World Series ratings down again.

[Cedric]

Is there a problem? What is the problem if there is one? Discuss.

I blame ESPN and FOX for shoving nothing but Boston and New York at people for the whole year. If you tell common fans that only two teams matter why should they watch other teams?

[Redsland]

I blame the absence of Scooter and the presence of Jeanne Zelasko. Eric Byrnes isn't helping, either.

[Johnny Footstool]

My Cards-fan friend and I wanted to watch Game 1 at a bar on Saturday night. Unfortunately, the bartender wouldn't put it on the big projection screen and wouldn't turn the volume up because college football was on, and it was more important to him and the dozen other patrons to watch Colorado vs. Oklahoma than to watch the World Series. We went to a couple of other places and found pretty much the same attitude. We ended up watching about half the game at another bar -- not on the big-screen projector, but on a crystal-clear LCD -- but had to leave once the band started playing.

Originally Posted by Redsland

I blame the absence of Scooter and the presence of Jeanne Zelasko. Eric Byrnes isn't helping, either.

Eric Byrnes has an enormous, pumpkin-like head, and when he grins his face cracks like a pre-surgery Joan Rivers.

[Reds Fanatic]

This is an article about the effects of the lower ratings.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ngs/index.html

The worst part of this is according to the article MLB has given FOX permission to make the breaks between innings longer next year so they can run more ads during the games. So you already losing viewers and now you are going to make the few of us that still watch suffer with even longer breaks.

[Roy Tucker]

Fox's productions of the game do drive me crazy.

The way they jump from one extreme closeup of player, fans, manager, etc. to another makes me feel like the jump-cuts are being done by some ADD-stricken child.

And I think I know Jeff Suppan's face better than my wife's after seeing it in nostril-hair closeup detail.

For heaven's sake, pan back out so I can take in what is happening on the field and stay with one shot more than a nanosecond.

[BRM]

Originally Posted by Reds Fanatic

This is an article about the effects of the lower ratings.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ngs/index.html

The worst part of this is according to the article MLB has given FOX permission to make the breaks between innings longer next year so they can run more ads during the games. So you already losing viewers and now you are going to make the few of us that still watch suffer with even longer breaks.

Longer breaks may drive away some of the current viewers as well.

[Redsland]

I've always assumed the extreme close-ups and quick cuts are there to frustrate waving cell phone owners.

To that end, I'm all for 'em.

[M2]

Originally Posted by Reds Fanatic

This is an article about the effects of the lower ratings.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ngs/index.html

The worst part of this is according to the article MLB has given FOX permission to make the breaks between innings longer next year so they can run more ads during the games. So you already losing viewers and now you are going to make the few of us that still watch suffer with even longer breaks.

Thanks for posting that. The part about the Neilsen's don't measure is worth a direct mention.

"I'm constantly amazed at how much stock TV execs put into Nielsen ratings," Hoffarth said, "because they weren't created to assess the actual 'viewer attendance,' but to give them some kind of vague measurement that could be used to show advertisers that this is what we think people are doing with their TV sets. Any ratings system that doesn't take into account those watching in sports bars, dorms, hotels and office buildings, and has no accountability for TiVo or DVR players, or who's watching on MLB.com on video streaming, plus has a different measure for those watching over-the-air versus cable, just seems to be very unstable and hard to bank on.

"I'm of the Billy Packer thinking -- gasp -- that it's crazy to assume viewership is down year after year when all you read and hear and feel is that the sport is a very healthy spectator activity."

Though I know that the length of postseason games has begun to wear on me. A low scoring contest can take up to three hours. That's ridiculous. I've found myself going away from the games to watch something else and then coming back for the latter innings. I just don't care to watch that much advertising and I find the added gap between innings leaves me feeling awfully apathetic about what's happening on the field. These aren't teams I root for on a normal basis and when the pace of the game is slowed to this extent I'm left with the existential question of whether I give that much of a damn about the next inning. What I'm finding more often than I'd have ever imagined is that I don't.

Oh, and for anyone who ever thought parity was what brought in viewership for football, time to revisit that theory. Clearly it doesn't turn the trick in baseball. My take has always been that gambling rakes in viewership in football. Parity just makes the betting line more interesting.

[Blimpie]

I openly acknowledge that if MLB returned to airing the WS games at earlier time slots, they might experience some short term diminishing returns on their overall ratings. However, I feel that by trying to accomodate all market time zones simply for a larger market "share grab" is an extremely myopic way of thinking.

MLB needs to forsake a little in the ratings department and return to a grassroots marketing approach. Nowadays, the young baseball fan is as disenchanted with the game as ever before. By airing WS games so late in the evening, how can MLB hope to secure this vital demographic later on in their lives (when these children grow and actually have discretionary income to spend on the MLB product) if most kids cannot physically witness the event?

The World Series is--and should be--the crown jewel of all sports. Young fans have gravitated away from baseball, in a large part, due to the fact that they simply cannot connect with the most truly marquis moments the sport has to offer. Instead of worrying about how many homes in the Los Angeles or San Francisco markets are tuned in to watch two Midwest teams play in the classic, how about playing a day game or two for the kids? Yes, I know that program ratings drive advertising rates--which, it turn, feed the main network revenue streams. However, at some point, they are going to have WS games with 100% coverage saturation and not a sole who cares about the outcome.

Personally, I have an eight year old son who would give his eye teeth to be allowed to stay up and watch the WS games. I would probably relax my rules if the stinking games actually started and ended during the same day. As it currently stands, my boy has a 6:00am wakeup call every school day and simply needs more quality rest that he can obtain if I allowed him to watch the broadcast.

Oh well, at least he got a nice new radio for his birthday a few weeks ago. Now he can at least go to bed dreaming about the World Series.

[westofyou]

The way they jump from one extreme closeup of player, fans, manager, etc. to another makes me feel like the jump-cuts are being done by some ADD-stricken child.

They perform more jump cuts then Goddard in his prime.

[Redsland]

They show more angles than MC Escher.

[westofyou]

They make more cheese then Wisconsin

[Redsland]

They have more sound effects than a clown convention.

[RedFanAlways1966]

Originally Posted by M2

Thanks for posting that. The part about the Neilsen's don't measure is worth a direct mention.

I agree. I have done the Neilsen thing. I thought it was cool to be asked and thought I'd be a real stickler for marking things down. I hate to sound dishonest, but will be honest here...

For those who have never done Neilsen... you get a little book and you are supposed to manually write down every program you watch. Each TV has it's own book. More than one book to keep! After 1 week you are supposed to mail the books back to them immediately.

The first day or so I was on it like a hawk. By day two or three I was already sick of writing everything down. Flip channels and you are supposed to mark it down. Anyone out there who doesn't utilize that flipper quite often? I do. I started marking things down a day or two after each day. Looked in the TV Guide to make sure I wasn't caught lying and wrote down one program for each hour. I also marked that no TV was on for periods of time when it actually was. And the 12-year-old and his TV... no chance of that being accurate. I just put down some Cartoon Network and Disney stuff and was done with it. Lo and behold... they came back a couple of months later and asked me to do it again. This time I said no thanks. I've got better things to do for the $5 they give you... like flip channels!

Bottom-line... my info. was bogus. Not complete hogwash, but nowhere near accurate. I am sure there are people who enjoy doing it and keep it completely accurate, but I am sure there are a lot like me too. So how accurate are their rankings? It seems that the TV people take it to heart, so it must work for some. Because of personal experience (and dishonesty!) I have to wonder about it's validity. I like to think that I am a fairly normal type (hold the comments, please!) and can see lots of people doing the same as me.

[GridironGrace]

If you ask me the whole broadcasting system and TV time for MLB is worthless... no vararity, and i never get to see the reds unless thier playing the Cubs on the road or the Braves on the road.(WGN and TBS)

the marketing of MLB SUCKS!!! but that just IMO..

They need a system kinda like the NFL's show more games.... on more channels.. especially afternoon games. Have a few nights a week that a couple channels.. not ust ESPN shows a game..

watching the same teams over and over on ESPN is getting very old!!!!! and im sure it has for alot of ppl and therefore no one cares about watching the games on TV cause they dont get to watch THIER TEAM!!!