The Decline Of MLB

[VanCitySportsGuy]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

Simmons and Cowherd talked about this subject last week. Simmons is 40 and I believe Cowherd is 46 and even they talked about how long the games are/slow pace of the games. They simply don't have the time/patience to sit through these games anymore. Basically who wants to stay indoors in the summertime to watch Baseball on TV.

Society has shifted in terms of attention span. We live in a want now society and Baseball goes against this. I'm not going to lie, I fit into this group. I DVR most of my games so I can FF through all the boring stuff and cut down the amount of time it takes to watch a game because my free time is valuable.

MLB has done a horrible job of marketing the game towards young people. I would never associate the word hip with Baseball. We're talking about a sport where most of the people directly involved don't want expanded replay. This is mind boggling.

[raynman]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

Interesting article by Bill Simmons today that is mostly related to the topic: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/100729

I agree with some of the things he suggests (except for dumping the DH - I would prefer my pitchers not to get injured while doing something they are horrible at) to increase the speed of the game, which is totally why there is a decline in TV ratings and general interest. Whenever I talk to someone who doesn't watch baseball, their number one reason is because it is slow, boring, and long.

[CMH]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

Interesting article by Bill Simmons today that is mostly related to the topic: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/100729

I agree with some of the things he suggests (except for dumping the DH - I would prefer my pitchers not to get injured while doing something they are horrible at) to increase the speed of the game, which is totally why there is a decline in TV ratings and general interest. Whenever I talk to someone who doesn't watch baseball, their number one reason is because it is slow, boring, and long.

Bill Simmons is knowledgeable when it comes to basketball but he has it very wrong when it comes to baseball. Look, he's a real passionate Red Sox fan but he isn't seeing this the right way.

Using Red Sox games to talk about the length of baseball games is a terrible sample. Everyone already knows that the Red Sox and Yankees play in games that are actually much longer than the average length of game for other teams. Why is this? I'm not sure, but many have their theories from veteran club blah blah blah to advanced scouting reports blah blah blah. I doubt there's a definitive reason, but I'm sure most of those things are related.

The average length of an MLB game is just under 3 hours by about five minutes. That makes MLB about 20 minutes longer than the average NBA or NFL game.

20 minutes does not seem to me to be a huge problem, yet people always turn to length of game.

Here's what I think most people are annoyed by and want to say: it's not that games are long, it's that there is a gap between action in the game. NBA games are constantly moving. Even if teams are only passing the ball, they are doing something. In that same space, MLB games are having batters step in and step out.

There is actually just as little action in an NFL game compared to MLB. Networks have continuously said that they prepare for NFL games unlike NBA or MLB because they need content to fill all of the dead space between a play that takes seconds and the minute it takes before a next play is made. Yet, no one complains about NFL games because the clock is constantly running.

I think fans forget that there is no clock in MLB. Trying to make it like other sports is unfair. It would be unfair to compare NBA and NFL games to soccer. Soccer has a clock that runs no matter what. Yes, you get extra time but it's only a few more minutes. You know you'll get a complete game in two hours. That's the way the sport works. Yet, why doesn't Simmons compare the length of NBA games to the length of soccer games?

It's an unfair comparison when you're looking at games with different structures of time.

[Sportsforever]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

Bill Simmons is knowledgeable when it comes to basketball but he has it very wrong when it comes to baseball. Look, he's a real passionate Red Sox fan but he isn't seeing this the right way.

Using Red Sox games to talk about the length of baseball games is a terrible sample. Everyone already knows that the Red Sox and Yankees play in games that are actually much longer than the average length of game for other teams. Why is this? I'm not sure, but many have their theories from veteran club blah blah blah to advanced scouting reports blah blah blah. I doubt there's a definitive reason, but I'm sure most of those things are related.

The average length of an MLB game is just under 3 hours by about five minutes. That makes MLB about 20 minutes longer than the average NBA or NFL game.

20 minutes does not seem to me to be a huge problem, yet people always turn to length of game.

Here's what I think most people are annoyed by and want to say: it's not that games are long, it's that there is a gap between action in the game. NBA games are constantly moving. Even if teams are only passing the ball, they are doing something. In that same space, MLB games are having batters step in and step out.

There is actually just as little action in an NFL game compared to MLB. Networks have continuously said that they prepare for NFL games unlike NBA or MLB because they need content to fill all of the dead space between a play that takes seconds and the minute it takes before a next play is made. Yet, no one complains about NFL games because the clock is constantly running.

I think fans forget that there is no clock in MLB. Trying to make it like other sports is unfair. It would be unfair to compare NBA and NFL games to soccer. Soccer has a clock that runs no matter what. Yes, you get extra time but it's only a few more minutes. You know you'll get a complete game in two hours. That's the way the sport works. Yet, why doesn't Simmons compare the length of NBA games to the length of soccer games?

It's an unfair comparison when you're looking at games with different structures of time.

All very good points. Listening to Colin Cowherd this week and another one of his "baseball is dying" rants, he keeps coming back to ratings and showing how TV ratings are so low. IMO, you can't use TV ratings to judge baseball's popularity compared to the NFL or even the NBA. Baseball is played almost everyday...if you miss a game, ah, so what. It's on tomorrow. In the NFL, you wait all week for your team's game and you aren't going to miss it. To me, TV ratings for baseball aren't as significant as he makes them out to be.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

Well, TV Ratings seem to indicate that and that's one declining area this season that seems to not concern MLB but instead all of those that continue to think MLB is declining. Either way, ratings are down.

Just read a blog from Rob Neyer saying that the Red Sox are experiencing a decline in their NESN viewership. They are still Top 5 across the league, but they were tops in the league for a few seasons even as they continued to sell-out every home game.

Here's the interesting thing about baseball ratings: they are more dependent on local fans than NBA or NFL.

The NFL makes it an event of a day where two local affiliates not only play your home team games, but also games from across the league. You follow that up with a nationally televised Sunday Night and Monday Night game (two to be exact) and the NFL is a TV rating whore. Good for them.

The NBA is similar. ABC hosts its Sunday lineup which runs two-three games on a given Sunday. Then there's also TNT which has double headers two nights of the week. This stuff is an event.

Baseball doesn't have that. They have ESPN Sunday Night Baseball and it is one of the worst nationally televised telecasts with its central focus being on about six-eight teams throughout the season and very little fan fare for the viewers.

If you want to watch baseball, you need Season Ticket or whatever it might be called. FOX has their Saturday thing, but it's Saturday afternoon. Who is home on Saturday afternoon?

There just isn't enough baseball to go around. It is very limited in marketing its product on television. I'm not sure if that's MLBs fault, the networks or the fans.

Great post.

[CMH]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

All very good points. Listening to Colin Cowherd this week and another one of his "baseball is dying" rants, he keeps coming back to ratings and showing how TV ratings are so low. IMO, you can't use TV ratings to judge baseball's popularity compared to the NFL or even the NBA. Baseball is played almost everyday...if you miss a game, ah, so what. It's on tomorrow. In the NFL, you wait all week for your team's game and you aren't going to miss it. To me, TV ratings for baseball aren't as significant as he makes them out to be.

This is the nature of programming.

My favorite example is Who Wants To Be A Millionaire.

Remember when that first came on for ABC? ABC gave it a one week run and the ratings were through the roof. Suddenly, ABC had a hit. Everyone was talking about it and Regis Philbin was special again.

ABC then made people wait a couple months before giving Millionaire a return. I believe the first run was in September and the next one was in November. Again, the ratings went through the roof.

ABC ran this system for about two years (I think it was closer to a year and a half) and then decided to give Millionaire a daily run. Just as quickly as Millionaire made a regular, daily appearance, viewership crashed. Why watch tonight's episode if you know it'll be on tomorrow? There's no incentive to keep watching.

Baseball is the same way in many ways. 162 games, a game six days of the week, six months long. Well, if your friends invite you out to dinner, is it really going to hurt you to miss that one game on a Tuesday night? Probably not.

Now, NFL? Your Sunday was planned around the games. You miss Sunday, you miss a whole weeks worth of action.

Two different sports.

Adding to that, and something I mentioned in an earlier post that was just quoted, baseball is way too local dependent. If I want to watch a Dodgers game...I can't. How do I watch the Dodgers? I have to wait till they play the Mets or face the Yankees in Interleague play (and that's because I have two local teams).

Maybe ESPN will have them on Sunday night baseball. Maybe. Maybe FOX will show one of their games, but that's only if the Yankees or Mets aren't already playing at the designated time that the Dodgers game is on.

Reality is, I can't watch them unless I subscribe to a service that sends me local affiliates from across the country.

NBA? Want to watch the Jazz? Chances are you'll see them on Tuesday or Thursday night on TNT. Maybe you might catch them on ABCs Sunday Lineup. The chances are good that you'll see them eventually. In fact, you can see almost anyone play.

Do I even have to mention the NFL? It's not even close. Everyone gets seen.

I'm not sure where baseball can even drive TV ratings from on a regular basis. Local fans are not the most committed and aren't most local fans going to the game at the ballpark? MLB has no chance to compete with ratings against the other major sports.

[Hootiefish]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

Ratings don't mean ****. It is as simple as that.

There are countless games on every day, and as it has been said, if you miss one, no big deal.

The name of the game is revenue. And right now, revenue is in line with the NFL (maybe even beyond it).

And Colin Cowherd is a dick. That is all.

[Cebby]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

Ratings don't mean ****. It is as simple as that.

There are countless games on every day, and as it has been said, if you miss one, no big deal.

The name of the game is revenue. And right now, revenue is in line with the NFL (maybe even beyond it).

I'm pretty sure that's not even close to true.

Ratings mean television contracts. I think the NFL's contracts are worth about 5 times the MLB's (I couldn't find the exact figures for MLB but saw that Fox and Turner were signed for 3 billion and the NFL's is worth 20 billion).

[TexasBorn1]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

The casual fan will never be excited over the course of a 162 game season and if your team is bad they might forget they exist.

[Hootiefish]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

I'm pretty sure that's not even close to true.

Ratings mean television contracts. I think the NFL's contracts are worth about 5 times the MLB's (I couldn't find the exact figures for MLB but saw that Fox and Turner were signed for 3 billion and the NFL's is worth 20 billion).

If its not close to true, then why is revenue as high, if not higher, than the NFL's? And why is it higher than the NBA's?

The fact of the matter is, ratings have never mattered for MLB.

One game, once a week, for 16 weeks, is an apple. One game, damn near every day, for 162 days, is an orange. Get it?

Here is an interesting (albeit, older) article explaining how baseball makes up for lower national television numbers.

http://www.bnet.com/article/the-revenue-model-why-baseball-is-booming/210671

[abcabc]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

decline of mlb = ozzie guien

[CMH]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

If its not close to true, then why is revenue as high, if not higher, than the NFL's? And why is it higher than the NBA's?

The fact of the matter is, ratings have never mattered for MLB.

One game, once a week, for 16 weeks, is an apple. One game, damn near every day, for 162 days, is an orange. Get it?

Here is an interesting (albeit, older) article explaining how baseball makes up for lower national television numbers.

http://www.bnet.com/article/the-reve...booming/210671

I think you two are arguing two different things.

You're stating that ratings don't matter for MLB because they have recognized where to make money for their sport and have successfully capitalized on that revenue maker - which happens to be everything but baseball (such as hats, food, merchandise). Funny thing that business.

Cebby is arguing that TV ratings lead to bigger TV contracts which brings in more money.

Both of you are right. I just think that both arguments are not related much today because MLB is beyond the TV contract problem. It doesn't work for them because they know they can't expect figure highs in viewership everyday of their 162 game season. So they have focused elsewhere and have been successful.

You know, Bud gets a lot of heat for destroying the purist form of baseball, but he helped make it into a media giant even when people don't realize how big it really is.

[ryan36]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

I know that here in Seattle, the Mariners stink. 710 ESPN , which competes with the heritage sports radio station, still beats them in ratings going from a 1.2 to about a 3.1. I asked a guy I know about it, he said "baseball still helps, even when the team's crappy."

People do watch/listen, but not to the same degree for sure. MLB revenue is close to, if not at, an all time high. People don't think so because there is no parity, like the NFL. The 2 sports simply drive revenues in different ways

[Hootiefish]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

I think you two are arguing two different things.

You're stating that ratings don't matter for MLB because they have recognized where to make money for their sport and have successfully capitalized on that revenue maker - which happens to be everything but baseball (such as hats, food, merchandise). Funny thing that business.

Cebby is arguing that TV ratings lead to bigger TV contracts which brings in more money.

Both of you are right. I just think that both arguments are not related much today because MLB is beyond the TV contract problem. It doesn't work for them because they know they can't expect figure highs in viewership everyday of their 162 game season. So they have focused elsewhere and have been successful.

You know, Bud gets a lot of heat for destroying the purist form of baseball, but he helped make it into a media giant even when people don't realize how big it really is.

I understand what you are saying, but my whole point is that people attempt to point at TV ratings as proof of the decline of baseball, which just isn't true.

[Speedy]

Re: The Decline Of MLB

decline of mlb = ozzie guien

It was childish but I did laugh.