other sports, the people reading about baseball would get a different feel for the game.

#2 is spot on.  MLB is tougher to sell than the NFL.  162 games vs. 16 games (a) makes it a lot easier to turn fantasy football into a cottage industry; and (b) requires a lot less of a time commitment to be an avid fan.

Bonus point is a good one as well.     

[Heads22]

In football, you know when the action is going to happen with each snap, in baseball you don't know on any given pitch if the ball is going to be put in play.

[caulfield12]

They also need to market to women more effectively...not just the handsome guys/chicks love the long ball approach, but really making women feel more welcome instead of an ‘ol boys club.

Think about it...how many women post at SoxTalk, 2?   Out of how many regular posters?  There’s obviously a huge discrepancy.

Another thing.  Not saying we should go like South Korea with the cute cheerleaders and sexy K-Pop idols throwing out first pitches in skin tight uniforms, but they should look at some of the trends from other countries (Japan with the thunder sticks) and figure out why the Latin American ad Asian fans are so much more involved in the “in game” experience.

[ptatc]

4 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

I've said it many times on this site, but it is absolutely true. The lack of action in baseball will ultimately be the death of it (not really the death but will send it into a major downhill spiral).  People can argue me all they want but it is 100% factual.  I don't want to watch a game where everything is going to be a walk, strikeout, or homerun. Yes, I'm exaggerating but my enjoyment of baseball has declined over the past 5-7 years (and it isn't because the White Sox stink). The lack of action is a major problem.  

For those of you using football as an analogy...it would be as if football you either had a 3 and out or a long touchdown and like 85% of the time it was just a 3 and out with minimal action.  

Agree 100%

[ptatc]

1 hour ago, Heads22 said:

In football, you know when the action is going to happen with each snap, in baseball you don't know on any given pitch if the ball is going to be put in play.

This has a lot to do with it. My son is a senior in high school. The vast majority of his friends stopped playing baseball in junior high. Mostly for 2 reasons. 1. They don't know when the action will happen or if it will happen and they get bored. 2. The kids who do like it need to play all the time or the high school. Coaches don't even look at them for the team. The first things the coaches ask is what traveling teams they played for each summer. The number of Americans playing the game to the MLB has been decreasing at an alarming rate.

[Lip Man 1]

Just a few random thoughts on this issue:

1. I've never understood why some folks are upset when a MLB game goes 3:15 but when an NFL game does that it's OK. When I was a kid and would go to Comiskey Park to see a DH, I'd wonder if eight hours or so was going to be enough baseball. (I'd get there two hours or so before first pitch to watch BP and infield practice, they used to open the gates three hours before first pitch). I don't think the game should be radically changed because a particular generation has a five minute attention span.

2. MLB is becoming like the NBA. Realistically only a handful of teams can win a title. The rest are all flotsam and jetsam. Hard to get fans excited when they know even with expanded playoffs they've got no chance. I can tell you right now the 10 teams that will probably be playing in October and I think I'd get eight or nine right.

3. Marketing is a huge issue with MLB, this I agree with. They have to do a better job.

4. The networks are a big player in this as well. It's always Yankees vs. Red Sox or Red Sox vs. Yankees seemingly every week (not literally of course but you get my drift...only select teams are usually shown). I recall the statement, by the ESPN ombudsman at the time, 'ESPN has to realize that Yankees-Red Sox mean very little to fans west of the Allegheny Mountains.' You want fans to get interested again in baseball? Stop promoting and showing just a handful of teams week after week. It used to be every team was required to be on the "Game of the Week" at least once, that is no longer in play. Ed Sherman wrote about this a few years ago when the A's finally were shown on Sunday Night Baseball.

[caulfield12]

19 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Just a few random thoughts on this issue:

1. I've never understood why some folks are upset when a MLB game goes 3:15 but when an NFL game does that it's OK. When I was a kid and would go to Comiskey Park to see a DH, I'd wonder if eight hours or so was going to be enough baseball. (I'd get there two hours or so before first pitch to watch BP and infield practice, they used to open the gates three hours before first pitch). I don't think the game should be radically changed because a particular generation has a five minute attention span.

2. MLB is becoming like the NBA. Realistically only a handful of teams can win a title. The rest are all flotsam and jetsam. Hard to get fans excited when they know even with expanded playoffs they've got no chance. I can tell you right now the 10 teams that will probably be playing in October and I think I'd get eight or nine right.

3. Marketing is a huge issue with MLB, this I agree with. They have to do a better job.

4. The networks are a big player in this as well. It's always Yankees vs. Red Sox or Red Sox vs. Yankees seemingly every week (not literally of course but you get my drift...only select teams are usually shown). I recall the statement, by the ESPN ombudsman at the time, 'ESPN has to realize that Yankees-Red Sox mean very little to fans west of the Allegheny Mountains.' You want fans to get interested again in baseball? Stop promoting and showing just a handful of teams week after week. It used to be every team was required to be on the "Game of the Week" at least once, that is no longer in play. Ed Sherman wrote about this a few years ago when the A's finally were shown on Sunday Night Baseball.

Not just a problem for baseball, but all of society.

Teachers have to deal with this short attention span/instant gratification society issue as well.  All the kids (especially boys for games and girls for pictures/Instagram-equivalent) are addicted to their iPads and mobile phones.  Think about Harrelson’s stories of yore.  Kids don’t want to listen to that, it’s how we are ending up with “entertainers” in broadcasting like Benetti.   Trying too hard to be “hip/cool” and make all the various audiences happy, which is of course impossible to do without alienating certain subsegments of viewers/consumers.

The big question is does baseball shift the sport itself, or adjust to the technology-driven society?  The latter is probably more promising with all the advances in AI, Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality.  If kids could “feel” what it’s like to stand in there and face a Kopech fastball or hit a homer 475 feet like Eloy Jimenez, appreciation for the sport would (hopefully) increase.

Edited June 26, 2018 by caulfield12

[Heads22]

I do say soccer has the easiest way to prevent tanking - relegation. There's a million reasons why something like that would never happen, but you're not gonna see full-scale tear downs if it may result in your team dropping to a second division.

[Dick Allen]

Every game is on TV in HD. Games can be expensive to attend. A lot of tanking not only affects the team you follow, but do you really want to see them play a horrible team? 

For instance, I have a "weekend plan". I put that in quotes because it used to mean I had tickets to every Saturday and Sunday game. Now it's a 20 game plan that has Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays. It used to be 27 games, now it's 20. I just looked. I have 3 games in July and 3 in August. 4 of the 6 games, the opponent is the Royals.  It's bad enough I have to watch one tanking team, but to watch what basically will be a spring training game neither team really cares if it wins in July and August of a major league season is pitiful. 

If you are living in NY and a Yankee fan, do you want to pay NY prices to watch them play the White Sox? I wouldn't. It's not just baseball. The NFL is having a problem not only with ratings, but people attending games. High prices and fantasy football are to blame. People would rather spend their money in a bar watching 5 games at once.

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Dick Allen said:

Every game is on TV in HD. Games can be expensive to attend. A lot of tanking not only affects the team you follow, but do you really want to see them play a horrible team? 

For instance, I have a "weekend plan". I put that in quotes because it used to mean I had tickets to every Saturday and Sunday game. Now it's a 20 game plan that has Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays. It used to be 27 games, now it's 20. I just looked. I have 3 games in July and 3 in August. 4 of the 6 games, the opponent is the Royals.  It's bad enough I have to watch one tanking team, but to watch what basically will be a spring training game neither team really cares if it wins in July and August of a major league season is pitiful. 

If you are living in NY and a Yankee fan, do you want to pay NY prices to watch them play the White Sox? I wouldn't. It's not just baseball. The NFL is having a problem not only with ratings, but people attending games. High prices and fantasy football are to blame. People would rather spend their money in a bar watching 5 games at once.

But these teams are also making huge amounts of money from their TV contracts now, so as long as people are actually tuning in, people going to fewer games per year isn't quite as lethal as you're making it sound.

The problem there is the one I'm noting, I don't want to watch a 3:05 average game length because on TV that starts to drag.

Furthermore, if I know my team won't be competitive during the year, I also am not motivated to buy the extra innings package before the year starts. 

[Dick Allen]

29 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

But these teams are also making huge amounts of money from their TV contracts now, so as long as people are actually tuning in, people going to fewer games per year isn't quite as lethal as you're making it sound.

The problem there is the one I'm noting, I don't want to watch a 3:05 average game length because on TV that starts to drag.

Furthermore, if I know my team won't be competitive during the year, I also am not motivated to buy the extra innings package before the year starts. 

But it's been mentioned before the TV money bubble is about to burst. Whether that is true or not, we will find out probably pretty soon. And to me, it's harder to develop a baseball nut on TV alone. Even if you go to one or two games a year, when you're a kid, you live for that. Never going, IMO, would lose a lot of would be fanatics. 

Time also matters like you mentioned. Especially when teams are bad. The only reason I would ever leave a game before it ended was rain delays. Other than that, I had never left before the end, except maybe once or twice because it was 13 innings or something, and I had to be somewhere else. The last couple of years , that has changed. I am not going to sit there 3 and a half hours when the Sox are losing 10-2. 

[Chisoxfn]

11 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Just a few random thoughts on this issue:

1. I've never understood why some folks are upset when a MLB game goes 3:15 but when an NFL game does that it's OK. When I was a kid and would go to Comiskey Park to see a DH, I'd wonder if eight hours or so was going to be enough baseball. (I'd get there two hours or so before first pitch to watch BP and infield practice, they used to open the gates three hours before first pitch). I don't think the game should be radically changed because a particular generation has a five minute attention span.

2. MLB is becoming like the NBA. Realistically only a handful of teams can win a title. The rest are all flotsam and jetsam. Hard to get fans excited when they know even with expanded playoffs they've got no chance. I can tell you right now the 10 teams that will probably be playing in October and I think I'd get eight or nine right.

3. Marketing is a huge issue with MLB, this I agree with. They have to do a better job.

4. The networks are a big player in this as well. It's always Yankees vs. Red Sox or Red Sox vs. Yankees seemingly every week (not literally of course but you get my drift...only select teams are usually shown). I recall the statement, by the ESPN ombudsman at the time, 'ESPN has to realize that Yankees-Red Sox mean very little to fans west of the Allegheny Mountains.' You want fans to get interested again in baseball? Stop promoting and showing just a handful of teams week after week. It used to be every team was required to be on the "Game of the Week" at least once, that is no longer in play. Ed Sherman wrote about this a few years ago when the A's finally were shown on Sunday Night Baseball.

MLB is nothing like NBA relative to teams winning a championship.  MLB is much closer to hockey and will likely always be. You just said you can think about 8 or 9 teams playing in October. In basketball, I can predict most playoff teams but I can count on basically two fingers the number of teams capable of winning a championship. In baseball, that is absolutely not the case. The whole nature of the sport means one player can't totally dominate the game. The best team wins the NBA title in basketball 90+% of the time. Not anywhere close to that in baseball, imo.  

[kitekrazy]

 I'm glad to see the game going back to the pitcher.   I think the roids era did a lot to hurt the purity of baseball.  You see a lot of players that are fundamentally weak. Being a catcher is not a glamorous position.  Some use to be household names in the 70's.

 Baseball is like golf. You either like it or you don't.  I do think it's a generational thing.  I remember in high school a teacher would put on the spring training games on the radio.  Professional sports are not as accessible like they use to.  You got to have cable or a paid program to listen on the radio if you are in a different region.

  I'm not sure modifying how the game is played is going to keep a traditionalist.  They start the season in March and most parts of the country that doesn't help attendance.

 

  The NFL no longer interests me.  That is a sport were the talent is regressing.  Way too many 1t round flops.  Plus it was a form of entertainment that is now politicized. ESPN/Fox I think has done more to ruin professional sports.  It's littered with former players who have to reflect on their career or just plain stupid how their sport has evolved. Terry Bradshaw is perfect example.  It's an era of the salary cap and the coach is not as near as important as the players. At one time sports was in the hands of journalists or announcers and that made it more interesting. Announcing is a talent.  I learned to appreciate Hawk after hearing Berman do the 2005 post season vs. the Red Sox.

  I never could get into the NBA. Just watch the last 5 minutes.  The NHL, I'm getting more into that.

  I think the interest of professional sports is declining because there is more competition for entertainment. It's pricing is also a weakness.  Why go to a game when you can buy the latest Call of Duty release and be entertained longer. With the digital format the music industry would lose to the movie industry.

  You see few kids into sports these days.  That may have to do with parenting.

 

[Wanne]

USA Today in trouble due to crap content....

[Balta1701]

1 hour ago, Wanne said:

USA Today in trouble due to crap content....

 

 

[TheTruth05]

14 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

 

 

This never fails to get a chuckle out of me lol

[Wanne]

18 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

 

 

hahahaaaaaaa......

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

On 6/25/2018 at 8:54 AM, Chisoxfn said:

I wouldn't be okay with that. I think the time length of a game is one thing...but the lack of action during the game is another.  So much stuff ends with zero fielders having to do anything, no bat on ball contact, etc. Its just lousy.  Baseball will need to implement rules to fix it. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if at some point the shift is banned (or limited) as a way to spur more balls in play.  

I would be entirely against banning the shifts. Maybe it was a poor choice of words but banning or limited the shift wouldn't put more balls in play it would just mean that the balls in play would result in more hits. If anything the shifts should theoretically get more balls in play when and if hitters make adjustments . The game has always been a game of adjustments. The best hitters spray the ball everywhere . The most predictable hitters get shifts. Why punish the defense for playing where the ball predictably will go ? Start hitting where they ain't , If there are huge gaps on the field than learn to hit the balls there.

How would you ban shifts anyway? Defenses have always adjusted to situations ,Double play depth means playing a bit farther back and shading up the middle. Infield in when you want to cut down a runner scoring from third. Outfields in closer when a sac fly will win a game while at the same time increasing the ability to catch a game winning single or a blooper. Outfielders have also always shaded in one direction or another. If a second baseman is playing in shallow right field and the SS right by 2nd base because some lumbering slow guy who only pulls the ball is up more power to them .