MLB 2025 Season

The Juggler

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

I think baseball is trying too hard to get people who will never like baseball to like baseball.  

Well I think baseball is better when it moves it a brisker pace. The same game shouldn't take 20-30 minutes longer, on average, than it did when I was a kid.

You can trace baseball's loss of popularity to other sports to this timeframe. I think it matters and I think it matters going forward when trying to attract new, younger, fans/players. 

What is baseball's loss in popularity?  I don't really see it.

People, younger people, will like baseball if the team in their area is good.  They won't if it isn't. If baseball wants to worry about popularity, they should put more efforts into making sure more than a third of the league is actually trying to compete than trying to shave fractions of time off the game.

Sure, do things to speed it up, but they are hell bent on speeding up the game which won't do shit if teams aren't enjoyable to watch.  No one is going to watch the Diamondback whether the games are 3 hours or 2.5 hours if the team stinks. 

The problem with baseball popularity is that there were 3 teams interested in Bryce Harper, not the fact that a game may take over 3 hours.

Attendance. 
Tv ratings. 
Less kids playing the game than before. 
I think any way you slice it, it’s obvious baseball’s popularity has declined over the last thirty years. That’s not really up for debate.
Baseball was regional before these numbers started slipping. To ignore them is to the detriment of the sports’s future.  

Again, there’s no reason why the same game should be played 30 minutes slower than it used to be played. That’s got to be a factor. 

Cliffy6745

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

I think baseball is trying too hard to get people who will never like baseball to like baseball.  

Well I think baseball is better when it moves it a brisker pace. The same game shouldn't take 20-30 minutes longer, on average, than it did when I was a kid.

You can trace baseball's loss of popularity to other sports to this timeframe. I think it matters and I think it matters going forward when trying to attract new, younger, fans/players. 

What is baseball's loss in popularity?  I don't really see it.

People, younger people, will like baseball if the team in their area is good.  They won't if it isn't. If baseball wants to worry about popularity, they should put more efforts into making sure more than a third of the league is actually trying to compete than trying to shave fractions of time off the game.

Sure, do things to speed it up, but they are hell bent on speeding up the game which won't do shit if teams aren't enjoyable to watch.  No one is going to watch the Diamondback whether the games are 3 hours or 2.5 hours if the team stinks. 

The problem with baseball popularity is that there were 3 teams interested in Bryce Harper, not the fact that a game may take over 3 hours.

Attendance. 
Tv ratings. 
Less kids playing the game than before. 
I think any way you slice it, it’s obvious baseball’s popularity has declined over the last thirty years. That’s not really up for debate.
Baseball was regional before these numbers started slipping. To ignore them is to the detriment of the sports’s future.  

Again, there’s no reason why the same game should be played 30 minutes slower than it used to be played. That’s got to be a factor. 

I don’t think the popularity is declining. I think teams aren’t putting exciting teams on then field. Look at Philly. It’s a perfect example 

Cliffy6745

I can’t wait for Phillies fans to turn off the tv because Bryce Harper and Hoskins are having such good at bats or the Phillies are scoring too many runs, but gosh, this game is taking too long

Edit: point being, plenty of people like baseball and would invest the time if it was worth while. No one is going to come back to baseball because a half hour is cut off the game. They’ll come back to baseball if they have a fun team to watch. It’s really simple as that. There is absolutely no drama in the American League this year. It is almost a given that 4 playoff spots are set.  There are about 6 teams in the AL actually trying. Why would someone invest 162 games into a team that is no fun to watch?  The biggest issue facing baseball can be seen in the Machado and Harper markets. They can do whatever they want about pace of play, but nothing will do anything if teams are boring to watch 

The Juggler

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

I think baseball is trying too hard to get people who will never like baseball to like baseball.  

Well I think baseball is better when it moves it a brisker pace. The same game shouldn't take 20-30 minutes longer, on average, than it did when I was a kid.

You can trace baseball's loss of popularity to other sports to this timeframe. I think it matters and I think it matters going forward when trying to attract new, younger, fans/players. 

What is baseball's loss in popularity?  I don't really see it.

People, younger people, will like baseball if the team in their area is good.  They won't if it isn't. If baseball wants to worry about popularity, they should put more efforts into making sure more than a third of the league is actually trying to compete than trying to shave fractions of time off the game.

Sure, do things to speed it up, but they are hell bent on speeding up the game which won't do shit if teams aren't enjoyable to watch.  No one is going to watch the Diamondback whether the games are 3 hours or 2.5 hours if the team stinks. 

The problem with baseball popularity is that there were 3 teams interested in Bryce Harper, not the fact that a game may take over 3 hours.

Attendance. 
Tv ratings. 
Less kids playing the game than before. 
I think any way you slice it, it’s obvious baseball’s popularity has declined over the last thirty years. That’s not really up for debate.
Baseball was regional before these numbers started slipping. To ignore them is to the detriment of the sports’s future.  

Again, there’s no reason why the same game should be played 30 minutes slower than it used to be played. That’s got to be a factor. 

I don’t think the popularity is declining. I think teams aren’t putting exciting teams on then field. Look at Philly. It’s a perfect example 

https://imaginesports.com/news/baseball-rank-in-popularity
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2018/06/15/mlb-attendance-rate-declining

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1592862002
I don’t see how it’s not declining, Cliff. I get revenues are high...but literally every other metric we measure this stuff by shows its popularity declining. 

Cliffy6745

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

I think baseball is trying too hard to get people who will never like baseball to like baseball.  

Well I think baseball is better when it moves it a brisker pace. The same game shouldn't take 20-30 minutes longer, on average, than it did when I was a kid.

You can trace baseball's loss of popularity to other sports to this timeframe. I think it matters and I think it matters going forward when trying to attract new, younger, fans/players. 

What is baseball's loss in popularity?  I don't really see it.

People, younger people, will like baseball if the team in their area is good.  They won't if it isn't. If baseball wants to worry about popularity, they should put more efforts into making sure more than a third of the league is actually trying to compete than trying to shave fractions of time off the game.

Sure, do things to speed it up, but they are hell bent on speeding up the game which won't do shit if teams aren't enjoyable to watch.  No one is going to watch the Diamondback whether the games are 3 hours or 2.5 hours if the team stinks. 

The problem with baseball popularity is that there were 3 teams interested in Bryce Harper, not the fact that a game may take over 3 hours.

Attendance. 
Tv ratings. 
Less kids playing the game than before. 
I think any way you slice it, it’s obvious baseball’s popularity has declined over the last thirty years. That’s not really up for debate.
Baseball was regional before these numbers started slipping. To ignore them is to the detriment of the sports’s future.  

Again, there’s no reason why the same game should be played 30 minutes slower than it used to be played. That’s got to be a factor. 

I don’t think the popularity is declining. I think teams aren’t putting exciting teams on then field. Look at Philly. It’s a perfect example 

https://imaginesports.com/news/baseball-rank-in-popularity
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2018/06/15/mlb-attendance-rate-declining

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1592862002
I don’t see how it’s not declining, Cliff. I get revenues are high...but literally every other metric we measure this stuff by shows its popularity declining. 

You’re missing the point and you know it. Fine ratings are down but you are arguing that shortening the game will help improve them when in fact it won’t do a fucking thing.

Take the Phillies for example, they will likely play longer games than they have played in a good 5 years.  By your logic, their attendance and ratings will decline. Willing to put money on that?

The fact is there are less teams trying to compete and less reason for people to dedicate daily attention to. If the white Sox signed Harper, think their popularity would go up? So the issue with baseball is that there were 3 teams interested in harper and not the fact the games take too long.

It’s not complicated. Baseball is regional. It is and it always has been. The solution to better regional ratings and attendance is teams being more interested in winning. Ratings and attendance are just fine in areas where they are putting decent teams on the field. I repeat, there are a grand total of 5-6 teams in the AL that have a realistic shot of making the playoffs 

If you build it, they will come. Baseball will be popular and draw 2.5 million in almost any market who puts a good team on the field 

Cliffy6745

Also, Americans are stupid and I am 99% sure you can track the decline of this country to the date football overtook baseball in popularity 

HesCalledDyer

tempo_n_groove said:

HesCalledDyer said:

He also struck out a lot less.  Clever wording, too.  "Slight uptick" to describe his improvements, but 10 runs (which could all be accounted for in HR differential), 14 hits, & 1 fewer SB are just "went down."  Also, I wouldn't really call 20 walks and a 24 point improvement in OBP as "slight" upticks.

Fair enough.  His OBP went up because his ab's went down and walks went up not because he struck out less.

But anywho, if you use WAR as a tool he was a whole point lower his MVP year.  

Last year his performance really suffered.  He did have almost 3/4 of the ab's in previous years but didn't put anything together.

Is it because he was hurt last year?  People expect a huge comeback from him this year.

Yeah, ongoing shoulder injury that he just never really got good from. Chili Davis supposedly made him change something in his swing mechanics which apparently either led to the injury and/or re-agitated it.  He is back to his old swing and says the injury is fully healed & he feels great.  Time will tell but he's been hitting pretty well this spring.

The Juggler

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

I think baseball is trying too hard to get people who will never like baseball to like baseball.  

Well I think baseball is better when it moves it a brisker pace. The same game shouldn't take 20-30 minutes longer, on average, than it did when I was a kid.

You can trace baseball's loss of popularity to other sports to this timeframe. I think it matters and I think it matters going forward when trying to attract new, younger, fans/players. 

What is baseball's loss in popularity?  I don't really see it.

People, younger people, will like baseball if the team in their area is good.  They won't if it isn't. If baseball wants to worry about popularity, they should put more efforts into making sure more than a third of the league is actually trying to compete than trying to shave fractions of time off the game.

Sure, do things to speed it up, but they are hell bent on speeding up the game which won't do shit if teams aren't enjoyable to watch.  No one is going to watch the Diamondback whether the games are 3 hours or 2.5 hours if the team stinks. 

The problem with baseball popularity is that there were 3 teams interested in Bryce Harper, not the fact that a game may take over 3 hours.

Attendance. 
Tv ratings. 
Less kids playing the game than before. 
I think any way you slice it, it’s obvious baseball’s popularity has declined over the last thirty years. That’s not really up for debate.
Baseball was regional before these numbers started slipping. To ignore them is to the detriment of the sports’s future.  

Again, there’s no reason why the same game should be played 30 minutes slower than it used to be played. That’s got to be a factor. 

I don’t think the popularity is declining. I think teams aren’t putting exciting teams on then field. Look at Philly. It’s a perfect example 

https://imaginesports.com/news/baseball-rank-in-popularity
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2018/06/15/mlb-attendance-rate-declining

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1592862002
I don’t see how it’s not declining, Cliff. I get revenues are high...but literally every other metric we measure this stuff by shows its popularity declining. 

You’re missing the point and you know it. Fine ratings are down but you are arguing that shortening the game will help improve them when in fact it won’t do a fucking thing.

Take the Phillies for example, they will likely play longer games than they have played in a good 5 years.  By your logic, their attendance and ratings will decline. Willing to put money on that?

The fact is there are less teams trying to compete and less reason for people to dedicate daily attention to. If the white Sox signed Harper, think their popularity would go up? So the issue with baseball is that there were 3 teams interested in harper and not the fact the games take too long.

It’s not complicated. Baseball is regional. It is and it always has been. The solution to better regional ratings and attendance is teams being more interested in winning. Ratings and attendance are just fine in areas where they are putting decent teams on the field. I repeat, there are a grand total of 5-6 teams in the AL that have a realistic shot of making the playoffs 

If you build it, they will come. Baseball will be popular and draw 2.5 million in almost any market who puts a good team on the field 

Well....except all of these teams last year:
Tampa Bay won 90 games and finished second to last in attendance.
Oakland was a wild card team and finished 27th in attendance.
The Pirates were over .500 and sniffed a wild card spot and finished 28th in attendance.
Cleveland won their division with 91 wins and finished 21st in attendance.
The Brewers won 96 games and finished 16th in attendance.

What you're saying is true in traditional baseball hotbeds like NY, LA, Chicago, Boston, etc etc etc....but it's not the case everywhere else for the most part. 

Baseball is regional? Yes, of course it is. Baseball has ALWAYS BEEN REGIONAL. Every sport other than football is regional but not every sport is experiencing the same issues that baseball is right now. Attendance is down, ratings are down, popularity among kids playing the game is down, African Americans could care less about the sport as a whole. These are not good signs for the future of the game.

I'm just happy baseball doesn't have appear to have their heads in the sand as much as some people regarding these things. I don't know what the answer is and speeding up the game isn't the only issue... but it's definitely one of them. And there's nothing wrong with trying to get it back to the pace that is used to be played at. Watch an inning or two from a game from the 80's on You Tube when you get the chance. Hardly anyone steps out out of the box between pitches. The game just moved at much better pace back then. 

The Juggler

Cliffy6745 said:

Also, Americans are stupid and I am 99% sure you can track the decline of this country to the date football overtook baseball in popularity 

You will also see baseball games getting longer and longer during that same timeframe. 

HesCalledDyer

The length of the game has absolutely nothing to do with attendance being down.  In the 1930s games were 2 hours long.  Were people bitching in the 50's because the games were suddenly 2.5 hours?  2007 was baseball's best year in history as far as total and per game attendance.  Length of the game in 2007? 2:55.  1993 was the first year baseball broke 70million in attendance (mind you, expansion was a big factor). Length of the game in 1993? 2:52.  The length of the game is NOT the problem.

Cliffy6745

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

I think baseball is trying too hard to get people who will never like baseball to like baseball.  

Well I think baseball is better when it moves it a brisker pace. The same game shouldn't take 20-30 minutes longer, on average, than it did when I was a kid.

You can trace baseball's loss of popularity to other sports to this timeframe. I think it matters and I think it matters going forward when trying to attract new, younger, fans/players. 

What is baseball's loss in popularity?  I don't really see it.

People, younger people, will like baseball if the team in their area is good.  They won't if it isn't. If baseball wants to worry about popularity, they should put more efforts into making sure more than a third of the league is actually trying to compete than trying to shave fractions of time off the game.

Sure, do things to speed it up, but they are hell bent on speeding up the game which won't do shit if teams aren't enjoyable to watch.  No one is going to watch the Diamondback whether the games are 3 hours or 2.5 hours if the team stinks. 

The problem with baseball popularity is that there were 3 teams interested in Bryce Harper, not the fact that a game may take over 3 hours.

Attendance. 
Tv ratings. 
Less kids playing the game than before. 
I think any way you slice it, it’s obvious baseball’s popularity has declined over the last thirty years. That’s not really up for debate.
Baseball was regional before these numbers started slipping. To ignore them is to the detriment of the sports’s future.  

Again, there’s no reason why the same game should be played 30 minutes slower than it used to be played. That’s got to be a factor. 

I don’t think the popularity is declining. I think teams aren’t putting exciting teams on then field. Look at Philly. It’s a perfect example 

https://imaginesports.com/news/baseball-rank-in-popularity
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2018/06/15/mlb-attendance-rate-declining

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1592862002
I don’t see how it’s not declining, Cliff. I get revenues are high...but literally every other metric we measure this stuff by shows its popularity declining. 

You’re missing the point and you know it. Fine ratings are down but you are arguing that shortening the game will help improve them when in fact it won’t do a fucking thing.

Take the Phillies for example, they will likely play longer games than they have played in a good 5 years.  By your logic, their attendance and ratings will decline. Willing to put money on that?

The fact is there are less teams trying to compete and less reason for people to dedicate daily attention to. If the white Sox signed Harper, think their popularity would go up? So the issue with baseball is that there were 3 teams interested in harper and not the fact the games take too long.

It’s not complicated. Baseball is regional. It is and it always has been. The solution to better regional ratings and attendance is teams being more interested in winning. Ratings and attendance are just fine in areas where they are putting decent teams on the field. I repeat, there are a grand total of 5-6 teams in the AL that have a realistic shot of making the playoffs 

If you build it, they will come. Baseball will be popular and draw 2.5 million in almost any market who puts a good team on the field 

Well....except all of these teams last year:
Tampa Bay won 90 games and finished second to last in attendance.
Oakland was a wild card team and finished 27th in attendance.
The Pirates were over .500 and sniffed a wild card spot and finished 28th in attendance.
Cleveland won their division with 91 wins and finished 21st in attendance.
The Brewers won 96 games and finished 16th in attendance.

What you're saying is true in traditional baseball hotbeds like NY, LA, Chicago, Boston, etc etc etc....but it's not the case everywhere else for the most part. 

Baseball is regional? Yes, of course it is. Baseball has ALWAYS BEEN REGIONAL. Every sport other than football is regional but not every sport is experiencing the same issues that baseball is right now. Attendance is down, ratings are down, popularity among kids playing the game is down, African Americans could care less about the sport as a whole. These are not good signs for the future of the game.

I'm just happy baseball doesn't have appear to have their heads in the sand as much as some people regarding these things. I don't know what the answer is and speeding up the game isn't the only issue... but it's definitely one of them. And there's nothing wrong with trying to get it back to the pace that is used to be played at. Watch an inning or two from a game from the 80's on You Tube when you get the chance. Hardly anyone steps out out of the box between pitches. The game just moved at much better pace back then. 

Tampa and Oakland...come on. I’ll give you Cleveland, that’s bad and I didn’t realize that, but Pittsburgh is a point for me. Look at their attendance when they were putting a good team on the field. 2-2.5 million. They get rid of their best and most charasmatic player and start to lose and what happens? Milwaukee was 16th...that’s great and serves my point! They were good and at the half way mark as one of the smaller markets in the game. And if memory serves me well they got better and their games got more attention as the season went on. I think the brewers are a perfect example of what a good product can do.


No other sport has the same economics of baseball by any stretch of the imagination. 162 games is 80 games more than any other sport. It’s a marathon. “This ain’t football, we do this every day”

Speed the game up. Cool. I am all about it. I have lost more sleep than most people as a Yankees fan. But don’t pretend it’s going to bring anyone back. No one is going to watch a shitty product, regardless of how long it takes.

As for youth, this is nothing new. When’s the last time black players were a big deal? 80’s? Yes baseball definitely has a youth problem but I’d argue that’s accessibility, like soccer, more than anything. It ain’t cheap to play baseball. 

Again, philly will pack citizens bank park if the team is interesting and good. They won’t go near it if they stink. It’s he same for the majority of markets. Almost everyone is a baseball fan, you just have to give them a reason to invest 

Cliffy6745

HesCalledDyer said:

The length of the game has absolutely nothing to do with attendance being down.  In the 1930s games were 2 hours long.  Were people bitching in the 50's because the games were suddenly 2.5 hours?  2007 was baseball's best year in history as far as total and per game attendance.  Length of the game in 2007? 2:55.  1993 was the first year baseball broke 70million in attendance (mind you, expansion was a big factor). Length of the game in 1993? 2:52.  The length of the game is NOT the problem.

Boom. This deserves a hat tip 

The two most popular teams in baseball over the past 20 years also happen to play the longest games 

Cliffy6745

This is why I say, good for the fucking Padres. At least they’re trying. They have a great system and just signed a top 15 player in the game. As a team that has trouble drawing, fucking right and good for them. It may not work out but they are doing what every team should do

The Juggler

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said:

Cliffy6745 said:

The Juggler said

Attendance. 
Tv ratings. 
Less kids playing the game than before. 
I think any way you slice it, it’s obvious baseball’s popularity has declined over the last thirty years. That’s not really up for debate.
Baseball was regional before these numbers started slipping. To ignore them is to the detriment of the sports’s future.  

Again, there’s no reason why the same game should be played 30 minutes slower than it used to be played. That’s got to be a factor. 

I don’t think the popularity is declining. I think teams aren’t putting exciting teams on then field. Look at Philly. It’s a perfect example 

https://imaginesports.com/news/baseball-rank-in-popularity
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2018/06/15/mlb-attendance-rate-declining

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1592862002
I don’t see how it’s not declining, Cliff. I get revenues are high...but literally every other metric we measure this stuff by shows its popularity declining. 

You’re missing the point and you know it. Fine ratings are down but you are arguing that shortening the game will help improve them when in fact it won’t do a fucking thing.

Take the Phillies for example, they will likely play longer games than they have played in a good 5 years.  By your logic, their attendance and ratings will decline. Willing to put money on that?

The fact is there are less teams trying to compete and less reason for people to dedicate daily attention to. If the white Sox signed Harper, think their popularity would go up? So the issue with baseball is that there were 3 teams interested in harper and not the fact the games take too long.

It’s not complicated. Baseball is regional. It is and it always has been. The solution to better regional ratings and attendance is teams being more interested in winning. Ratings and attendance are just fine in areas where they are putting decent teams on the field. I repeat, there are a grand total of 5-6 teams in the AL that have a realistic shot of making the playoffs 

If you build it, they will come. Baseball will be popular and draw 2.5 million in almost any market who puts a good team on the field 

Well....except all of these teams last year:
Tampa Bay won 90 games and finished second to last in attendance.
Oakland was a wild card team and finished 27th in attendance.
The Pirates were over .500 and sniffed a wild card spot and finished 28th in attendance.
Cleveland won their division with 91 wins and finished 21st in attendance.
The Brewers won 96 games and finished 16th in attendance.

What you're saying is true in traditional baseball hotbeds like NY, LA, Chicago, Boston, etc etc etc....but it's not the case everywhere else for the most part. 

Baseball is regional? Yes, of course it is. Baseball has ALWAYS BEEN REGIONAL. Every sport other than football is regional but not every sport is experiencing the same issues that baseball is right now. Attendance is down, ratings are down, popularity among kids playing the game is down, African Americans could care less about the sport as a whole. These are not good signs for the future of the game.

I'm just happy baseball doesn't have appear to have their heads in the sand as much as some people regarding these things. I don't know what the answer is and speeding up the game isn't the only issue... but it's definitely one of them. And there's nothing wrong with trying to get it back to the pace that is used to be played at. Watch an inning or two from a game from the 80's on You Tube when you get the chance. Hardly anyone steps out out of the box between pitches. The game just moved at much better pace back then. 

Tampa and Oakland...come on. I’ll give you Cleveland, that’s bad and I didn’t realize that, but Pittsburgh is a point for me. Look at their attendance when they were putting a good team on the field. 2-2.5 million. They get rid of their best and most charasmatic player and start to lose and what happens? Milwaukee was 16th...that’s great and serves my point! They were good and at the half way mark as one of the smaller markets in the game. And if memory serves me well they got better and their games got more attention as the season went on. I think the brewers are a perfect example of what a good product can do.


No other sport has the same economics of baseball by any stretch of the imagination. 162 games is 80 games more than any other sport. It’s a marathon. “This ain’t football, we do this every day”

Speed the game up. Cool. I am all about it. I have lost more sleep than most people as a Yankees fan. But don’t pretend it’s going to bring anyone back. No one is going to watch a shitty product, regardless of how long it takes.

As for youth, this is nothing new. When’s the last time black players were a big deal? 80’s? Yes baseball definitely has a youth problem but I’d argue that’s accessibility, like soccer, more than anything. It ain’t cheap to play baseball. 

Again, philly will pack citizens bank park if the team is interesting and good. They won’t go near it if they stink. It’s he same for the majority of markets. Almost everyone is a baseball fan, you just have to give them a reason to invest 

Pirates were good from 14-16. They ranged from 19th to 15th in attendance those years. Meh. They went from horrible to middle of the pack. Not sure that's helping your point. And again, the Brewers almost won a hundred games yet were middle of the pack last year. I don't see how that's "great." And why would you just write off Tampa and Oakland? Because the don't support your argument? They were good teams. Hardly anyone cared. That doesn't happen in the NBA. There's a basketball team in the A's market who sell out every night.

I'm not saying the speed of game is the only issue, but it's definitely one of them....hence the reason MLB is trying to speed up the games. You don't think they've done extensive market research on why the sport isn't as popular as it used to be? Ask anyone who doesn't like baseball why they don't like it--I guarantee you the length of games will be one of the reasons. It's always come up in conversations I've had with people who don't like baseball much. 

You keep poo-pooing these things The youth issue might not be a new one but it has enormous ramifications on the future of the game. I guess it's difficult to see right at this moment but if kids these days aren't playing the game as much, odds are they won't watch or attend games when they get older and neither will their kids. Long term, I think that is a huge issue. I also don't think cost is an issue. All you need is a bat, ball, and a mitt.

Regarding black players---in 1991 18% of MLB players were black. Today, or as recent as '17, 7% were black. It was never a big demographic to begin with....but it's another diminishing one for baseball. 

And Philadelphia is a hotbed, big market baseball town, like the others I mentioned.

The Juggler

Looks like I was wrong about the Brewers. They were 10th in attendance. That is pretty good actually. Not sure what I was looking at.

Anyway, I think my point stands though. I love baseball but I'm concerned about it's future and I'm just happy that MLB seems to share that concern. 

Wobbie

HesCalledDyer said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Kris Bryant has had a bad last 2 years.  He was hurt last year but the year before he had some drops in production.

You guys that follow the cubbies closely have any idea why?

Hoping the Angels bring up some of their farm team this year.  Maitan I'm talking to you!

I disagree on Bryant.  His 2017 season was as good if not better than his MVP campaign the year prior.  HR & RBI were down but he improved in practically every other offensive category over 2016.  Have to remember, too, that Maddon REFUSED to take Kyle Schwarber out of the leadoff spot until June despite batting .140 and striking out 30% of the time.  Kris can't drive empty bases in.

wait.....I thought maddon was the smartest guy to ever manage?

HesCalledDyer

Wobbie said:

HesCalledDyer said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Kris Bryant has had a bad last 2 years.  He was hurt last year but the year before he had some drops in production.

You guys that follow the cubbies closely have any idea why?

Hoping the Angels bring up some of their farm team this year.  Maitan I'm talking to you!

I disagree on Bryant.  His 2017 season was as good if not better than his MVP campaign the year prior.  HR & RBI were down but he improved in practically every other offensive category over 2016.  Have to remember, too, that Maddon REFUSED to take Kyle Schwarber out of the leadoff spot until June despite batting .140 and striking out 30% of the time.  Kris can't drive empty bases in.

wait.....I thought maddon was the smartest guy to ever manage?

He aggravates me on an almost daily basis. He’s a good manager, but a genius he is not. Some of his in-game decisions boggle my mind at times, like pulling Kyle Hendricks after 4 2/3 of WS Game 7 after one walk when he was cruuuuuuuuising all game, or using Chapman in Game 6 when up by 5 runs late. I often think the Cubs win despite some of his decisions rather than because of them. The players have bailed him out for so long and last year, when many of the players just didn’t have it, it really started to show. Terrance Gore, a guy who is a mere 1 for 15 at the plate in his career pinch hitting with the Wild Card game on the line? Wtf?

DewieCox

How much does race figure into declining popularity? 

tempo_n_groove

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2018/10/03/how-mlb-attendance-dropped-below-70-million-for-first-time-in-15-years/#2536143b61bf

Go ahead and argue.

Cliffy6745

Pittsburgh is one of the smallest cities in baseball.  Middle of the pack is solid.  Brewers are another small market and did well last year and will likely do well this year.

Again, I am fine speeding up the game.  Just don't change what the game is to speed it up because it won't have much of a impact on popularity.

Regarding youth.  Yeah, but that is not an MLB issue.  Baseball is expensive and not accessible. Definitely an issue, but not sure what a fix is there. Besides the point of this discussion.

The teams with probably the longest games over the past 20 years are probably the Yankees and Red Sox.  Wonder how they have done rating and attendance wise.

Again, are people going to stay away from Phillies games this year because games are longer? Do you think that teams not putting a quality product on the field or pace of play is a bigger issue for baseball? Because in my mind only one is being addressed and it is the one that will have a much lesser impat