GDT (3/4) | Blue Jays (59-49) vs. Red Sox (64-48) | August 7 — 7:07 PM

[Rockhaus]

Maybe they should stop with the stupid shift on a guy who’s had 90 mlb at bats. If Bo was playing his position that ground ball becomes an out. I blame Montoyo for that.

[Grant77]

I know you hate it but be objective. No, the vast majority don’t view the 11th inning of a regular season game to be the most exciting part. That’s why they tried the new way. Most will turn off the game from tv and go to bed. That’s all the casuals that make up the majority of viewers. Sounds like baseball is doing the smart thing and making a compromise next year

 

So, objectively, late innings in close games are less exciting than early innings in lopsided games. I've had it wrong all of these years.

 

All kidding aside, you're clearly wrong about the excitement level and somewhat correct about the viewership. The root of that problem is the pace of the game and not extra innings themselves. After 3 slow hours, people are ready to tune out no matter what the score is. A faster paced game would retain more viewers for what everyone except you would agree is the best part.

[thatoneguy]

Blaming anything other than the offense going cold for the split DHer is disingenuous. They were lucky to split it in the first place.

[intentional wok]

My biggest surprise is how much I appreciate these 7-inning games. The drag of the 5th and 6th with teams patching together a way to get to the late game is pretty much gone. It just makes it so obvious to me how sick I am of waiting for the mop-up innings to be over.

 

The pace-of-play problem already has an answer: shortening the game itself rather than meddling with the rules and strategies (free runners, RP requirements). Probably not what fans want to hear, but I really think a shorter ball game is still a purer baseball experience than all these band-aid rules. Probably not what the players want to hear either since a change to 7 innings would probably equal to losing about a month's worth of stat padding. RPs in general might be severely impacted too, though also maybe not because shorter games on average means less middle-inning strain on your arms and much more viable "bullpen days".

[Laika]

My biggest surprise is how much I appreciate these 7-inning games. The drag of the 5th and 6th with teams patching together a way to get to the late game is pretty much gone. It just makes it so obvious to me how sick I am of waiting for the mop-up innings to be over.

 

The pace-of-play problem already has an answer: shortening the game itself rather than meddling with the rules and strategies (free runners, RP requirements). Probably not what fans want to hear, but I really think a shorter ball game is still a purer baseball experience than all these band-aid rules. Probably not what the players want to hear either since a change to 7 innings would probably equal to losing about a month's worth of stat padding. RPs in general might be severely impacted too, though also maybe not because shorter games on average means less middle-inning strain on your arms and much more viable "bullpen days".

 

I have seen this suggestion elsewhere and I do see the merit of it. Not sure I could ever get on board with such a drastic change though.

[gruber92]

So, objectively, late innings in close games are less exciting than early innings in lopsided games. I've had it wrong all of these years.

 

All kidding aside, you're clearly wrong about the excitement level and somewhat correct about the viewership. The root of that problem is the pace of the game and not extra innings themselves. After 3 slow hours, people are ready to tune out no matter what the score is. A faster paced game would retain more viewers for what everyone except you would agree is the best part.

 

IMO, the problem lies with the casual fan's mind set with baseball. Most sports fans are stimulated by offence and offensive plays. Baseball has so much more to appreciate where the casual fan is unable to grasp. When a casual fan is watching a traditional extra inning game where there are a few clean innings played, they turn the game off and check the score later (if they even last a few innings). The runner on second rule keeps casuals attached, which Manfred feels it's good for the game, but more importantly good for sponsorship.

[Laika]

IMO, the problem lies with the casual fan's mind set with baseball. Most sports fans are stimulated by offence and offensive plays. Baseball has so much more to appreciate where the casual fan is unable to grasp. When a casual fan is watching a traditional extra inning game where there are a few clean innings played, they turn the game off and check the score later (if they even last a few innings). The runner on second rule keeps casuals attached, which Manfred feels it's good for the game, but more importantly good for sponsorship.

 

I don't even think it's about that. It's just about ending games. Long extra inning games have no benefit for the league and they have certain costs, in terms of money and fatigue.

 

Honestly, just having stupid ties might be better than the extra innings rule.

 

Adding ties to the win loss formula is a smaller change than just plopping a runner on second in extras. Arguably, at least.

[gruber92]

My biggest surprise is how much I appreciate these 7-inning games. The drag of the 5th and 6th with teams patching together a way to get to the late game is pretty much gone. It just makes it so obvious to me how sick I am of waiting for the mop-up innings to be over.

 

The pace-of-play problem already has an answer: shortening the game itself rather than meddling with the rules and strategies (free runners, RP requirements). Probably not what fans want to hear, but I really think a shorter ball game is still a purer baseball experience than all these band-aid rules. Probably not what the players want to hear either since a change to 7 innings would probably equal to losing about a month's worth of stat padding. RPs in general might be severely impacted too, though also maybe not because shorter games on average means less middle-inning strain on your arms and much more viable "bullpen days".

 

I hear what you're saying but this will never happen, ever.

 

The amount of jobs lost alone would never make the player's union agree to it.

[gruber92]

I don't even think it's about that. It's just about ending games. Long extra inning games have no benefit for the league and they have certain costs, in terms of money and fatigue.

 

Honestly, just having stupid ties might be better than the extra innings rule.

 

Adding ties to the win loss formula is a smaller change than just plopping a runner on second in extras. Arguably, at least.

 

There are valid arguments on both sides. A compromise where you put a runner on second to start the 12th inning could be an answer.

[Grant77]

I don't even think it's about that. It's just about ending games. Long extra inning games have no benefit for the league and they have certain costs, in terms of money and fatigue.

 

Honestly, just having stupid ties might be better than the extra innings rule.

 

Adding ties to the win loss formula is a smaller change than just plopping a runner on second in extras. Arguably, at least.

 

I would prefer a tie after (12?) Innings over the current rule, which changes how the game is played.

[gruber92]

I don't even think it's about that. It's just about ending games. Long extra inning games have no benefit for the league and they have certain costs, in terms of money and fatigue.

 

Honestly, just having stupid ties might be better than the extra innings rule.

 

Adding ties to the win loss formula is a smaller change than just plopping a runner on second in extras. Arguably, at least.

 

It's hard enough for casuals to understand and formulate what being 3.5 games behind/ahead means. Imagine adding ties to the equation?

[Laika]

It's hard enough for casuals to understand and formulate what being 3.5 games behind/ahead means. Imagine adding ties to the equation?

 

It wouldn't be that foreign for hockey fans, at least. Point system baby

[Scion]

Blaming anything other than the offense going cold for the split DHer is disingenuous. They were lucky to split it in the first place.

 

Its kind of a stupid point when the opposition also scored two runs...

[intentional wok]

I don't even think it's about that. It's just about ending games. Long extra inning games have no benefit for the league and they have certain costs, in terms of money and fatigue.

 

Honestly, just having stupid ties might be better than the extra innings rule.

 

Adding ties to the win loss formula is a smaller change than just plopping a runner on second in extras. Arguably, at least.

 

I hear what you're saying but this will never happen, ever.

 

The amount of jobs lost alone would never make the player's union agree to it.

 

Agreed on both. Not sure I'd want to see such a drastic change and very doubtful the players' union would entertain it.

 

This is baseball's own TJ surgery option. Bite the bitter bullet and hope that it gets your product where you want it to be (while everyone trashes you for a decade until the changes become normalized) or try literally every other option, even terrible ones. I know it's fashionable to hate on Manfred but he's in a very weird place trying to placate the unions and current fans while also trying to attract the next generation of baseball fans (and mitigating the damage that the global emergency has had on the business).

 

Still hope the 7-inning D/Hs remain though. Great solution.

[glory]

Agreed on both. Not sure I'd want to see such a drastic change and very doubtful the players' union would entertain it.

 

This is baseball's own TJ surgery option. Bite the bitter bullet or try literally every other option. I know it's fashionable to hate on Manfred but he's in a very weird place trying to placate the unions and current fans while also trying to attract the next generation of baseball fans (and mitigating the damage that the global emergency has had on the business).

 

Still hope the 7-inning D/Hs remain though. Great solution.

 

I dislike Manfred as much as anyone, but I agree, he's in a tough spot. The game has a core fanbase that trends older. That fanbase is not going to accept change very easily. However, if baseball doesn't change at least to some degree, it's going to alienate the younger demo that they desperately need to attract. So Manfred pretty much has to annoy the diehards in order to build something that the casuals/younger audience will get behind. Younger people today have no attention span. Long extra inning games are not going to attract any new fans, they'll just entertain the existing ones who want the game to be played the same way its been played for decades. If you notice the stadiums in those 15-20 inning marathons, they are 90% empty by the time the game ends. People want to get home. People at home don't want to dedicate 5-6 hours on a sporting event that has a slow and methodical pace. The league should figure out the best solution to end games quicker. If there is a compromise where they start the runner on 2nd in the 11th, so that they give each team one extra half inning of "real" baseball until the ghost runner comes in, then fine.

[intentional wok]

I'd argue that extra-inning games are primarily a player health and fatigue question rather than fan engagement issue. Correct me if it's been proven wrong, but I don't think extra-inning marathons are the threshold casual fans need to get over, and even then the marathons are fairly rare. The problem is that the middle innings of a baseball game are usually really drab and boring, especially on weeknights. When it's already 8:30 and we're only in top 5th? Of course even big fans will turn to Netflix for an hour and come back in the 8th -- baseball as a product is generally no worse than it's been in the past, but there are infinite other entertainment options when you compare things to even the mid-2000s. Baseball asks for a huge time investment in general and a lot of that time is frankly wasted and/or doesn't pay off.

[Laika]

I'd argue that extra-inning games are primarily a player health and fatigue question rather than fan engagement issue. Correct me if it's been proven wrong, but I don't think extra-inning marathons are the threshold casual fans need to get over, and even then the marathons are fairly rare. The problem is that the middle innings of a baseball game are usually really drab and boring, especially on weeknights. When it's already 8:30 and we're only in top 5th? Of course even big fans will turn to Netflix for an hour and come back in the 8th -- baseball as a product is generally no worse than it's been in the past, but there are infinite other entertainment options when you compare things to even the mid-2000s. Baseball asks for a huge time investment in general and a lot of that time is frankly wasted and/or doesn't pay off.

 

I don't agree with all of this.

 

For one thing, the other major sports also suffer from the same general problem. 3 hours is a long time commitment. With any of the sports you can ignore the middle portion of the game and just watch the fourth quarter / third period.

 

Baseball is actually uniquely suited for the modern era where every viewer's attention is being pulled in multiple directions at all times. You can literally stare at your cell phone for 95% of a baseball game and if you look up before each pitch is thrown you will miss no second of game action.

 

I do agree that keeping total game length down needs to continue to be a priority. Nobody really likes most games that drag on and on.

[thatoneguy]

Its kind of a stupid point when the opposition also scored two runs...

 

How? The Jays shut them down, but couldn't get a hit, and yet people are blaming Montoyo's bullpen management and the extra inning rule instead for splitting the DHer when they should've been able to sweep.

[intentional wok]

I don't agree with all of this.

 

For one thing, the other major sports also suffer from the same general problem. 3 hours is a long time commitment. With any of the sports you can ignore the middle portion of the game and just watch the fourth quarter / third period.

 

Baseball is actually uniquely suited for the modern era where every viewer's attention is being pulled in multiple directions at all times. You can literally stare at your cell phone for 95% of a baseball game and if you look up before each pitch is thrown you will miss no second of game action.

 

I do agree that keeping total game length down needs to continue to be a priority. Nobody really likes most games that drag on and on.

 

I'd argue the 95% of staring at something else is actually very harmful for fan engagement. The more the audience is being entertained by something else means less time you're the one entertaining them. Instant entertainment takes the edge off the game for us fans who are invested to the point of being mentally unwell (everyone here), but I don't think it's great for getting casuals invested. And yes, all sports probably have similar problems but I'd argue that the Instagram generation took their captive audience from them and it's basically showing off what we all already felt, that daily 3-hour sporting events are mostly high-sponsored filler content.

 

That said, I don't really include the Blue Jays franchise in struggling with fan engagement. The Rogers marketing teams are beasts and the Blue Jays are uniquely suited for a country-sized market. Doubt a lot of the other franchises could compare. Canada and the Blue Jays are probably one of the few markets MLB aren't concerned about anyway.

Edited August 8, 2021 by intentional wok

[glory]

I'd argue that extra-inning games are primarily a player health and fatigue question rather than fan engagement issue. Correct me if it's been proven wrong, but I don't think extra-inning marathons are the threshold casual fans need to get over, and even then the marathons are fairly rare. The problem is that the middle innings of a baseball game are usually really drab and boring, especially on weeknights. When it's already 8:30 and we're only in top 5th? Of course even big fans will turn to Netflix for an hour and come back in the 8th -- baseball as a product is generally no worse than it's been in the past, but there are infinite other entertainment options when you compare things to even the mid-2000s. Baseball asks for a huge time investment in general and a lot of that time is frankly wasted and/or doesn't pay off.

 

I'm in my mid 30's, and that's exactly what I do. I'll watch a movie with my wife, but have my phone on me to periodically check the score on the app, and if something happens, I use MLBtv to watch it (since it allows people to rewind live games) or I'll just wait for the highlight to pop up. As mentioned, one benefit to baseball in today's environment is that it is much easier to consume without having to watch the game. Put Gameday on your phone, and you know exactly what is going on. If you tried to follow the NBA like that, it would be a lot more difficult. Or put baseball on in the background, and do your daily routine. I'm not much into gambling, but the dead time in between pitches, AB's, etc, can probably be better utilized for sports betting. There are benefits to the current format. The issue is the lack of real action in games nowadays (3 true outcomes), time in between pitches, and the overall length of the game. I think what Manfred/Epstein have implemented in the minors as far as rule changes are all positive steps to fix those issues. If those are implemented in the bigs within the next few years, it will drive purists nuts, but I think overall it would likely help the flow of the game.

[TwistedLogic]

Baseball is actually uniquely suited for the modern era where every viewer's attention is being pulled in multiple directions at all times. You can literally stare at your cell phone for 95% of a baseball game and if you look up before each pitch is thrown you will miss no second of game action.

 

I've always thought this. Baseball's biggest issue is unfortunately innate: there's too many players. A single player makes very little impact on a team overall and players are thus a lot harder to market. If baseball players were easier to market, it would probably be the most popular sport just because of how conducive it is to s***** attention spans.