World Series Ratings and ESPN: A Mini-Rant

by GreenNGoldSooner on Oct 27, 2006 6:03 AM PDT

So I'm watching Mike & Mike on ESPN2 this morning (I know, I know...what do I deserve if I'm watching these two?). And they're having a conversation in which they're both puzzled at the low TV ratings this World Series is getting. Is it because the Cards were an 83-win team? Or that the Tigers are a wildcard? Well, the Steelers were a wildcard, and nobody minded that. And everyone loved George Mason in the NCAA hoops tournament. People like underdogs! Could it be the small market thing? Nope. St. Louis is a huge baseball town and the Cards have a regional following. Besides, the Tigers were the feel good story of the year. In short, Mike and Mike were stumped at the low ratings.

I have an idea, boys. Could it possibly have something to do with the fact that your network, which rules the roost in national sports coverage, had spent an entire season pretending that only two teams--the Yankees and the Red Sox--mattered at all?

If I were Bud Selig and I were not a complete flippin' idiot (I know, that's already an impossible wish), I'd have long since been on the horn to Bristol screaming at the network executives about this rather predictable result of the kind of coverage they gave baseball all season.

Tweet Comment 69 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

there may be something to that

mike and mike....heh, sometimes i torture myself and click them on in the morning too.

rip 2006, it was nice while it lasted.

by ak_A on Oct 27, 2006 6:40 AM PDT reply actions

See what happens when the A's don't win

it all?

From day 1 NY vs NY was the media's focus.

St Louis is larger stronger market than you or they are giving credit for.

Detroit is very strong small market

"Heartland" of America may have poor appeal on larger markets of East & West Coasts.

It would seem simple enough to verify geographically where viewers are located.

by A s Eh on Oct 27, 2006 6:42 AM PDT reply actions

You're Misreading Me a Bit, AE

I was only reporting what M&M were saying.

But I am (and as I thought I indicated, even M&M are) aware that St. Louis is a very big market, with a truly regional fanbase (even in Oklahoma, I'm on the outskirts of it). For the first half century plus of organized baseball, the Cards and the Browns were the farthest west major league teams. And since nobody could possibly want to root for the Brownies, that left a huge chunk of the country to the Cards. Especially in the midwest farmbelt and the northern plains, you see Cards fans everywhere, though a combination of TBS, WGN, and ESPN Yankee worship has somewhat eroded that fan base over the last couple decades.

All of which is to entirely agree with you: there's nothing small market about the Redbirds.

If nothing else, he knew how to chew a stick of gum.

by GreenNGoldSooner on Oct 27, 2006 7:25 AM PDT up reply actions

Actually...

From what I've seen, TBS does more Braves worship, considering their corporate "brotherhood." Anybody remember what happened to them this year?

...for death awaits you all with nasty, big, pointy teeth!

by Lanway13 on Oct 27, 2006 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions

I think...

he was referring to only ESPN as the network guilty of Yankee worship out of the 3 he mentioned (by the way, WGN?? Don't know of that one.)

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital

by Cutthemullet on Oct 28, 2006 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions

WGN...

WGN is a Chicago based nationally televised station. They play a lotta White Sox and Cubs games.

"Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer." ~Ted Williams

by ZeroIndulgence on Oct 29, 2006 3:22 AM PDT up reply actions

Thanks and apologies for any misunderstandings

My criticisms were not of you but the media vagueness that was not necessary.

My real point was both coasts were left out of the world series party and logically less interested in the outcome.

I too had less interest but I'm still happy for the fans of the teams playing.

Hopefully our A's are involved soon but folks in Florida probably won't be watching unless Marlins make it as our opponents.

by A s Eh on Oct 28, 2006 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions

I think

it's a pretty similar debate as the Giants vs. A's tv ratings. The "Casual Baseball Fan" will flip on and see Boston and NYY, so they'll watch. When these teams are on FAR more than any other team, more people will watch them. For example, I was chatting with a UPS driver about baseball, and he said he's not much of a baseball fan, but when he does watch baseball, it's only the Yankees OR the Red Sox. He likes both teams! This has everything to do with ESPN's saturation of coverage over those two teams.

by sprtsnwyn on Oct 27, 2006 7:20 AM PDT reply actions

this is the result of the ESPNization of baseball

actually, fox is just as guilty of this. when all you do is hype up one freaking rivalry and two, possibly three (if the mets count) teams, you saturate the market with thoughts of only that rivalry or those teams. they had a golden opportunity to promote an incredible tigers team this season (from 119 losses to 1st place in 3 years), as well as the twins (incredible hot streak for much of the season), or even our a's (winning with 2nd and 3rd stringers all over the place), all quite remarkable stories, but they chose to talk red sox, yankees, and maybe the amazings' 24-7. it's their own damn fault, because as noted above, detroit and st. louis are big markets. the casual fan is watching this year, because they've been programmed to only care about their team and the other 3 teams ESPN and Fox shove down our throats.

"welcome to ME, motherf*^*er!" - tim hudson

by guy incognito on Oct 27, 2006 7:53 AM PDT reply actions

I agree wholeheartedly

the ESPNization of baseball is why this series is getting low ratings. I was out at a bar last night to watch the game and there were at least 15 people watching it with me. The true baseball fan watches this stuff. Now it seems as it's become popular to say that if the Red Sox and Yankees aren't in it then 'who cares.' My Sirius unit is broken and I've been forced to listen to morning DJ's on my way to work...it seems that they think it's cool to clown on baseball.

I really don't care what they say as baseball's turnstyles keep clicking in record numbers!

by SteveUJohnson on Oct 27, 2006 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions

Morning DJs are the apocalypse incarnate.

They'll clown on anything that doesn't have sound effects and do traffic updates every fifteen minutes.

And, for whatever reason, thinking people will listen.

"It's time to blow this team up." - Oaktoon, July 2006

by Ozzz on Oct 27, 2006 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions

I was listening to a similar discussion

on the radio last night and so far what I came up with is this.

-The lack of a salary cap has caused payrolls to skyrocket out of propotion. As a result of this the top players from most teams usually leave in free agency for the teams at the top of the payroll totem pole. This in turn causes small market teams, such as Oakland, to not have franchise players, or better yet players who become the face of a team and thus cause people to be interested. Familiarity breeds interest, thats why the Vlad's, Barry Bonds, Jeter's amd Ortiz's will bring in crowds, because they are star players whose sole name invokes interest in tuning in. Yes most baseball teams have taken to lose all players demanding a double digit payroll and instead opted to year in and year out go with good but not so well known rookie players (that I might add, leave once they become well known). This might allow most teams like say, the A's to survive but it does little to help draw attention to the game from casual fans. Common everyday people want to see something on tv that they are atleast familiar with, thats why they love the all star team that is the Yankees and the R. Sox.

-With baseball coverage dominated by the teams with the highest payrolls, theres little chance for interest to grow for other teams. Look at the NFL for instance, You have Raider fans, you have Broncos fans, you have people who live and die by the outcome of chargers/philidelphia/jets games. Its not that the baseball is slow (an excuse commonly thrown out by those who prefer not thinking during a sporting event) but rather other sports have more options for people, they give casual fans something more to root for. In the NBA, NFL and NHL there isnt the top two teams and then everyone else, rather the attention is spread out more evenly. Why only in baseball do we have a disproportionate bias towards only two teams? my belief.....Lack of salary caps and the dominance of the outrageous payrolls.

-the devil that is ESPN. as someone stated before, heres an idea ESPN...when you spend all season bashing and predicting the "inevitable" failure of a team that eventually makes it to the WS, dont be suprised when people arent interested in watching them play the fall classic. But I'll be a little more progressive here and state that its not all ESPN's fault. ESPN after all is a business, and a business' job is to ::gasp:: make money! Yes they do little to promote interest in other teams but that isnt really their job. Their job is to report sports, the sports which people are interested in. SO whos to blame if not ESPN?

-MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL. Ever get the feeling that there is only one league in MLB? I do, hell Ill be honest - I have absolutey no interest in the National league, none whatsoever. No DH means no aknowledgement from me. And its not just that I love watching home runs, but I believe it just shows the inability of the league to adapt to changing times. In a world where most sports have constant scoring happening on both sides, no casual fan has time to suffer the pain of watching the pitcher go up there and swing at what 1/100 times* (*based on my own non scientific research) a guaranteed out. This just doesnt make sense.
why are people not interested in the WS? how about because interleague games takes the excitement out of watching NL and AL teams meet for the first time in like....ever!
MLB's inability to step up to the plate and handle controversy in hopes that it just might go away reminds me more and more of John Kerry refusing to address the Swift Boat Veteran Ads in hopes that it would go away, well guess what? it didnt, and look where that got him? That the sport has lost some integrity because we allow the Barry Bonds and Kenny Rogers of this game to get away with stuff is an understatement, I would even go as far as saying the word Steroid has become synonymous with baseball. The more I learn about baseball the more it seems like the MLB is like a stubborn old man who refuses to aknowledge the changing times.

Anyway thats my 10 dollars and 2 cents.

by Amnesiac727 on Oct 27, 2006 8:29 AM PDT reply actions

rack him...

nice take Amnesiac.

What's sad to me is that baseball is a great sport. It's great for soooo many reasons.
(hopefully, Amnesiac, you read that book I gave you) but many sides of it are overlooked.

Baseball is great because a 0-0 game going into the 9th inning can be one of the most interesting and exciting baseball games you'll ever see.
Baseball is great because on any given pitch someone who has never made contact with a pitch hurled at them can hit it over 330 feet for a homerun.
Baseball has sooo many stories.
I believe that you have underdog stories, you have stories of triumph, stories of endurance that can appeal to all of America one way or the other.
ESPN (I believe with the approval of MLB) refuse to recognize those stories and try to get the casual fan with hype of NY/Bos. It's sad, but they made their bed, now MLB/FOX has to lie in it.
I still hope both teams lose the W.S.

"Straight outta Oakland, California where we sparkin on ya" - 2Pac

by Erik being Erik on Oct 27, 2006 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions

I did,

and so did the little brother. We loved it. Also I would like to point out that when I talk about the bad moves that baseball has made I am referring to the organization that is MLB. I love the sport and kick myself in the rear for not playing it when I way younger, but I think theres more to the sport than just 1st,2nd,3rd base and "tag-Youre out". So yeah, my criticism is for MLB not baseball in general.

by Amnesiac727 on Oct 27, 2006 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions

MLB is as much to blame as ESPN

Selig & Co. implemented a schedule heavy on division opponents because they want the Yankees and Red Sox to play 17 times a year, and they know the TV networks want to televise every one of those games. They implemented a wild-card system that allows for the possibility of a Yankees-Red Sox ALCS. They collect millions in TV rights fees from ESPN and Fox (and now TBS), knowing that it's the Yankees and Red Sox those networks are paying the big bucks for.

MLB is just as much to blame as the media for the media's obsession with the Yankees and the Red Sox.

by socal on Oct 27, 2006 8:58 AM PDT reply actions

And Don't Forget Interleague Play

Which creates three or four games that are less meaningful or interesting than the average intraleague game for every rivalry game, and which robs the World Series of much of its mystique. Without interleague play, this would have been the first time the Cards and Tigers had played each other in a real game since 1968. Fans might wonder how the Tigers young arms would do against Pujols and other Cards batters they'd never faced. Instead, these two teams faced off just this year.

If nothing else, he knew how to chew a stick of gum.

by GreenNGoldSooner on Oct 27, 2006 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions

Interleague play is a great idea

The things that are good about it need to be exploited and extended.

It's a big positive for ticket sales when the A's can bring the Giants and even the Dodgers to the Coliseum, and even the interleague clunkers like the Rockies or Pirates probably sell as many tickets as a series with the Royals or the Devil Rays.

The franchises that struggle with ticket sales would really benefit from more home games against regional teams in the opposite league -- the Royals would love more games vs. the Cardinals and Cubs, the Rays would love more games vs. the Braves and Marlins.

And if we had more of those regional matchups, we'd have less focus on the Yankees and Red Sox, IMO.

But MLB is unlikely to change interleague play substantially, because they just signed big TV contracts, they have more money than ever, and they have no incentive to make any changes at all.

by socal on Oct 27, 2006 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions

Horsefeathers!

Interleague play is great! Fans get to see teams and players that they would otherwise NEVER get to see! And as for World Series mystique, poppycock! Do you think that the near-all-time-low ratings would be higher if we didn't have IL play? I don't think it has anything to do with it. It's the ultimate bandwagon NY fans that are the problem. Real baseball fans watch the World Series regardless of who's in it. Those fair weather NY fans stop after their teams are out. Eff them, I say. I hope we don't see another NY team in the WS for 50 years.

I hope Detroit wins the next two games and forces a game 7. I want to stave off the end of the season and baseball withdrawal symptoms as long as I can.

"...sometimes I can't tell the difference between baseball and magic."- salb918 "Ellie plowed into him like an evil, pink unicorn."-ArakSOT

by McFood on Oct 27, 2006 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions

I haven't been watching.

And it's precisely because I can't stomach listening to the hacky announcers do their thing.

If they broadcast games with nothing more than crowd noise and stats on screen, I'd be there.

Or even if they did it like in the old days, with a big board and names being moved around like chess pieces, I'd take that.

I just don't do Fox or ESPN. It hurts my fragile mind.

"It's time to blow this team up." - Oaktoon, July 2006

by Ozzz on Oct 27, 2006 11:08 AM PDT reply actions

Aw, Hollywood,

but Tim McCarver and Joe Buck wuv you!

I love me some Esteban, even though he scares the hell out of me.

by Leopold Bloom on Oct 27, 2006 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions

Ahem.

"It's time to blow this team up." - Oaktoon, July 2006

by Ozzz on Oct 27, 2006 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions

You've made both

Tim and Joe Buck vert sad pandas.

As an aside, do you think Joe Buck got his ass kicked a lot as a child?

I love me some Esteban, even though he scares the hell out of me.

by Leopold Bloom on Oct 27, 2006 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions

It is quite ovbious

that he was subjected against his will to an invasive procedure involving a stick that has yet to be reversed.

by mikeA on Oct 27, 2006 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions

But if you manipulate the stick the right way..

..he'll say anything you want.

"It's time to get things started on the Muppet Show tonight!"

"It's time to blow this team up." - Oaktoon, July 2006

by Ozzz on Oct 27, 2006 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions

That would explain a lot,

though, to be perfectly honest, I found Kermit to be a lot less smarmy.

I love me some Esteban, even though he scares the hell out of me.

by Leopold Bloom on Oct 27, 2006 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions

YES!!! This is what I've been saying

Since ESPN does not promote anything but the Sox/Yanks, when those teams are out, they've programmed the public to not care anymore.

A self-fulfilling ratings prophecy.

They really need to branch out in order to begin courting everyone.

PLus, get rid of the f'ing musical acts, thats insulting to real fans.

Frank Thomas is big.

by robber23 on Oct 27, 2006 11:26 AM PDT reply actions

There are a lot of reasons...

...that the ratings are low and getting lower every year.

The Yanks/Red Sox reason is a major one, but it's a combination of all the reasons, including one, listed below.

Cable TV has blown up to where there are more options now than ever before. That's not just for sports but for all network TV across the board.
The fact that the World Series starts on a Saturday night rather than during the week doesn't help, either. However that issue has been dealt with since next year the Series will start during the week.
It's not just Detroit vs. St. Louis, but it's the Midwest vs. the Midwest. It's not as bad as NoCal vs. NoCal back in '89, but still the greatest amount of interest has to be in the Midwest and then falls sharply elsewhere. Guess what the highest rated World Series was? 1991, Minnesota and Atlanta: the Midwest vs. the South.

But I agree. If ESPN just followed the Patroits and Cowboys, the Knicks and Lakers and the Red Wings and Maple Leafs, those other three sports would suffer as well.

Lance Armstrong can make homophobic jokes on ESPN, yet Harold Reynolds pays the ultimate price? Explain that to me.

by gmoneymcg on Oct 27, 2006 11:43 AM PDT reply actions

re: football, ESPN is getting there

Cowboys on all the time...rather TO on all the time.

And now I'm getting sick of all the Reggie Bush coverage. The Monday night game btwn the Falcons and Saints, some stupid reporter actually had a debate on who is more exciting, Vick or Bush. It was only like Bush's 2nd or 3rd game as a pro.

by smash on Oct 27, 2006 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions

I wish there was more Reggie Bush coverage

It's not like he had only played 2-3 games total? Flip on the USC-Fresno State game....as electric as electric gets.

Not to mention he is a community oriented guy who has given countless time (NOT just money which is a lot easer to give) to rebuilding New Orelans.

Bring back Hammer.

by OaktownPower on Oct 27, 2006 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Not just TO

This week was non-stop Cowboys QB controversy.

If nothing else, he knew how to chew a stick of gum.

by GreenNGoldSooner on Oct 29, 2006 11:15 PM PST up reply actions

did they execute harold reynolds?

Bill James on Duane Kuiper: "It's absolutely incredible that a player this bad could be given 3000 at bats in the major leagues." -- Baseball Abstract, 1982

by blueconversechucks on Oct 27, 2006 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions

I agree on all...

Also one of the lowest-rated World Series ever?

Yankees vs. Mets, 2000.

That '91 Series was awesome. The Braves had captivated the whole South (I was in Alabama at the time), so the ratings had to be boosted by good numbers not only in Atlanta but Birmingham, Charlotte and cities in Florida (remember it was pre-Marlins and Devil Rays). The quality of the baseball didn't hurt, either. :)

"So, whatever, Ozzie." -- Nick Swisher

by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Oct 27, 2006 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions

Lack of star power

I agree that blame can be laid at the doors of Bristol CT and the league offices in NYC (and their Milwaukee annex) for their incessant pimping of the Eastern seaboard axis of evil, and the thought by extension that if it ain't the Yanks/Red Sox it ain't worth watching.

Another factor, though, is the way the league and the MLBPA markets its stars. The machinery touts the stars in the "prime" cities quite well, but an enormous talent like Albert Pujols gets comparatively little attention. The league has always struggled with marketing individual players (as compared with teams, with which it does a passable job). Casual fans will tune in to watch Jeter and ARod, or Clemens, or even Ichiro. But they don't tune in for Pudge and Chris Carpenter, not to mention the Detroit pitching staff. St. Louis and Detroit lack the big name star appeal, which is partly a function of the seaboard fixation, partly a function of MLB+MLBPA's player-specific marketing efforts, and partly because there simply aren't as many top tier stars on the Cards and Tigers.

I threw that horseshoe into the weeds to see what luck can bring

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Oct 27, 2006 12:31 PM PDT reply actions

What I don't understand...

Doesn't the Sox/Yankees rivalry seem to be nearly dead, now that the Sox broke the curse? It's starting to feel like ESPN/FOX is trying to create any kind of melodrama between the two teams, hoping that a storyline as profitable as the curse will arise.

"One thing about ground balls. They don't go out of the ball park." - Tim McCarver

Off The Record

by JLaff on Oct 27, 2006 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions

Your comment

reminded me of this: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/52032

"We are a complete freak show." -- Billy Beane

by day-to-day on Oct 27, 2006 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions

Next year...

I hope Toronto is somehow able to win the AL East, and the Wild Card will come out of the West or Central. And it would be cool for someone other than the Mets to win the NL East next year.

Can you imagine a non-New York/Boston playoffs? A guy can dream though, can't he?

"One thing about ground balls. They don't go out of the ball park." - Tim McCarver

Off The Record

by JLaff on Oct 27, 2006 12:59 PM PDT reply actions

I'm with you, bud.

PArt of the dream was already fulfilled when the Braves missed the playoffs. Ten years of the Tomahawk Chop and accompanying chant was 9 years too many.

Ohhh...Ohh oh oh oh, ohh oh oh shut the HELL UP!

"...sometimes I can't tell the difference between baseball and magic."- salb918 "Ellie plowed into him like an evil, pink unicorn."-ArakSOT

by McFood on Oct 27, 2006 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions

Same mistake as "I love this game!"

Owners and leagues can't control the outcome on the field. Players get hurt, they perform badly when they're supposed to perform well, they get caught for cheating, etc. So any league or team that bases its financial fortunes on the teams' performance or on the performance of individual players is just putting a dollar in the slots and praying.

The NFL has solved all this by making the players and the games irrelevant. NFL game are simply a platform to enable: 1) gambling 2) public drunkenness and otherwise unacceptable behavior (e.g., painting your body in team colors and screaming at people -- try that on a street corner and see if you're allowed to do it for 3 hours) 3) social bonding, largely male bonding; and 4) video game sales.

Even if your team completely sucks, you can still bet on them to beat the spread, go to the Coliseum to tailgate 4 hours early, get drunk with your friends, scream at the other team, and cheer as the Raiders kick a late field goal to bring you to within 15 1/2 points and win you $100. And you can do all that stuff for the Super Bowl, too, except you'll tailgate at your house with your friends.

Baseball and ESPN thought they'd solved the predictability problem with the Superteam in NYC. Well, they weren't predictable enough. But I expect them to continue to look for ways to take the game (and the players) out of the business just like the NFL has.

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Oct 27, 2006 3:14 PM PDT reply actions

Depends on the street corner

As you well know, body painted stranger screaming at Telegraph and Durant is not only allowed, it's considered high public art. Unless your colors of choice are cardinal and white.

I threw that horseshoe into the weeds to see what luck can bring

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Oct 27, 2006 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions

Well sure,

if you want to be beaten up by Polka-Dot Man or the Orange Juice Guy. Be my guest.

Me, I'm heading for Universal, Rasputin's and Leopolds for some used records. After that, Silverball Gardens for some Tempest. Then I'll stop by the Ren for some coffee.

< /1982]

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Oct 27, 2006 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions

Beaten up by opposing painted screamers

And now we've come full circle back to football.

I threw that horseshoe into the weeds to see what luck can bring

by FreeSeatUpgrade on Oct 27, 2006 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions

And Rick Starr could do the play-by-play

"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s

by Nick on Oct 27, 2006 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions

Hmmm

I wonder if Rick Starr built the KYCY transmitter.

Some are sabermetricians.

by andeux on Oct 27, 2006 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions

you forgot fantasy football

I don't think I've seen a MNF game yet where Tony Kornheiser didn't point out which of the guys on the field was on his fantasy team...at first I thought he was being sarcastic about the fantasy football craze, by week 2 I realized he wasn't. I'm as big of a fantasy football geek as the next guy, but yeah, it definitely adds even more weight to your "irrelevance of games" argument.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital

by Cutthemullet on Oct 28, 2006 9:00 PM PDT up reply actions

I don't buy it

Is it popularity of the Red Sox and Yankees because of ESPN, or is ESPN's focus on the Red Sox and Yankees because they were already popular?

Personally, I think it's the latter. The Yankees have ALWAYS had a national following. And I think many who just had a hatred of the Yankees became Red Sox fans because they are the epitome of Yankee hating.

ESPN and Fox consider the Red Sox and Yankees big news because they know folks will watch and listen.

"So, whatever, Ozzie." -- Nick Swisher

by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Oct 27, 2006 3:37 PM PDT reply actions

I agree with you

The Yankees have always had a hufe fanbase, bandwagon and die-hard. And in my experience, people who grow up Red Sox fans stay Red Sox fans, regardless of where they're living. They probably have the strongest group of NRAFs out there. They don't pick up new teams once they move out of New England.

I don't think it's fair to blame good teams with large fanbases for the fact that the ratings are lower. Hell, I'm a die-hard fan and I've only caught about 18 innings total. I just don't have any rooting interest in these teams.

Kettlecorn! Swishercorn!

by TurnTwo on Oct 27, 2006 7:38 PM PDT up reply actions

Shouldn't that be NRRSF?

When the lights...go down...in the city...

by senork on Oct 27, 2006 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes.

Forgive me. It's been a long week. I need to recharge my batteries.

Kettlecorn! Swishercorn!

by TurnTwo on Oct 27, 2006 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions

kinda both

It started out as ESPN giving the BoSox/Yanks more coverage due to higher demand, but over time this turned into ignoring other teams, which then caused more casual fans to only notice those two teams, because they are the only teams that get any significant coverage/regognition.

by sypher1504 on Oct 27, 2006 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions

Absolutely!

Chicken or the egg. ESPN gives disproportionate coverage to the Yanks-Red Sox because they are successful in doing so. Yankees and Red Sox merchandise accounts for nearly 70% of all MLB gear sold nationally. The question is are the fans getting what they want, or are they being told what they want and just following orders.
To a degree, I blame the casual fans who only care about Yankees - Red Sox... I blame the fools who only go to A's games when they play the Yankees or the Red Sox.
But did ESPN create this monster, or are they merely capatalizing on it?

Live forever or die trying.

by oaklandpete on Oct 28, 2006 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions

Capitalizing

ESPN and other media outlets will capitalize on anything that grabs attention. Take last year, for example: They sure liked focusing on the White Sox, possibly thanks to Ozzie Guillen (media loves a quote producer).

I also have the feeling that if the Cubs get really good, watch out -- especially now that they have Lou Piniella.

"So, whatever, Ozzie." -- Nick Swisher

by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Oct 28, 2006 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions

both

They were already popular, obviously, but starting around the beginning of the Epstein era ESPN flooded their programming with coverage that in turn increased the popularity.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital

by Cutthemullet on Oct 28, 2006 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Star Power- definitely

I agree with many of the very good posts above.

This country does not and has never really cared about team play - it is obsessed with 'stars.
It is one reasoin wshy a great sport like soccer has so much trouble in the USA.

by Herm4430 on Oct 27, 2006 3:45 PM PDT reply actions

Except when Pele was here...

...which kind of proves your point...

"So, whatever, Ozzie." -- Nick Swisher

by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Oct 27, 2006 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions

Haven't seen this point raised yet.

One of the principal reasons for the lower ratings is that baseball is becoming increasingly irrelevant to the average sports fan. Or in other words, people like basketball and football (and NASCAR) better more than they ever have before.

"Next thing you know, they'll have me taking an overdose of pills."--Milton Bradley

by jeepers on Oct 27, 2006 5:05 PM PDT reply actions

Actually, I think

basketball is hurting maybe even more than baseball right now. But I think your more-general point is on the money. Football has become kind of the giant, the Big 1 rather than one of the Big 3. NASCAR has grown tremendously. Also, the newer extreme sports I think draw the interest of some kids who would otherwise have nothing else to do but watch baseball.

"WTF is wrong with you people TASTELESS COMMENTS. I'm disgusted. Mocking a 10 year old's horrible painful death." --eshock

by rubin sierra on Oct 28, 2006 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions

Using the Wild Card as an excuse is DUMB.

I keep hearing the baseball purists are upset over how wild card teams are easily advancing and winning the World Series. This is a stupid argument since the wild card team in baseball is usually better than most of the division winners. When your wild card team is winning 100, 99, and 97 gms, and out performing other division winners, you should not have anything to complain about.

Because of the low ratings, the commisioner is considering some modifications to the format of the ALDS, such as changes to the home/away schedule favoring the Div winner by eliminating 1 hm gm from the wild card team.

I agree with the poster. When ESPN puts its focus on 2 teams all year, while paying little to no attention to the rest of the league, these are the ratings they deserve.

by sf drift king on Oct 27, 2006 5:19 PM PDT reply actions

proposed ALDS modification

so the wild card team would have...1 home game and 4 away? WTF?

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital

by Cutthemullet on Oct 28, 2006 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions

Cards win the series

and ESPN has a regular front page.. you wouldn't even know they won if you glanced. ridiculous.

"Imagine all the Hebrews goin dumb"-Tell Me When To Go

by ohad on Oct 27, 2006 8:43 PM PDT reply actions

well now they've changed it

"Imagine all the Hebrews goin dumb"-Tell Me When To Go

by ohad on Oct 27, 2006 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions

Another reason

There are too many games in a season. With more than 10 times as many games per season that the NFL has, twice as many as basketball, and about three times as many as hockey, people get tired out. I know I do. Unless the A's are doing something very noteworth (winning streak, hitting streaks, etc.), I actually pay little attention to the team's everyday doings in July and early August. Pretty much all I do is check the score online and read the article in the paper the next day (unless I go to the game).

When October comes, if my team isn't in it, I won't watch the playoffs unless the games are being presented as worth more of my time than my other alternatives. It doesn't matter what's happening on the field. If it was a game with 10 errors and it was lopsided as hell, I would watch as long as the commentators and director were doing their jobs effectively--that is, making me want to watch, or at the very least not making me wonder if Mythbusters is on. I agree with whoever posted above that if all they did was follow the ball with the camera and had crowd noise, I would enjoy that more than the current situation.

If Fox is turning baseball fans off from the playoffs, they are doing something wrong, because that means that they sure aren't attracting poeple with only a passing interest in baseball. Right now I am positive that I would rather go out and watch a little league game than have to watch the World Series on Fox.

When the lights...go down...in the city...

by senork on Oct 27, 2006 8:45 PM PDT reply actions

heh

That last sentence says it all.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital

by Cutthemullet on Oct 28, 2006 9:07 PM PDT up reply actions

ESPN

Eastern Sports Programming Network... They started solely on Boston and New York, who cares about the the rest of the nation!

"I see Milton Bradley being the Oaktown player that breaks out this year." breaks out... breaks out of where? jail?

by gdub171 on Oct 28, 2006 2:18 AM PDT reply actions

Correct -- It's the same bias in every sport

Different teams in every sport, but eastern-centric in every sport.

ESPN didn't create that bias; it was around long before ESPN went on the air. But they have certainly emphasized it.

by socal on Oct 28, 2006 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions

not in every sport

The Lakers' Shaq-Kobe-Phil Jackson-Jerry Buss-any other involved member of the Laker organization I'm forgetting-soap opera got more coverage than the games themselves. For the NFL, Ed Werder might as well live at the Cowboys' training complex. Baseball is the only sport victimized by a bias towards east coast teams.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital

by Cutthemullet on Oct 28, 2006 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions

It's true that MLB has shown itself

clumsy in its feeble attempts to market individual players. They should focus more effort in getting their good young players names out in the media.

As far as the steroid issue, the pine tar issue, corked bat issue, and other controversial subjects, these are actually good for baseball. Especially if you suscribe to the notion that there is no such thing as bad publicity. Terrell Owens can attest to this altruism. Baseball needs take steps that will get the talking heads on sports shows to start screaming and ranting. As sad as it is to say, these are the types of things that get peoples attention. When they see this type of controversy, they are more likely to tune in and see what the fuss is all about. It's worked well for the NFL and for the NBA for years.

Another thing MLB could due to attract more attention is to lay off the fines/suspensions for on the field brawls. Especially the ones where no one is injured. As sad as it is to say, conflict sells in this country. Which we you get right down to it, that's what sports is all about. Baseball brawls are akin to the people who watch NASCAR on the chance that they may witness a spectacular crash.

None of the above is good baseball mind you, but IT will get the publics attention and bring a lot more people out to the yards or the TV set.

"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer

by alox on Oct 28, 2006 10:10 PM PDT reply actions

You must have been a huge XFL fan.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Oct 28, 2006 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions

so many individual points to respond to...

I'll pick the one about controversy working well for the NBA over the years. That's entirely false. Did the Carlesimo choking incident make people rush out and buy tickets? How about the Pacers-Pistons brawl where fans honestly feared for their safety? And those are just examples of on-the-court incidents...off-the-court could fill a book. Sure, it gets people talking, but the tone of the conversation is usually how the NBA has gone downhill ever since MJ retired for good and left behind a league full of tattooed (I love how people are somehow offended by the number of tattoos a player has...but many conserative sorts are) "thugs." While I personally am a fan of professional basketball, and do enjoy some of the "controversies" that haven't resulted in any harm, the same cannot be said for many fans, or former fans as they now are.

"We don't want haddock and chips, we want cod. In cod we trust." --Ghostigital, the pride of Iceland

by Cutthemullet on Oct 28, 2006 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions