- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/9/12 at 1:39 pm to stapuffmarshy
its good for the tv company to make more money but its not good for the growth of the game to show the same team in primetime every single night.
Posted on 10/9/12 at 1:45 pm to bbap
how do you grow the game if less people are watching because the mlb wanted to be fair the padres and rockies?
Posted on 10/9/12 at 1:48 pm to TigerPhan27
quote:
how do you grow the game if less people are watching because the mlb wanted to be fair the padres and Rockies?
I mean I partly agree with you, but this isn't the Padres or Rockies we are talking about.
Posted on 10/9/12 at 1:48 pm to TigerPhan27
quote:
how do you grow the game if less people are watching because the mlb wanted to be fair the padres and rockies?
its seems pretty simple to me. while the northeast may not be watching you can grow your product in other markets.
hell if you really wanted to grow it throughout you should never put the yankees/sox on since that market is about as saturated as it gets. i understand that's crazy and im not actually advocating that, just pointing out an extreme.
there needs to be a balance. the yanks may be a cash cow but you shouldnt ignore other markets all the time. and by balance i mean 70/30, just not 100/0.
This post was edited on 10/9/12 at 1:50 pm
Posted on 10/9/12 at 2:08 pm to taylork37
quote:
I mean I partly agree with you, but this isn't the Padres or Rockies we are talking about.
no it's the a's/tigers or the cards/nats, or the reds/giants none of which = ratings. This really isn't rocket science.
Posted on 10/9/12 at 2:32 pm to TigerPhan27
Plus for the Monday and Wednesday night games during the season, they're screwed on west coast games.
If you start at 5 your crowd won't be that good. Game starts at 6 local time at the earliest, 9 eastern. You lose a TON of viewers.
If you start at 5 your crowd won't be that good. Game starts at 6 local time at the earliest, 9 eastern. You lose a TON of viewers.
Posted on 10/9/12 at 2:43 pm to The Boat
quote:
It fricked the A's.
Why?? They have home field advantadge.
Posted on 10/9/12 at 2:45 pm to dukke v
quote:
Why?? They have home field advantadge
Because with home field advantage, you are usually guaranteed more than one home game.
Along with the fact that game 2 was at 9am West Coast time.
And Verlander would have had to pitch in the coliseum
This post was edited on 10/9/12 at 2:52 pm
Posted on 10/9/12 at 2:48 pm to Tiger Ryno
quote:
they have already devalued the regular season by making it 6000 games long
Posted on 10/9/12 at 3:03 pm to Rohan2Reed
The ways that I, as a marginal MLB fan, would fix the sport, is cut the number of regular season games in half, institute the use of the pitch clock (as pioneered by the SEC in baseball), institute the robotic empire (a machine that measures players when they're on deck and creates an electronic strike zone for ever player and calls balls and strikes accordingly without bias), institute a salary cap (albiet one that is far less restrictive than other sports), and standardize the designated hitter rule between both leagues. I don't care if both or neither have it (personally, I like designated hitters), but I'd just like it to be the same.
That's just my two sense.
The cutting the number of games is due to my opinion that playing so many games devalues each game until each individual game no longer matters. Teams can go long stretches playing poorly to mediocre and then suddenly come out of nowhere and win their divisions in the final month.
I do like the new postseason format, though, except for the 2-3 and 3-4. I'd like to see them go back to the 2-2-1 and the 3-3-1.
That's just my two sense.
The cutting the number of games is due to my opinion that playing so many games devalues each game until each individual game no longer matters. Teams can go long stretches playing poorly to mediocre and then suddenly come out of nowhere and win their divisions in the final month.
I do like the new postseason format, though, except for the 2-3 and 3-4. I'd like to see them go back to the 2-2-1 and the 3-3-1.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News