BASEBALL IS BACk!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!k!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[glory]

 

I guess we will know what's up soon enough. Sounds like owners want a revenue sharing deal for the Covid season, which the MLBPA does not want to do. I can't imagine either side is going to prevent a season from happening if it's deemed safe. The optics for that would be horrendous. More likely someone will swallow their pride this year and then in 2022 they can finally have a lockout like both sides seem to want.

[Barkerfan23]

 

I guess we will know what's up soon enough. Sounds like owners want a revenue sharing deal for the Covid season, which the MLBPA does not want to do. I can't imagine either side is going to prevent a season from happening if it's deemed safe. The optics for that would be horrendous. More likely someone will swallow their pride this year and then in 2022 they can finally have a lockout like both sides seem to want.

 

f*** the mlbpa. you know what people are working hard to make a few extra bucks and you cant throw a ball around for millions. will be glad if there is no season

[Dick_Pole]

Extra innings cause injuries and make zero money for anyone (and cost the team money). It's going to happen (probably the 11th inning is what they will settle on). Without minor league play taking place, there will be no unlimited extra innings. Live with it, as MLB couldn't give a s*** that baseball fans love long games. You will watch regardless and much like every change ever...people will get used to it and love it.

 

Well, Grant, this is not only common sense, but also common knowledge around baseball. Here is a clip from last years ‘Business of Baseball’ program on the MLB Network where a bunch of GMs at the December 2019 Winter Meetings went on record saying the next rule change they’d all like to see would be “anything that would allow us not to have those roster-crushing games.”

 

https://www.mlb.com/video/business-of-baseball-evolving-game

 

If you’d like specific numbers, former Marlins president Dave Samson did half a podcast on how much it costs a team to go deep into extra innings. I can’t remember the exact episode, but it was about 4-6 weeks ago.

 

f***...then just BLOW the game! Intentionally walk four guys in the bottom of the ninth and take the L and be done with it so you never have to go into extra innings. Save your precious roster for the next game. Holy s*** a bunch of suits and ties 120 pound pencil neck geeks are sissying up baseball. Whatever happened to the competitive spirit? What, you might get one game a year per team that goes beyond the 13th, if that? Live with it!

[Dick_Pole]

Instead of nickel and diming EVERY possible way to save a few bucks at the cost of the integrity of the game, how about these knucklehead front offices which are supposed to be so smart put their stooge heads together and find a way to increase revenue?

[glory]

The issue the players will have, and it will be more obvious as the years go on assuming that baseball continues to become more regionalized and less mainstream popular (very likely), is that players do very little to move revenue. I think Philly saw a significant increase in ticket sales right after they signed Harper, but how many players in the league will have that type of name value moving forward? MLB has done so poorly at marketing its players since Manfred took over that Harper seems like a relic from the last era of baseball where a star actually had name value. Baseball fans pay for the front of the jersey, not the back of it. The NBA is different. When LeBron left Cleveland, not only did the Cavs suffer, but the city itself did as well. The players run that league. MLB is run by the franchises, much like the NFL, the only difference is the NFL is widely popular whereas MLB is trending downwards in that area. Mike Trout can disappear tomorrow and would anyone in Los Angeles notice? Would MLB lose revenue because of it? Probably not. It's the way the game is structured.

 

I can see why the players wouldn't want a revenue sharing deal (they want to get paid what they signed for, even if it's prorated), but as the years go on, the MLBPA will continue to lose leverage because the players don't really matter aside from a very select few.

[Dick_Pole]

These shitheads all roster a bajillion specialist relief pitchers that pitch above their true talent level because of computer algos. And NOW they are complaining that extra inning games go too long because not enough runs are scored. Simple solution. You're allowed to roster 10 pitchers. That should guarantee a whole ton of runs are scored by the 11th.

 

Yeah, I know. I'm triggered worse than the worst anti-Trumper right now. I wish Bud Selig was still around so I could punch him in his punchable face for this.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Dick_Pole

[Dick_Pole]

Baseball is by far the best sport for addicted gamblers in terms of sheer number of games and number of prop bets available per game. It also has a 2+ month monopoly on the North American team sport market right at the peak of non-betting people not giving a s*** about baseball. It's about time to embrace that competitive advantage.

[Beans]

Roster difficulties don't support your statement that viewership drops off dramatically in extra innings.

 

Are more people watching the 9th inning of a 13-1 trouncing than the 10th inning of a 3-3 nail biter? I don't know either way, but it isn't as clear as you suggest.

 

I don't have time to listen to all his old podcasts to see where he went into the ratings issue for extra inning games, so I just DM'd him directly:

 

 

 

So, yah, that's his 19 seasons of looking at TV ratings. And it's rather obvious, as we're talking about games that go beyond 12 innings (because that's when they would place a runner on 2nd, like they do in the minors). And with the average runtime of over 3 hours for a 9 inning game, add on another 4 innings and we're looking at games going past primetime (which ends at 11 PM).

[Beans]

f***...then just BLOW the game! Intentionally walk four guys in the bottom of the ninth and take the L and be done with it so you never have to go into extra innings. Save your precious roster for the next game. Holy s*** a bunch of suits and ties 120 pound pencil neck geeks are sissying up baseball. Whatever happened to the competitive spirit? What, you might get one game a year per team that goes beyond the 13th, if that? Live with it!

 

Calm down, dude. I agree with you, and thanked your post earlier saying it'd be better to have ties, and I've thanked every post saying it's stupid to have a runner on 2nd in extra innings.

 

My post was a response to Grant's question on whether the ad revenue from TV ratings in extra innings would be enough to offset the costs.

 

For the record, I love extra inning games and do not support any rule changes that would effect their length.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Beans

[Beans]

I would rather just have games end in ties after the 12th or 13th than put runners on base. This is a worse idea than NHL shootouts.

 

100%

 

Tied baseball games used to happen all the time.

 

[Spanky99]

Calm down, dude. I agree with you, and thanked your post earlier saying it'd be better to have ties, and I've thanked every post saying it's stupid to have a runner on 2nd in extra innings.

 

My post was a response to Grant's question about whether the ad revenue from TV ratings in extra innings would be enough to offset the costs.

 

For the record, I love extra inning games and do not support any rule changes that would effect their length.

 

lol... DP's on full tilt.

[TheHurl]

f***...then just BLOW the game! Intentionally walk four guys in the bottom of the ninth and take the L and be done with it so you never have to go into extra innings. Save your precious roster for the next game. Holy s*** a bunch of suits and ties 120 pound pencil neck geeks are sissying up baseball. Whatever happened to the competitive spirit? What, you might get one game a year per team that goes beyond the 13th, if that? Live with it!

 

 

The Giants alone had 5 last year (1 resulting in an injury which cost me a Golf Clash teammate). They also had the most surgeries this off-season. When something is wanted by both the PA and Owners it's assuredly going to happen. I'd rather think about how to make it best rather than argue over whether it is going to ruin some fans viewing pleasure.

[Abomination]

I'd much rather see games end in an actual tie after two or three extra innings than runners starting on 2nd in extras and stuff like that.

[Grant77]

I don't have time to listen to all his old podcasts to see where he went into the ratings issue for extra inning games, so I just DM'd him directly:

 

 

 

So, yah, that's his 19 seasons of looking at TV ratings. And it's rather obvious, as we're talking about games that go beyond 12 innings (because that's when they would place a runner on 2nd, like they do in the minors). And with the average runtime of over 3 hours for a 9 inning game, add on another 4 innings and we're looking at games going past primetime (which ends at 11 PM).

 

Thanks

[Grant77]

 

The Giants alone had 5 last year (1 resulting in an injury which cost me a Golf Clash teammate). They also had the most surgeries this off-season. When something is wanted by both the PA and Owners it's assuredly going to happen. I'd rather think about how to make it best rather than argue over whether it is going to ruin some fans viewing pleasure.

 

Those 58 games of 15 innings or more make up a substantial portion of the best games to watch during that time period. I get the economics, but it would truly be a shame to lose out on a good portion of the best baseball games that we will see from each season. Think back to your own favourite regular season memories and a large chunk of them will be extra inning games.

[TheHurl]

I'd much rather see games end in an actual tie after two or three extra innings than runners starting on 2nd in extras and stuff like that.

 

I am okay with this too. I just don't think the majority support it. North American sports has a hate on for the tie.

[TheHurl]

Those 58 games of 15 innings or more make up a substantial portion of the best games to watch during that time period. I get the economics, but it would truly be a shame to lose out on a good portion of the best baseball games that we will see from each season. Think back to your own favourite regular season memories and a large chunk of them will be extra inning games.

 

again...longtime baseball fans opinions don't matter. You will enjoy any game, as will I and about 30% of this board (yes I believe that 70% of this board are not baseball fans). For the record runners on 2nd don't necessarily mean a game will end. It could still lead to many tied innings. And that would be exciting as anything

[Grant77]

again...longtime baseball fans opinions don't matter. You will enjoy any game, as will I and about 30% of this board (yes I believe that 70% of this board are not baseball fans). For the record runners on 2nd don't necessarily mean a game will end. It could still lead to many tied innings. And that would be exciting as anything

 

I agree that they don't, but it doesn't mean that I have to like it. We'll never again see anything like the 22 inning game against the Dodgers where Youppi got ejected. I'll still watch, but I'm probably too used to the old way to ever truly enjoy the runner on 2nd thing. Hopefully the new fans will adjust to it better than things like the shootout. Hockey fans young and old universally dislike it even after all this time.

[TheHurl]

I agree that they don't, but it doesn't mean that I have to like it. We'll never again see anything like the 22 inning game against the Dodgers where Youppi got ejected. I'll still watch, but I'm probably too used to the old way to ever truly enjoy the runner on 2nd thing. Hopefully the new fans will adjust to it better than things like the shootout. Hockey fans young and old universally dislike it even after all this time.

 

same thing is said for penalty kicks in soccer. Everyone universally hates it...but it's f***ing ratings gold.

[sdyment]

So, does no one care about this:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/report-mlb-owners-vote-revenue-sharing-new-schedule-2020/

 

82 game schedule, dh in both leagues, division only games (if I’m understanding this correctly), extra wild cards...

[Spanky99]

So, does no one care about this:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/report-mlb-owners-vote-revenue-sharing-new-schedule-2020/

 

82 game schedule, dh in both leagues, division only games (if I’m understanding this correctly), extra wild cards...

 

MLBPA has to agree to terms, which apparently most think they won't.

[sdyment]

MLBPA has to agree to terms, which apparently most think they won't.

 

What’s the major stumbling block?

[Spanky99]

What’s the major stumbling block?

 

Revenue, of course...

 

 

[Brownie19]

Go figure that money - and not health concerns could potentially squash or delay the season.

 

f*** both sides.

[glory]

Yeah if the deal doesn’t happen because the players don’t want to risk their health, then that might be easier to explain to the public, but if it’s money, then people will be tripping over themselves to get in line to say f*** You to MLB and the MLBPA. If any league is going to mess this up, it’s the one with Manfred and Clark as the figureheads.

[Barkerfan23]

Go figure that money - and not health concerns could potentially squash or delay the season.

 

f*** both sides.

 

yep happy to see Garret Cole make 0 this year.

[Carlos Danger]

Go figure that money - and not health concerns could potentially squash or delay the season.

 

f*** both sides.

 

I kinda sympathize with the owners on this one. There are plenty of people out there not getting anything from their employer because their industry shut down.

 

The players will have an opportunity to work, and only half a day so to speak. There has to be an understanding that they can't just get paid the full salaries for half a year (season) of work in a non essential industry.

 

I think PR wise this will look bad on players..

 

Regardless, figure something out and let's play ball ASAP!!

[max silver]

I kinda sympathize with the owners on this one. There are plenty of people out there not getting anything from their employer because their industry shut down.

 

The players will have an opportunity to work, and only half a day so to speak. There has to be an understanding that they can't just get paid the full salaries for half a year (season) of work in a non essential industry.

 

I think PR wise this will look bad on players..

 

Regardless, figure something out and let's play ball ASAP!!

 

Half a years salary would sure beat the hell out of nothing for most reasonable people. But MLB isn't exactly known for being the most reasonable players union over the years.

[Carlos Danger]

Owners make huge profits because they "assume all the risk".

 

Or do they.

 

I think they do. You sign a 10 yr contract and the guys sucks and can't hit over the Mendoza lime for 10 yrs.. Your risk.

 

The player blows out their knee, year one... Owner assumes risk, or has to pay high premiums for insurance.

 

Owners assume risk team sucks and no attendance or you are in an area where you might have a good team but low attendance.

 

TV money is about the only guaranteed money.

 

Players assume very little risk if they have a long term guaranteed contract. Even if you don't, $650K min salary USD. Arbiration will probably see a raise regardless if win or lose. FA's get millions for being a 6th inning reliever or mop up guy..

[max silver]

Owners make huge profits because they "assume all the risk".

 

Or do they.

 

In normal times the owners are assuming the lions share of risk. But during a pandemic the balance really shifts towards the players in a large way given the increased risk of catching the coronavirus during play.