@@Motownsports89 Streaming packages are so unreasonable nowadays. I only want to watch sports. But I have to pay for 3 different services to do so. So I just do it illegally now because it's easier 🤷♂
@@inky-182 My CABLE service has a pay option service that allows me to see virtually any sports (MLB, NHL, NBA, college basketball). I can't believe you don't have the same thing wherever you are.
This is exactly it for me. Used to watch so many Indians / Guardians games when they were reasonably accessible. For the past 5 or so years, because I couldn’t watch I didn’t know the players and never went to any games. And I consider myself a good fan. Even when they struggled I’d watch. MLB needs to get this corrected fast.
Same here. I watch the Cardinals on Ballys. But the service (especially on my phone) is so bad it makes the games unwatchable. The streams freeze every few minutes forcing me to restart the app. How am I supposed to get invested when I’m constantly restarting the app?
The problem isn’t the trop, It’s always been the location. I was pissed when I saw that they were building the new stadium in st Pete. I agree, it’s a stupid decision.
you’re absolutely correct that the white sox attendance is so low because of the horrible play on the field, i can attest to that because i’m a sox fan, unlike what the cubs fans will tell you, sox can very easily average 30-32k a game whenever the team is good, chicago is a metra area of 9.5 million people, big enough to support two teams and them moving towards downtown and being in a great new stadium will also make attendance skyrocket, chicago is definitely a baseball city that will have people interested in watching either team in the postseason, similar to the new york teams, giants, dodgers, and the braves, people will watch those teams because of their history and of course big metro areas, the rangers play in a massive metro area that’s gonna pass chicago in population very soon, however they’re not a baseball city, they’re definitely a football city, and on top of the fact that they played a very less popular diamond team and neither team was expected to even win the pennant, i guess it just made things very uninteresting, there’s nobody to cheer for, there’s nobody to hate on, it was just 2 unpopular teams playing against each other and nobody outside of those states really even cared
I’m cubs fan and looked at your attendance numbers, it’s weird how it went down from 40k in 2012 down to 32k in 2019 and after pandemic it’s around 11k-18k. I assume it must be play
I also heard that the Coyotes tickets were crazy expensive because it only held like 12k seats? I also heard that they’re losing the Coyotes but getting another team in expansion.
@@lovesgucci1you are correct, the former owner of the Coyotes gets first dibs on owning a new phoenix expansion team if down the road the NHL goes through another wave of expansion teams
World Series will always be tough. As I’ve grown up I enjoy the playoff journey more …. So many games full of contenders. You always run that risk if dodgers/yanks/cubs aren’t in it.
Keep in mind that during the mid-teens, the Marlins were drawing a decent 1.7mil per season, despite sub .500 records. That said, they're at least upticking from those horrid attendance years from 2018-2022. The biggest intangible, like Tampa Bay, is the surge in population growth.
The location is terrible and the ownership is worse. Fix ownership, field a competitive team, re-sign players & you’ll definitely see attendance spike up.
@@lovesgucci1 You're correct on all counts. Much attention is paid to the inaccessibility of Tropicana Field for fans in Tampa, but getting to Miami from the fan rich suburbs in west Broward and PBC is far worse than the Ray's situation.
@@kurteckhardt7327 They assumed that putting it in a heavily Latino community would bring in more fans - which is ridiculous on so many fronts! No one wanted it there either. It is probably the nicest retractable roof ballpark; doesn’t look like a cave when watching on tv but does it matter if no one’s there to watch it??
As a lifelong MLB fan since the late 80’s, I’ve watched our beloved game get passed by the NFL. The first reason is the NFL has a salary cap so all 32 fanbases feel their team has a shot to build a winner if their front office does the right thing. There are no haves and have-nots in the NFL as the big market Cowboys have zero financial advantage over the tiny market Packers. That is the biggest problem in MLB as there is such a difference in payroll among the haves and have-nots. I live in the Philadelphia market so I know my team has the local TV deal that will spend on Free agents like Harper, Wheeler and Schwarber. Can we say that about the Pirates? Marlins? A’s? Reds? Rays? Royals? This is how you lose fans over the long run when they feel their team is at a disadvantage on opening day. The second problem with MLB is the playoff rounds go too long and the World Series games start late. There are just too many playoff games that the casual just won’t get invested in unless their team is in it. I know so many fellow Phillies fans who check out once the Phillies are out of the playoffs. The World Series should start at 7:30 Eastern Time. They should go back to starting the series on a Saturday so you can have possibly 4 weekend games so the West Coast is not a work when the games start. Many of these games go til midnight on the East Coast so you have already lost kids and people who go to work early on the East Coast. Think about the Superbowl starts at 6:30 so everyone watches it because it doesn’t end at midnight.
@@conservativeeducator5457What’s the most important part of a baseball game? From the 6th to 9th inning. You’ll be home from work by the 4th inning so you’ll be watching when the true drama starts in the later innings. The East Coast viewers will still be up to see the later innings cause the game will end at 10:30-11:00 now. Starting a game later makes no sense for either coast.
It's also been passed by the NBA, and relatively soon soccer too. The issue isn't the spending between large and small market teams. The Dodgers and Yankees have combined for two World Series over the past 20+ years and have spent several billion dollars. Small market teams like the Dbacks, Rays, Royals and Indians have all won or gotten to a World Series within the past decade. The Orioles are a juggernaut now and will be into the foreseeable future. The Rangers and Padres which are small-ish market teams have spent much more over the past few years with varying degrees of success. Nothing is stopping small and mid-market teams from spending, they all receive more than $200M a year from national TV deals and revenue sharing before a pitch is thrown. Their owners just pocket the money, because there's little incentive for them to spend it. To top it off, between 1927 and 1962 the large-market Yankees won 19 out of 36 World Series in that time frame, and baseball was never more popular. MLB's decline on the national landscape over the past few decades is due to several other factors. The 1994 strike started it, a lot of fans were turned off by that. Interleague play took away part of what made the All-Star game and World Series (the two biggest national events for MLB) special, because now the AL and NL played each other constantly instead of only two times a year. Youth participation and interest has dropped in the US, due to several factors meaning kids aren't growing up baseball fans. As MLB's fandom ages out there aren't enough replacement fans. In today's fast paced constantly connected internet era, 162 2.5-3 hour games is too much of a time commitment for a lot of people. Games have moved to cable whereas before they were free over the air, and with the expense and overall cord cutting it's hurt access. It doesn't matter if the games start at 1pm or midnight, if I don't have cable I can't watch World Series Game 2 on FS1. Players aren't marketable, you hardly see them in national ads, on ESPN etc. The costs of going to games has gone up tremendously. Those are just some of the reasons for MLB's increased national irrelevance. With all that said though, it's still strong locally.
@@davidfox9947Revenue is one measure to compare leagues, but fan interest and future growth is one that's just as important, if not more so. No different then how stocks are valued. The NBA is far ahead of MLB in that measure. The average age of a NBA fan is in their mid 30's, in the MLB it's the mid-50's. MLB revenue is so high because the average fan is an older one who has tons of disposable income (peak earning years, kids are gone, house paid off, etc). Those 50 and 60 somethings are going to pass away someday with less fans to replace them, whereas the NBA has tons of future growth. Also I said soccer on purpose, I'm not ignorant enough to think that the MLS is anywhere near as big as MLB or will pass it anytime soon. I'm including the European leagues into that, tons of young adults follow those leagues closely. In addition there's an ongoing demographic shift in this country towards cultures who love soccer, and the upcoming Olympics/World Cup will give major tailwinds to soccer's growth in this country.
From Tampa to st pete there’s two bridges other wise I think you hit it spot on. It is true they are making a new bridge I’ve passed by it a lot. But as a local I agree with a lot of what you said and I am glad you covered it the way you did.
I wouldn't be surprised if the state of Nevada (rightfully) Told fisher to go suck an egg. after the whole raiders fiasco, I'm sure they are tired of giving out handouts to less than reputable team owners. and i don't blame them, a Billon dollars in debt for two stadiums to teams who cant even give quality on the field.
Great video! On the viewership front, I saw that it's starting out well this year too. I wonder if last year's drop off had anything to do with the big market flops? Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, Angels, Cubs, White Sox all missed the postseason. In a world where more of those teams do well far into the season and the Dodgers and Phillies also stay hot. I imagine viewership gains could be kept? I feel like I was the only one still watching the Yankees the last weekend last season. They absolutely sucked. The park was *empty* the final months despite packed houses the rest of the season. Same with the Mets. NYC media market is massive. Such a drag effect in that case. An NYY LAD World Series with Soto, Judge, Ohtani, and Betts would be an international ratings success! Though the league shouldn't be totally relying on a super star matchup alone, that's not sustainable.
@thomaswinzeler9739 If the Rangers are in the 5th largest tv market but it’s not a popular team - yet. Add in the Diamondbacks, it just wasn’t a marquee matchup. Baseball fans were happy to see a new team win but it definitely didn’t bring in new or casual fans.
@@michaelkilbride6420 when did I say that? I followed and enjoyed that series, and was happy for the Rangers to get their well deserved win. It's not that it was bad for baseball, but it clearly didn't pull the ratings that other matchups would have. They don't have the national following that other teams do, neither do the Diamondbacks. I personally don't care that much about viewership, I was just making a comment on the trend.
I hate to say it, but St Louis' days of 3M attendance are over. Besides the team on the field being sub par, the downtown hits new lows every year. Even their iconic skyscrapers are vacant. They've somehow drawn well despite their declining, crime-ridden downtown. I think those days are over. Prediction: 2.5M in 2024. Below 2M in 2025.
I think this is ridiculous. I’m from St. Louis and I am downtown twice a week. Downtown is not “crime ridden”, crime in the city has been generally decreasing with 2020 being a big exception. But crime on a peice of paper, and crime in reality is often hard to compare. I’m not saying there’s no crime and that you should not consider it, but there also isn’t a bad man on every corner waiting to attack you. It’s also important to remember that St. Louis’ crime rate is heavily skewed by the “City-County Divide”. In the 1870s city leaders declared themselves to be an independent city separate from St. Louis county. They did this because they did not want to be responsible for the very rural parts of the region. This ended up being a very shortsighted choice since when mass suburbanization happened the city lost over half its population. But what this means for crime is that when St. Louis gets listed as one of the most dangerous cities, those crime stats are only being compared to the cities 1870 borders. If you were to combine the City and County’s crime and population totals St. Louis would be a more middle of the pack city in terms of danger. This leads St. Louis to have a horrible reputation, one that isn’t reflected in reality. Another example, only 1 in 10 people in the entire St. Louis metro live in the city of St. Louis as opposed to a surrounding county. While the majority of crime happens within specifically, the north side of the city. Again, I’m not trying to downplay the crime that does happen, and I’m not trying to paint St. Louis as a city with no crime problem. But it would not be viewed in the same light if it weren’t for this divide. The Downtown neighborhoods have actually been doing quite well in the last 20 years, since 2000 Downtown and Downtown West have seen around 10,000 people move in. Of course, the corporations moving out of Downtown is the big issue that really hurts. But if the city can continue to capitalize on the demand for downtown living we could be talking about a St. Louis downtown that is mostly residential in a few decades. The thing that I tell people to be most afraid of downtown though, is reckless drivers. People just decided for whatever reason that the rules of the road don’t apply. My prediction is that St. Louis will continue to draw big crowds downtown, there will probably be a dip if the Front Office can’t get their shit together.
The MLB really needs to cut down the number of regular season games, I know it’ll ruin season & career stats but it’s just hard to invest in a 162 game season, that’s 2 whole NBA seasons. It’d also be great for pitching health. I say 100 games at most, ideally closer to 82. Whatever number around there divides best with the 32 teams that the league will cap at so everyone is playing each other with more games in their division.
The bridge in St. Pete will likely not fix anything. When politicians promise some new big car-centric infrastructure build that will make traffic better they are often wrong. This is because the same amount of cars are still trying to get to the same places that were backed up with traffic before. So the change isn’t enough. In St. Pete’s case building this bridge and destroying the old one won’t fix anything. Because even if the bridge can handle traffic better you still only have people funneling themselves over the two bridges. Even if they kept the third one, traffic wouldn’t be gone. What cities need to do is provide a diversity of choice in regards to transportation. They need to make it viable for people to take the bus, train, walk, bike, or drive. To their destinations. If all of these options are made realistic by cities (which in most American cities they are not realistic) people will choose amongst the different choice, taking pressure off all the others making the overall transportation flow much easier.
I think that whole idea iof new stadiums will bring higher attendance is just a line propagated by salesman to fleece the cities into paying for the stadium. The novelty wears off surprisingly fast, and the real fans will either show up or not.
To go to a game in person, it has to be easy. Why would anyone want to fight bad traffic, poor parking situations and just over all pain in the ass access. Charging people high prices to watch games on tv is a bad model and only pushes people to illegal options. They can complain about “bad ratings” but when the customer has to upgrade 3 tiers in their cable/streaming service, most look at the bill and say fuck that.
Heard mlb dont need attendance to make their money , but sponsers..well put all their games on 1 tv channel so we dont get frustrated to find/ watch them. We'll not pay to watch them on 2 channels. In fact better to build interest to bring back at least 2 free tv games a week to build interest and the old promotions from the old old days like ladies days , old timers game , father and sons day( daughters now too) . All to bring interest
Update: conspiradores de Querétaro finally Will have the first Home series on April 26th and Against all odds it is having a great reception to there's market state
The cost of tickets is a major factor. It’s hard to take a family to the ballpark these days. From parking to food, the premium pricing has pushed out a lot of working class folks that traditionally have been the backbone of the game.
I have been to 29 of the current 30 MLB parks (all except the new one for the Rangers) and, while I dont think Tampa's stadium is attractive, IMHO the least attractive ballpark is Rogers Centre (formerly SkyDome). An engineering marvel for its time but unattractive inside and out. Most MLB parks I think are quite attractive, partly because most of them are relatively new. Just about all of the ugly parks are gone or no longer used, such as the KingDome and Olympic Stadium.
All 30 parks, that's the dream! Never been to Toronto but the Rogers Center does look pretty ugly lol. New renos look decent though. At the very least it's centrally located. The cool thing is if the roof is open you get that crazy view of the CN tower.
New renovations at Roger's may have improved the atmosphere. But know what you mean. Tropicana stadium is a dump. Not to major league standards, or minor league.
@@lukeofnewyork For a few years, I had all 30 parks. The problem is they keep building them faster than I can get to them. I considered going to the new one in Arlington a few weeks ago because the total eclipse was viewable from there but the weather forecasts predicted clouds so I saw it in Ohio instead. I hope to get to Arlington in the next year or 2, but when they build the new one in Vegas, I'll be back to 29 again.
@@bruceboman9801 Actually, when I went to Tropicana, it wasnt quite as bad as I expected. And altho I went on a weeknight, I had no trouble getting there from across the bay. Another problem w Tampa was there werent many places to go to nearby before or after the game. It looked kind of like an industrial area.
$100 for tickets I paid $16.50 for 30 years ago? Adjust for inflation it's $35. Used to be going to a game was was fun since it didn't break the bank now forget I'll stay home and watch it.
Nice Vid… TV ratings are not as important as they used to be, imho… Alot of people only look a an occasional game on TV. I think looking at highlights on YT or other apps is how people are viewing games now.
For many of us living in minor league cities that never had many games broadcasted like the major league teams, if any, now with MiLB live streaming every game is visible with the home team announcers.. I rather watch my minor league team than go or watch the nearby major league team... I root for the HOME team, even if its a minor league team...
Maybe a small factor, but the umps are really ruining the game imo. Seeing some absolutely terrible calls, and the umps seemingly more interested in making the game about them
I agree with everything except maybe the world series comments. Across almost all sports there has been a constant decline in ratings and I even venture to say in TV in General. I just don't see a world where tv ratings in general go up from now on
Since teams like the A's are going to be outliers that bring down the average, shouldn't the analysis of attendance figures be done by determining the median instead of the average?
I watch as many cubs games as I can, that being said when the game starts at 9 o’clock on the west coast I cannot stay up for the whole thing. I have to wake up early and so do most Americans. It is not worth it to stay up for baseball and I love the sport.
I went to a game last year. It felt so rushed due to the pitch clock. I had a beer and a hot dog and it was already half over. It wasn't the relaxing experience that it used to be. Plus the cost is outrageous. I have no plans to attend a game this year.
Ticket prices rise each year. Taking a family to a game is a once or twice a year event. Concessions expensive, and the costs of streaming games goes up, but cheeper then attending.
I think 12k per game in Sacramento is really generous. I feel like the new will wear off that real quick. Im not sure about it. At first yes. About half way through a losing season and especially when they see ground broke in LV, which I still have my doubts will happen as well, they’ll be no better off in Sacramento.
It feels eerily similar to when the now-Titans first settled in Memphis in the late '90s while they were waiting for their new park to be built in Nashville proper, with regional rivalries between the two cities and a history of having been jilted in previous major-team bids playing a big role in their early attendance struggles. Given that Sacramentans are probably VERY aware that any arrangement for the A's to stay in their city will be temporary at best, and that the controversy and chaos surrounding the franchise's impending move to Vegas has left many sports fans in the state with VERY bad tastes in their mouths--not to mention the city itself frequently getting passed over for expansion in favor of the likes of Los Angeles and San Francisco--I fear that the A's' attendance will get much, MUCH worse before it starts to get better.
I think to fix this issue, MLB needs to reduce the number of games. In April, you have the nba and nhl playoffs. In September, you have the start of the nfl season. Interests and investments into mlb vary based on time of year, location, and other factors. You do have your outliers in this case. Make the season 138 games. Games played from Tuesdays to Sundays, make Mondays automatic day off for travel and rescheduling rainouts as opposed to double headers. 60 games vs. division 60 games vs. rest of league 6 game vs. Interleague rival 12 games vs. Interleagued division I think that the AL vs. NL games everyone plays everyone is a good idea but also impacts travel and redues rivalry games. Yes, Yankees vs. Dodgers sounds great, but who’s going out of their way to watch matchups like Pirates vs. Mariners, Rockies vs. Tigers, or Nationals vs. Royals, unless it’s the World Series? Do AL East vs. NL East, NL Central vs. AL Central, and NL West Vs. AL West in Interleague play. Make playoffs division winners plus next 3 best records per league. Wildcard games are 1 game playoff. Makes it more exciting. Next round is 5 game set. LCS and WS still 7 games.
Having that many less games also reduces rivalry games. I’m on board with some of these. Particularly, baseball starting late April or early May would be good and having Monday as automatic day off is good too. I still think a 3 game series is needed for wildcards. You can’t control someone else getting more wins when not playing directly and baseball all season is meant to be played in a series.
I think the playoffs are fine as is, but I've also thought 138 is the sweet spot. With how much pitchers are regressing in health, a shorter season will improve the quality of play.
@@mbdg6810 Not really. In the OP's scenario, you would play each division opponent 15 times instead of 13 and your interleague rival 6 times instead of 4. However, I still say keep the season 162 games.
Is there national interest in interleague matchups like Pirates-Mariners, Rockies-Tigers etc.? No, but it gives fans opportunities to see their teams play in ballparks that they wouldn't normally see their team play in very often. I'm a Royals fan in Las Vegas and the current interleague format affords me the opportunity to see the Royals play in Dodger Stadium in June. Under the old format, I'd have to wait 6 years to see KC play in Dodger Stadium. Under your proposal, the Royals and Dodgers would never play.
Toronto, which is usually a big sports market seems to struggle with baseball at times. Hell, the WNBA had 20,000 people for a preseason game. My work hands out free tickets for games and not many take them. Playoffs are different story. Hockey, basketball and soccer all have really good attendance. The Profession Women’s Hockey has better attendance than the A’s. With the NHL playoffs going on and Toronto being there will make attendance drop even more.
World Series games need to be played before 9pm on the East Coast.
World Series are always at 8pm EST since many years ago !!
How about some day games on Saturday and Sunday for the World Series? 4PM in East 1PM in the West?
Talk to the ad agencies, this is their fault @@scottrichardson4086
The last World Series game played in the day was October 24 1987 a Saturday
@@scottrichardson4086would get mixed up with football.
People can’t watch their teams on TV anymore so no one is getting invested enough to attend games. Easy.
Why can't they? I've been able to.
@@Motownsports89 Streaming packages are so unreasonable nowadays. I only want to watch sports. But I have to pay for 3 different services to do so. So I just do it illegally now because it's easier 🤷♂
@@inky-182 My CABLE service has a pay option service that allows me to see virtually any sports (MLB, NHL, NBA, college basketball). I can't believe you don't have the same thing wherever you are.
This is exactly it for me. Used to watch so many Indians / Guardians games when they were reasonably accessible.
For the past 5 or so years, because I couldn’t watch I didn’t know the players and never went to any games. And I consider myself a good fan. Even when they struggled I’d watch.
MLB needs to get this corrected fast.
Same here. I watch the Cardinals on Ballys. But the service (especially on my phone) is so bad it makes the games unwatchable. The streams freeze every few minutes forcing me to restart the app. How am I supposed to get invested when I’m constantly restarting the app?
Putting the new Rays ballpark in St. Pete would be such a mistake, its baffling that they would even think about doing it again…
The problem isn’t the trop, It’s always been the location. I was pissed when I saw that they were building the new stadium in st Pete. I agree, it’s a stupid decision.
you’re absolutely correct that the white sox attendance is so low because of the horrible play on the field, i can attest to that because i’m a sox fan, unlike what the cubs fans will tell you, sox can very easily average 30-32k a game whenever the team is good, chicago is a metra area of 9.5 million people, big enough to support two teams and them moving towards downtown and being in a great new stadium will also make attendance skyrocket, chicago is definitely a baseball city that will have people interested in watching either team in the postseason, similar to the new york teams, giants, dodgers, and the braves, people will watch those teams because of their history and of course big metro areas, the rangers play in a massive metro area that’s gonna pass chicago in population very soon, however they’re not a baseball city, they’re definitely a football city, and on top of the fact that they played a very less popular diamond team and neither team was expected to even win the pennant, i guess it just made things very uninteresting, there’s nobody to cheer for, there’s nobody to hate on, it was just 2 unpopular teams playing against each other and nobody outside of those states really even cared
I’m cubs fan and looked at your attendance numbers, it’s weird how it went down from 40k in 2012 down to 32k in 2019 and after pandemic it’s around 11k-18k. I assume it must be play
Tampa Bay’s situation is similar to what undid the Coyotes, arena was just too inaccessible
I also heard that the Coyotes tickets were crazy expensive because it only held like 12k seats? I also heard that they’re losing the Coyotes but getting another team in expansion.
@@lovesgucci1you are correct, the former owner of the Coyotes gets first dibs on owning a new phoenix expansion team if down the road the NHL goes through another wave of expansion teams
@@lovesgucci1 I also heard what you heard.
Decreasing TV viewers is more a function of cable cutting i would think.
World Series will always be tough. As I’ve grown up I enjoy the playoff journey more …. So many games full of contenders. You always run that risk if dodgers/yanks/cubs aren’t in it.
You shouldn't need certain markets to be in to do well.
I feel like the Miami marlins relocating would help league average attendance
Keep in mind that during the mid-teens, the Marlins were drawing a decent 1.7mil per season, despite sub .500 records. That said, they're at least upticking from those horrid attendance years from 2018-2022. The biggest intangible, like Tampa Bay, is the surge in population growth.
The location is terrible and the ownership is worse. Fix ownership, field a competitive team, re-sign players & you’ll definitely see attendance spike up.
@@lovesgucci1 You're correct on all counts. Much attention is paid to the inaccessibility of Tropicana Field for fans in Tampa, but getting to Miami from the fan rich suburbs in west Broward and PBC is far worse than the Ray's situation.
@@kurteckhardt7327 They assumed that putting it in a heavily Latino community would bring in more fans - which is ridiculous on so many fronts! No one wanted it there either. It is probably the nicest retractable roof ballpark; doesn’t look like a cave when watching on tv but does it matter if no one’s there to watch it??
As a lifelong MLB fan since the late 80’s, I’ve watched our beloved game get passed by the NFL.
The first reason is the NFL has a salary cap so all 32 fanbases feel their team has a shot to build a winner if their front office does the right thing. There are no haves and have-nots in the NFL as the big market Cowboys have zero financial advantage over the tiny market Packers.
That is the biggest problem in MLB as there is such a difference in payroll among the haves and have-nots. I live in the Philadelphia market so I know my team has the local TV deal that will spend on Free agents like Harper, Wheeler and Schwarber. Can we say that about the Pirates? Marlins? A’s? Reds? Rays? Royals? This is how you lose fans over the long run when they feel their team is at a disadvantage on opening day.
The second problem with MLB is the playoff rounds go too long and the World Series games start late. There are just too many playoff games that the casual just won’t get invested in unless their team is in it. I know so many fellow Phillies fans who check out once the Phillies are out of the playoffs.
The World Series should start at 7:30 Eastern Time. They should go back to starting the series on a Saturday so you can have possibly 4 weekend games so the West Coast is not a work when the games start. Many of these games go til midnight on the East Coast so you have already lost kids and people who go to work early on the East Coast. Think about the Superbowl starts at 6:30 so everyone watches it because it doesn’t end at midnight.
I live in Vegas. I don't want week day World Series games starting at 4:30.
@@conservativeeducator5457What’s the most important part of a baseball game? From the 6th to 9th inning. You’ll be home from work by the 4th inning so you’ll be watching when the true drama starts in the later innings. The East Coast viewers will still be up to see the later innings cause the game will end at 10:30-11:00 now. Starting a game later makes no sense for either coast.
It's also been passed by the NBA, and relatively soon soccer too.
The issue isn't the spending between large and small market teams. The Dodgers and Yankees have combined for two World Series over the past 20+ years and have spent several billion dollars. Small market teams like the Dbacks, Rays, Royals and Indians have all won or gotten to a World Series within the past decade. The Orioles are a juggernaut now and will be into the foreseeable future. The Rangers and Padres which are small-ish market teams have spent much more over the past few years with varying degrees of success. Nothing is stopping small and mid-market teams from spending, they all receive more than $200M a year from national TV deals and revenue sharing before a pitch is thrown. Their owners just pocket the money, because there's little incentive for them to spend it. To top it off, between 1927 and 1962 the large-market Yankees won 19 out of 36 World Series in that time frame, and baseball was never more popular.
MLB's decline on the national landscape over the past few decades is due to several other factors. The 1994 strike started it, a lot of fans were turned off by that. Interleague play took away part of what made the All-Star game and World Series (the two biggest national events for MLB) special, because now the AL and NL played each other constantly instead of only two times a year. Youth participation and interest has dropped in the US, due to several factors meaning kids aren't growing up baseball fans. As MLB's fandom ages out there aren't enough replacement fans. In today's fast paced constantly connected internet era, 162 2.5-3 hour games is too much of a time commitment for a lot of people. Games have moved to cable whereas before they were free over the air, and with the expense and overall cord cutting it's hurt access. It doesn't matter if the games start at 1pm or midnight, if I don't have cable I can't watch World Series Game 2 on FS1. Players aren't marketable, you hardly see them in national ads, on ESPN etc. The costs of going to games has gone up tremendously. Those are just some of the reasons for MLB's increased national irrelevance. With all that said though, it's still strong locally.
@@DennyJr22 It is really even with the NBA, MLS has a tenth the revenue of MLB and half of that has come from franchise fees.
@@davidfox9947Revenue is one measure to compare leagues, but fan interest and future growth is one that's just as important, if not more so. No different then how stocks are valued. The NBA is far ahead of MLB in that measure. The average age of a NBA fan is in their mid 30's, in the MLB it's the mid-50's. MLB revenue is so high because the average fan is an older one who has tons of disposable income (peak earning years, kids are gone, house paid off, etc). Those 50 and 60 somethings are going to pass away someday with less fans to replace them, whereas the NBA has tons of future growth.
Also I said soccer on purpose, I'm not ignorant enough to think that the MLS is anywhere near as big as MLB or will pass it anytime soon. I'm including the European leagues into that, tons of young adults follow those leagues closely. In addition there's an ongoing demographic shift in this country towards cultures who love soccer, and the upcoming Olympics/World Cup will give major tailwinds to soccer's growth in this country.
From Tampa to st pete there’s two bridges other wise I think you hit it spot on. It is true they are making a new bridge I’ve passed by it a lot. But as a local I agree with a lot of what you said and I am glad you covered it the way you did.
I wouldn't be surprised if the state of Nevada (rightfully) Told fisher to go suck an egg. after the whole raiders fiasco, I'm sure they are tired of giving out handouts to less than reputable team owners. and i don't blame them, a Billon dollars in debt for two stadiums to teams who cant even give quality on the field.
Great video!
On the viewership front, I saw that it's starting out well this year too. I wonder if last year's drop off had anything to do with the big market flops? Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, Angels, Cubs, White Sox all missed the postseason. In a world where more of those teams do well far into the season and the Dodgers and Phillies also stay hot. I imagine viewership gains could be kept? I feel like I was the only one still watching the Yankees the last weekend last season. They absolutely sucked. The park was *empty* the final months despite packed houses the rest of the season. Same with the Mets. NYC media market is massive. Such a drag effect in that case.
An NYY LAD World Series with Soto, Judge, Ohtani, and Betts would be an international ratings success! Though the league shouldn't be totally relying on a super star matchup alone, that's not sustainable.
As a Red Sox fan I would hate to see this, as a baseball fan it would glorious
So the Rangers winning the world series was bad for baseball
@thomaswinzeler9739
If the Rangers are in the 5th largest tv market but it’s not a popular team - yet. Add in the Diamondbacks, it just wasn’t a marquee matchup. Baseball fans were happy to see a new team win but it definitely didn’t bring in new or casual fans.
@@michaelkilbride6420 when did I say that? I followed and enjoyed that series, and was happy for the Rangers to get their well deserved win. It's not that it was bad for baseball, but it clearly didn't pull the ratings that other matchups would have. They don't have the national following that other teams do, neither do the Diamondbacks. I personally don't care that much about viewership, I was just making a comment on the trend.
I hate to say it, but St Louis' days of 3M attendance are over. Besides the team on the field being sub par, the downtown hits new lows every year. Even their iconic skyscrapers are vacant. They've somehow drawn well despite their declining, crime-ridden downtown. I think those days are over. Prediction: 2.5M in 2024. Below 2M in 2025.
I think this is ridiculous. I’m from St. Louis and I am downtown twice a week. Downtown is not “crime ridden”, crime in the city has been generally decreasing with 2020 being a big exception. But crime on a peice of paper, and crime in reality is often hard to compare. I’m not saying there’s no crime and that you should not consider it, but there also isn’t a bad man on every corner waiting
to attack you.
It’s also important to remember that St. Louis’ crime rate is heavily skewed by the “City-County Divide”. In the 1870s city leaders declared themselves to be an independent city separate from St. Louis county. They did this because they did not want to be responsible for the very rural parts of the region. This ended up being a very shortsighted choice since when mass suburbanization happened the city lost over half its population. But what this means for crime is that when St. Louis gets listed as one of the most dangerous cities, those crime stats are only being compared to the cities 1870 borders. If you were to combine the City and County’s crime and population totals St. Louis would be a more middle of the pack city in terms of danger. This leads St. Louis to have a horrible reputation, one that isn’t reflected in reality. Another example, only 1 in 10 people in the entire St. Louis metro live in the city of St. Louis as opposed to a surrounding county. While the majority of crime happens within specifically, the north side of the city. Again, I’m not trying to downplay the crime that does happen, and I’m not trying to paint St. Louis as a city with no crime problem. But it would not be viewed in the same light if it weren’t for this divide.
The Downtown neighborhoods have actually been doing quite well in the last 20 years, since 2000 Downtown and Downtown West have seen around 10,000 people move in. Of course, the corporations moving out of Downtown is the big issue that really hurts. But if the city can continue to capitalize on the demand for downtown living we could be talking about a St. Louis downtown that is mostly residential in a few decades.
The thing that I tell people to be most afraid of downtown though, is reckless drivers. People just decided for whatever reason that the rules of the road don’t apply.
My prediction is that St. Louis will continue to draw big crowds downtown, there will probably be a dip if the Front Office can’t get their shit together.
St. Louis has iconic skyscrapers? 😂
The MLB really needs to cut down the number of regular season games, I know it’ll ruin season & career stats but it’s just hard to invest in a 162 game season, that’s 2 whole NBA seasons. It’d also be great for pitching health. I say 100 games at most, ideally closer to 82. Whatever number around there divides best with the 32 teams that the league will cap at so everyone is playing each other with more games in their division.
The bridge in St. Pete will likely not fix anything. When politicians promise some new big car-centric infrastructure build that will make traffic better they are often wrong. This is because the same amount of cars are still trying to get to the same places that were backed up with traffic before. So the change isn’t enough.
In St. Pete’s case building this bridge and destroying the old one won’t fix anything. Because even if the bridge can handle traffic better you still only have people funneling themselves over the two bridges. Even if they kept the third one, traffic wouldn’t be gone.
What cities need to do is provide a diversity of choice in regards to transportation. They need to make it viable for people to take the bus, train, walk, bike, or drive. To their destinations. If all of these options are made realistic by cities (which in most American cities they are not realistic) people will choose amongst the different choice, taking pressure off all the others making the overall transportation flow much easier.
I think that whole idea iof new stadiums will bring higher attendance is just a line propagated by salesman to fleece the cities into paying for the stadium. The novelty wears off surprisingly fast, and the real fans will either show up or not.
I am more concerned with minor league attendance figures. Whether they have recovered from the lost season to the pandemic...
The A's attendance is so much of an outlier that it should not even factor into the average.
To go to a game in person, it has to be easy. Why would anyone want to fight bad traffic, poor parking situations and just over all pain in the ass access.
Charging people high prices to watch games on tv is a bad model and only pushes people to illegal options. They can complain about “bad ratings” but when the customer has to upgrade 3 tiers in their cable/streaming service, most look at the bill and say fuck that.
What about teams like the Yankees and Dodgers pulling up attendance.
Heard mlb dont need attendance to make their money , but sponsers..well put all their games on 1 tv channel so we dont get frustrated to find/ watch them. We'll not pay to watch them on 2 channels. In fact better to build interest to bring back at least 2 free tv games a week to build interest and the old promotions from the old old days like ladies days , old timers game , father and sons day( daughters now too) . All to bring interest
I hope that the MLB continues to fail.
I don’t like all the extra inter league play. I miss it when it was this much more limited kind of mid season special treat.
Yea it made the all star game and World Series that much more special
Update: conspiradores de Querétaro finally Will have the first Home series on April 26th and Against all odds it is having a great reception to there's market state
The cost of tickets is a major factor. It’s hard to take a family to the ballpark these days. From parking to food, the premium pricing has pushed out a lot of working class folks that traditionally have been the backbone of the game.
I have been to 29 of the current 30 MLB parks (all except the new one for the Rangers) and, while I dont think Tampa's stadium is attractive, IMHO the least attractive ballpark is Rogers Centre (formerly SkyDome). An engineering marvel for its time but unattractive inside and out.
Most MLB parks I think are quite attractive, partly because most of them are relatively new. Just about all of the ugly parks are gone or no longer used, such as the KingDome and Olympic Stadium.
All 30 parks, that's the dream! Never been to Toronto but the Rogers Center does look pretty ugly lol. New renos look decent though. At the very least it's centrally located.
The cool thing is if the roof is open you get that crazy view of the CN tower.
New renovations at Roger's may have improved the atmosphere. But know what you mean. Tropicana stadium is a dump. Not to major league standards, or minor league.
@@lukeofnewyork For a few years, I had all 30 parks. The problem is they keep building them faster than I can get to them. I considered going to the new one in Arlington a few weeks ago because the total eclipse was viewable from there but the weather forecasts predicted clouds so I saw it in Ohio instead. I hope to get to Arlington in the next year or 2, but when they build the new one in Vegas, I'll be back to 29 again.
@@bruceboman9801 Actually, when I went to Tropicana, it wasnt quite as bad as I expected. And altho I went on a weeknight, I had no trouble getting there from across the bay. Another problem w Tampa was there werent many places to go to nearby before or after the game. It looked kind of like an industrial area.
Rogers centre is outdated but the location is great
Gotta love Major League Baseball ⚾️
League would show growth if Oakland wasn’t so bad
People are near broke, going to watch a bunch of rich people play a game is getting kind of annoying.
But is baseball gaining new fans? Under the age of 50?
Yes
@@Motownsports89 Do you know any?
@@ronniecozzi8385 Myself, my wife, and a bunch of people I work with.
Me
FYI there are 3 bridges across Tampa Bay not 1
Population in general declining
$100 for tickets I paid $16.50 for 30 years ago? Adjust for inflation it's $35. Used to be going to a game was was fun since it didn't break the bank now forget I'll stay home and watch it.
They still sell $5 tickets
@@avery.a5948 For 3rd base 12 rows back?
Nice Vid… TV ratings are not as important as they used to be, imho… Alot of people only look a an occasional game on TV. I think looking at highlights on YT or other apps is how people are viewing games now.
For many of us living in minor league cities that never had many games broadcasted like the major league teams, if any, now with MiLB live streaming every game is visible with the home team announcers.. I rather watch my minor league team than go or watch the nearby major league team... I root for the HOME team, even if its a minor league team...
Except in Oakland , Tampa and white Sox
I was looking at going to an angels game but I said fuck that when I saw ALL the tickets were from resellers. I’m not paying a scalper, sorry.
Cost of tickets, parking, food, gas to the game. For a family of 4 you can easily end up spending $400+
White Sox has that beat soon..they literally draw in 20 fans ...per game and they may just fall asleep..
Maybe a small factor, but the umps are really ruining the game imo. Seeing some absolutely terrible calls, and the umps seemingly more interested in making the game about them
I agree with everything except maybe the world series comments. Across almost all sports there has been a constant decline in ratings and I even venture to say in TV in General. I just don't see a world where tv ratings in general go up from now on
Since teams like the A's are going to be outliers that bring down the average, shouldn't the analysis of attendance figures be done by determining the median instead of the average?
I watch as many cubs games as I can, that being said when the game starts at 9 o’clock on the west coast I cannot stay up for the whole thing. I have to wake up early and so do most Americans. It is not worth it to stay up for baseball and I love the sport.
Zzzzzz
lol… you r dreaming … MLB is joke and trying to get attendance is going to be harder. Tampa? lol … let’s see more renderings? Lol
MLB attendance is down everywhere except for Arizona and Texas. Idk what figure you’re looking at. Even in LA it’s down 11% despite their big signing.
You have to look at attendance now vs attendance at this point last season. My numbers came from baseball reference. Right now it’s up for 16 teams
As of today the Brewers are down 1673 per game
New 35k plus stadium in Oakland and a decent team will almost sell out 👍
Um no. I lived there- it’s a complete shitt hole of a city
Hahaha
I went to a game last year. It felt so rushed due to the pitch clock. I had a beer and a hot dog and it was already half over. It wasn't the relaxing experience that it used to be. Plus the cost is outrageous. I have no plans to attend a game this year.
Ticket prices rise each year. Taking a family to a game is a once or twice a year event. Concessions expensive, and the costs of streaming games goes up, but cheeper then attending.
I think 12k per game in Sacramento is really generous. I feel like the new will wear off that real quick. Im not sure about it. At first yes. About half way through a losing season and especially when they see ground broke in LV, which I still have my doubts will happen as well, they’ll be no better off in Sacramento.
It feels eerily similar to when the now-Titans first settled in Memphis in the late '90s while they were waiting for their new park to be built in Nashville proper, with regional rivalries between the two cities and a history of having been jilted in previous major-team bids playing a big role in their early attendance struggles. Given that Sacramentans are probably VERY aware that any arrangement for the A's to stay in their city will be temporary at best, and that the controversy and chaos surrounding the franchise's impending move to Vegas has left many sports fans in the state with VERY bad tastes in their mouths--not to mention the city itself frequently getting passed over for expansion in favor of the likes of Los Angeles and San Francisco--I fear that the A's' attendance will get much, MUCH worse before it starts to get better.
I think to fix this issue, MLB needs to reduce the number of games. In April, you have the nba and nhl playoffs. In September, you have the start of the nfl season. Interests and investments into mlb vary based on time of year, location, and other factors. You do have your outliers in this case.
Make the season 138 games. Games played from Tuesdays to Sundays, make Mondays automatic day off for travel and rescheduling rainouts as opposed to double headers.
60 games vs. division
60 games vs. rest of league
6 game vs. Interleague rival
12 games vs. Interleagued division
I think that the AL vs. NL games everyone plays everyone is a good idea but also impacts travel and redues rivalry games. Yes, Yankees vs. Dodgers sounds great, but who’s going out of their way to watch matchups like Pirates vs. Mariners, Rockies vs. Tigers, or Nationals vs. Royals, unless it’s the World Series? Do AL East vs. NL East, NL Central vs. AL Central, and NL West Vs. AL West in Interleague play.
Make playoffs division winners plus next 3 best records per league. Wildcard games are 1 game playoff. Makes it more exciting. Next round is 5 game set. LCS and WS still 7 games.
Having that many less games also reduces rivalry games.
I’m on board with some of these. Particularly, baseball starting late April or early May would be good and having Monday as automatic day off is good too.
I still think a 3 game series is needed for wildcards. You can’t control someone else getting more wins when not playing directly and baseball all season is meant to be played in a series.
I think the playoffs are fine as is, but I've also thought 138 is the sweet spot. With how much pitchers are regressing in health, a shorter season will improve the quality of play.
@@mbdg6810 Not really. In the OP's scenario, you would play each division opponent 15 times instead of 13 and your interleague rival 6 times instead of 4. However, I still say keep the season 162 games.
Is there national interest in interleague matchups like Pirates-Mariners, Rockies-Tigers etc.? No, but it gives fans opportunities to see their teams play in ballparks that they wouldn't normally see their team play in very often. I'm a Royals fan in Las Vegas and the current interleague format affords me the opportunity to see the Royals play in Dodger Stadium in June. Under the old format, I'd have to wait 6 years to see KC play in Dodger Stadium. Under your proposal, the Royals and Dodgers would never play.
Yes, getting the owners to agree to a significant loss of revenue is so realistic.
They’re not staying in Sacramento. Are you kidding?
Toronto, which is usually a big sports market seems to struggle with baseball at times. Hell, the WNBA had 20,000 people for a preseason game. My work hands out free tickets for games and not many take them. Playoffs are different story. Hockey, basketball and soccer all have really good attendance. The Profession Women’s Hockey has better attendance than the A’s. With the NHL playoffs going on and Toronto being there will make attendance drop even more.
too expensive - parking is ridiculous