The business of baseball, ratings, and the WS

[Hallsgator]

I posted this in Sweeness' thread, but it was locked?? It seemed like an interesting discussion, we actually discussed the topic in one of my classes today.

Anyways:

It's good for the Rangers. Hopefully this will help them repay some of their debt.

I also think it could help WS ratings. People may be more interested in seeing this upstart, high octane Rangers team as opposed to another Yankees WS.

But then again, people could watch the first 10 minutes, see the Rangers and Giants lineups, and ask who? Then go to something else.

Will be interesting to see what happens. However, parity is usually not a bad thing.


What's your take on small market, lesser known teams, with the possibility of the Giants, going to the World Series. As opposed to the household names of the Phillies and Yanks.

 

[ThoseBackPages]

since FOX is not available to much of the North East Cablevision customers, the Giants advancing would be a great FU to FOX

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

What's best for baseball is to always have the best teams win...

The game is useless when the best teams DON'T win.

 

[mannyramirezcollec]

FOX will not be happy with a Giants/Rangers world series. Ratings will be way down anyways due to the Cablevision/Fox dispute. What happened ratings wise in the 2005 World Series?

 

[Hallsgator]

since FOX is not available to much of the North East Cablevision customers, the Giants advancing would be a great FU to FOX

Wow, had no idea. That seems dumb on MLB's part. Why wouldn't you make sure your product is shown in the whole country.

 

[ThoseBackPages]

since FOX is not available to much of the North East Cablevision customers, the Giants advancing would be a great FU to FOX

Wow, had no idea. That seems dumb on MLB's part. Why wouldn't you make sure your product is shown in the whole country.

millions of dollars, what else is new? lol

 

[Hallsgator]

FOX will not be happy with a Giants/Rangers world series. Ratings will be way down anyways due to the Cablevision/Fox dispute. What happened ratings wise in the 2005 World Series?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Seri ... on_ratings

Looks like the Yanks/Phillies last year was pretty widely viewed. Would have been interesting to compare this year and last year if it was a repeat of the teams.

 

[Sweetness]

Hell ya the Yankees lose is great for baseball. It's great that a team in financial trouble builds a team through their own farm system goes out and spends $ wisely and has success. Every time a smaller team or struggling team has success it's great for the future of the game.

Now I just have to hope any NBA team other than the Miami Heat win. Parody is what makes professional sport exciting.

 

[sportscardtheory]

I don't see why any fan would care that "popular" teams aren't in the World Series. The game is about who wins, not about who loses.

 

[Hallsgator]

I don't see why any fan would care that "popular" teams aren't in the World Series. The game is about who wins, not about who loses.

As a fan I agree. But since I've started studying Sport Management here at OU and working for a minor league team, it's really important to look at the business side as well.

 

[rymflaherty]

I think your kidding yourself if you think "upstart" teams move the ratings.
And not being rude, to a certain agree I believe in that as a fan, and would like to think it is true.....but I can't imagine the Yankees not being a substantially bigger ratings draw.

The problem to me is - those that agree with what you are saying are probably already baseball fans and thus already going to be watching the WS. The big ratings come from being able to lure causal fans - and at least imo the casual fan tunes in when the big teams and superstars are involved. It's like in the NBA when the Spurs won their titles and the ratings were garbage, Orlando Magic (upstart team) barely registers......but give the fans Kobe, Lakers vs. Celtics, or Lebron and you get the highest ratings possible.
Also doesn't help that you rarely get "Cinderella" type teams in the pros (like in the NCAA tourny) and it doesn;t help that Yahoo currently has a front page story claiming the Rangers and Giants would be amongst the worst teams to win a WS ever.

I agree though that I think it's good for the game and again real baseball fans....just what's good for baseball fans and what's good for the network/ratings can be two completely different things. *edit* forgot to mention - I suppose Fox does have a chance if they really hype Lee pitching. His starts could pull in decent ratings I'd imagine

 

[vwnut13]

Hell ya the Yankees lose is great for baseball. It's great that a team in financial trouble builds a team through their own farm system goes out and spends $ wisely and has success. Every time a smaller team or struggling team has success it's great for the future of the game.

Now I just have to hope any NBA team other than the Miami Heat win. Parody is what makes professional sport exciting.

Wouldn't you just crap your pants if the Giants lose there next two games.

Having a high payroll and losing in game 6 of the ALCS is a lot less embarrassing than having a high payroll and finishing fourth.

 

[Hallsgator]

I think your kidding yourself if you think "upstart" teams move the ratings.
And not being rude, to a certain agree I believe in that as a fan, and would like to think it is true.....but I can't imagine the Yankees not being a substantially bigger ratings draw.

The problem to me is - those that agree with what you are saying are probably already baseball fans and thus already going to be watching the WS. The big ratings come from being able to lure causal fans - and at least imo the casual fan tunes in when the big teams and superstars are involved. It's like in the NBA when the Spurs won their titles and the ratings were garbage, Orlando Magic (upstart team) barely registers......but give the fans Kobe, Lakers vs. Celtics, or Lebron and you get the highest ratings possible.
Also doesn't help that you rarely get "Cinderella" type teams in the pros (like in the NCAA tourny) and it doesn;t help that Yahoo currently has a front page story claiming the Rangers and Giants would be amongst the worst teams to win a WS ever.

I agree though that I think it's good for the game and again real baseball fans....just what's good for baseball fans and what's good for the network/ratings can be two completely different things.

I know there's a 99% chance the upstart teams won't help ratings, but I was just trying to look at it from another perspective.

And looking at the WS ratings from the 80s, they had 20+ million watching each game. Wow. Now they're lucky to get 15 million.

 

[Hallsgator]

Hell ya the Yankees lose is great for baseball. It's great that a team in financial trouble builds a team through their own farm system goes out and spends $ wisely and has success. Every time a smaller team or struggling team has success it's great for the future of the game.

Now I just have to hope any NBA team other than the Miami Heat win. Parody is what makes professional sport exciting.

Wouldn't you just crap your pants if the Giants lose there next two games.

Having a high payroll and losing in game 6 of the ALCS is a lot less embarrassing than having a high payroll and finishing fourth.

OK, we get it. I think you've said this 8 times lol.

The Yankees will always be in the playoff mix.

 

[rymflaherty]

I think your kidding yourself if you think "upstart" teams move the ratings.
And not being rude, to a certain agree I believe in that as a fan, and would like to think it is true.....but I can't imagine the Yankees not being a substantially bigger ratings draw.

The problem to me is - those that agree with what you are saying are probably already baseball fans and thus already going to be watching the WS. The big ratings come from being able to lure causal fans - and at least imo the casual fan tunes in when the big teams and superstars are involved. It's like in the NBA when the Spurs won their titles and the ratings were garbage, Orlando Magic (upstart team) barely registers......but give the fans Kobe, Lakers vs. Celtics, or Lebron and you get the highest ratings possible.
Also doesn't help that you rarely get "Cinderella" type teams in the pros (like in the NCAA tourny) and it doesn;t help that Yahoo currently has a front page story claiming the Rangers and Giants would be amongst the worst teams to win a WS ever.

I agree though that I think it's good for the game and again real baseball fans....just what's good for baseball fans and what's good for the network/ratings can be two completely different things.

I know there's a 99% chance the upstart teams won't help ratings, but I was just trying to look at it from another perspective.

And looking at the WS ratings from the 80s, they had 20+ million watching each game. Wow. Now they're lucky to get 15 million.

Well hopefully you are right.
I personally hope it is Tex and SF.
Like I said - I think a lot of baseball fans with no affiliation to the teams left would probably agree, just to get the big numbers it seems you need the big markets and something to bring in casual sports fans.

 

[Hallsgator]

I think your kidding yourself if you think "upstart" teams move the ratings.
And not being rude, to a certain agree I believe in that as a fan, and would like to think it is true.....but I can't imagine the Yankees not being a substantially bigger ratings draw.

The problem to me is - those that agree with what you are saying are probably already baseball fans and thus already going to be watching the WS. The big ratings come from being able to lure causal fans - and at least imo the casual fan tunes in when the big teams and superstars are involved. It's like in the NBA when the Spurs won their titles and the ratings were garbage, Orlando Magic (upstart team) barely registers......but give the fans Kobe, Lakers vs. Celtics, or Lebron and you get the highest ratings possible.
Also doesn't help that you rarely get "Cinderella" type teams in the pros (like in the NCAA tourny) and it doesn;t help that Yahoo currently has a front page story claiming the Rangers and Giants would be amongst the worst teams to win a WS ever.

I agree though that I think it's good for the game and again real baseball fans....just what's good for baseball fans and what's good for the network/ratings can be two completely different things.

I know there's a 99% chance the upstart teams won't help ratings, but I was just trying to look at it from another perspective.

And looking at the WS ratings from the 80s, they had 20+ million watching each game. Wow. Now they're lucky to get 15 million.

Well hopefully you are right.
I personally hope it is Tex and SF.
Like I said - I think a lot of baseball fans with no affiliation to the teams left would probably agree, just to get the big numbers it seems you need the big markets and something to bring in casual sports fans.

Yea, I don't see the casual fan being pumped about Sanchez vs. Lewis like we are, lol. Oh well.

 

[JoshHamilton]

Please tell me why I should remotely care about how much revenue FOX makes from the World Series. I don't own any stock in FOX

MLB ranks far lower than the NFL in tv ratings. That's because the main revenue generator for baseball isn't network contracts, it's ticket and merch sales.

 

[James52411]

Sometimes you have to take a long-term view regarding what is best for a sport. Dallas/Arlington is a very large market and having the Rangers make the World Series should create additional interest in the game and new, young fans for the future (kids become fans when their local team is successful). Really, San Francisco is also plenty big. So, this isn't two small markets in the title game. The ratings will be a little down but not terrible.

I think it is beneficial in the long term to have Texas in the Series because it is a positive when fans in multiple markets have hope that their team can take out the big money teams in the playoffs. Furthermore, MLB needs to do a better job of promoting stars like Josh Hamilton and Tim Lincecum/Roy Halladay and teams not named the Yankees and Red Sox, and this World Series will give them the chance to do that. The long term health of baseball depends on having all of its larger markets invested in the game and also having small markets believe they can compete. This World Series serves those long term goals and thus is a positive for the game.

 

[rsmath]

It's good for the Rangers. Hopefully this will help them repay some of their debt.

I'm thinking that's what the Rangers/FSN SW megadeal contract extension is all about! :lol:

IMHO, FSN SW probably will get screwed but they had to fend off a potential new upstart plus keep from getting a gaping hole in their summer programming schedule since NHL doesn't play in the summer... yet.

As for WS ratings, FOX probably get hammered - Phils might help a little if they can battle back to win the NLCS and of course if it's a short series, FOX will see some red on the bottom line like usual for anything shorter than 6 games. MLB shouldn't care about ratings - they have their money in the bank and a great stategical advantage in 2013 when the MLB contract is up for renewal.