1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Baseball LCS ratings down! The world is coming to an end!

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by printdust, Oct 17, 2011.

  1. Mystery Meat II

    Mystery Meat II Well-Known Member

    If I had to guess, the schedule. It requires a lot more investment to follow a team for 162 games than to follow one for 16. Plus the nature of the sport allows football and basketball stars and teams to shimmer in ways it can't in baseball (long touchdowns come in all shapes and sizes, but most home runs look the same).
     
  2. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Oh, I would ... if I were running a network. But I'd do so (I hope) in full awareness that I am potentially jeopardizing the value of my post-season product. If I were running baseball, I might take a slightly longer view. I might prevent my customer (the network) from maximizing his short-term value as a means of increasing the long-term value of my product (and ultimately, hopefully, getting more from the network as a result). This assumes, of course, that the Yankees/Red Sox viewership shadow is made bigger by their disproportionate number of regular-season television appearances. Seems reasonable, but I'm not sure it's a drop-dead certainty.
     
  3. BitterYoungMatador2

    BitterYoungMatador2 Well-Known Member

    No Phillies or Giants either, which are both fairly large markets.
     
  4. joe king

    joe king Active Member

    I'll take on your first point. No one can rig the system to guarantee smaller-market teams -- or any teams for that matter -- will play for the championship. All it can do is offer a more equal chance to build a team (and keep it together) that can compete for a title. And if such a system is in place, those smaller-market have a better chance of rising from the ashes (say, Pittsburgh or KC) and becoming a national feel-good story, or simply of becoming consistently good through smart management and player development and thereby developing a national following like the Colts (as discussed earlier).
     
  5. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    The Cardinals are dreadfully boring, corporate and unlikeable. People just don't know enough about the Brewers, Tigers or even the Rangers. All three good and compelling teams that should be in the mix for a while. The Rangers aren't going anywhere. Might as well get used to them playing in October for a while.
     
  6. joe king

    joe king Active Member

    Not to back Manky, but the numbers he cited were ALCS ratings. Philly and SF are therefore irrelevant.
     
  7. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Baseball has such a system. It's the minor leagues. And it's why the disparity between the Yankees and a small-market team like, say, the Twins or Brewers isn't nearly as enormous as the payrolls indicate. Throw in a crapshoot playoff system, and there's little need for a salary cap. I would support enforced slotting of draft pick bonuses.
     
  8. Cosmo

    Cosmo Well-Known Member

    I'll offer this. I'm a Baltimore fan, and for the last 15 years, my team has essentially been eliminated before Memorial Day. I go into the season knowing the team I root for has zero chance of competing. None. Zilch. Makes it hard for me to care about the rest of the league. I'll catch some of the World Series if it's convenient. But it's not appointment viewing for me. Not close.
     
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    That makes sense.

    But why aren't people in Philadelphia watching this week? Or Boston? Or Chicago? (Assuming that to be the case). Those markets are regular or semi-regular participants in the postseason and in pennant races.
     
  10. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    August's Yankees-Red Sox Sunday night game was the most watched ESPN baseball game in more than four years with nearly five million viewers.

    http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5372:red-sox-yankees-games-draw-big-viewership-numbers-for-espn-fox-and-mlb-network&catid=57:television&Itemid=122

    As long as they keep getting those kind of figures, we are going to continue to get Yankees-Red Sox up the rectum.
     
  11. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Speaking as a Phillies fan, I have found the experience of losing in the playoffs takes a little time to get over, and leaves you kind of washed out and not so intensely into baseball as you were before. But mostly, I think baseball fans have it right. They follow the sport MORE in the regular season, which is the truest expression of the sport as a competition, and slack off during the playoffs, which are, while very exciting if you're committed, a very random test of merit compared to a 162-game season. Also, postseason baseball as a television experience is tough to take. The pace of the games gets even more glacial, the Fox and TBS promos drive you mad, etc.
     
  12. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I'm the opposite. If my guys fell way out of it early, I'd still follow them through the regular season but I know I'd get caught up in the postseason. Not clear-the-calendar watching, but I'd definitely tune in. If my guys got eliminated very late -- or if they, perchance, messed the bed in an early playoff round (not losing mind you, but a total gag) -- I think I'd be too bummed to even tune in to the rest of the show.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page