I can't imagine, as late as last year, that Yanks/Sox end up on the secondary channel.    MLB Network and ESPN carried the other two games so there's still value to that game.

When I went to the HOF the first thing I saw after walking through the door was Shoeless Joe Jackson's shoes. 

There was no secondary channel until August of last year and FOX didn't have a contract that would have allowed them to put it there last year.

I'm not sure why you're saying that anyone thinks there's no value to that game - I'm saying quite the opposite.  It's more valuable to FOX right now to put some of it's best content on FS1 to get that network known and established than it is to try and absolutely maximize the number of eyes on the main network on a Saturday afternoon.  You're assuming "secondary channel = secondary value" and that's just not always the case.  

FWIW, FS1 is in more homes than MLB and isn't that far behind ESPN.

Well, MLB Network has one sport option for content.  

Anyway, IMO, July/August is "baseball's time" on the calendar.  While it's obvious that you and I disagree on the value of a specific game, it seems that baseball would want the most eyes possible between the end of basketball/start of football and that's on the the major network. 

It's Fox's call, not MLB's. Fox would rather move eyes to FS1.

This is pointless. Baseball is not going anywhere. Baseball is fine.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/4/2014 9:59:00 AM (view original):
Well, MLB Network has one sport option for content.  

Anyway, IMO, July/August is "baseball's time" on the calendar.  While it's obvious that you and I disagree on the value of a specific game, it seems that baseball would want the most eyes possible between the end of basketball/start of football and that's on the the major network. 

And FOX wants prime regular content for FS1 during that time of year.  These are negotiations and there's a contract agreed to.

Here's the tradeoff MLB made - they turned 14 Saturday afternoons on FOX into 14 on FS1, and then got 26 additional national games on FS1 out of the deal, and probably considerably more money overall since the deal was for double the national games.  Your can certainly argue that that is a short-sighted money grab on MLB's part since while FS1 is still relatively unknown they are losing eyes on their product and opportunity for growth, and that I wouldn't necessarily disagree with.  It may very well be a bad approach long term.

But that's not where this started - you presented soccer on FOX vs. baseball on FS1 as some statement about how FOX feels relatively about the two sports right now, and that's just not true.  I'll have to find the soccer numbers to verify, but I'm pretty sure Yanks/Sox would have done better for them.  But FS1 taking off is worth way more to FOX than getting marginally higher ratings on FOX in July/Aug. 

I guess I'm not being clear.   I don't think soccer is surpassing MLB tomorrow.    However, I can see it happening in the future.   I submit that FOX thought "This is what Yanks/Sox in August historically draws.   What would soccer draw?"   Of course, if MLB was a big "winner", they wouldn't experiment for future viable FS1 content.   Bet we don't see Sunday afternoon NFL games on FS1. 

And I submit that FOX was planning on putting some premium mid-summer games (Yanks/Sox obviously included) games on FS1 when they inked the deal.  Eyes on FS1 are worth way more to FOX than eyes on FOX at this point.  The tournament that created Saturday's soccer game wasn't even in existence when that deal was signed. 

No, we're not getting Sunday afternoon games on FS1 at anytime soon, because FOX doesn't have a bargaining chip like "We'll double the amount of national games" with the NFL - it already has a national audience every time it's being played.  All they could do is offer way more than someone who was keeping all the games on the main network.  But we did see the NFL take a similar tack with Thursday Night Football.  Those games always had less eyes on them than they would have had they offered that package to one of the networks, but in the short term, it was worth it to them to use them to get the NFL Network into more homes and raise their carriage rates.  And now that it's established, they are trying to double-dip by doing the simulcast deal.

ESPN had Sox-Yankees on AGAIN last night, despite both being largely irrelevant and much better matchups yesterday (KC-Oakland, Milwaukee-St. Louis, Hamels vs. Strasburg). I'm sure that's helping the sport.

Posted by dahsdebater on 8/4/2014 12:16:00 PM (view original):
Aside from the fact that you happen to be a fan of one of the teams, how can you totally ignore the fact that Yanks/Sox just ISN'T an important matchup this season?  Only one of the teams is contending, and even that is a generous assessment.  Ironically, I don't think you'd say nearly as much about a Baltimore/Toronto matchup, or a Baltimore/Oakland matchup, or Seattle/Toronto, even though all of those are far more relevant with substantial playoff implications.  You think it's good for the future of baseball to try to build up fan bases for the handful of teams with the most money and just say "who cares who's winning, look at these overpaid guys!"?  Ignoring the fact that you somehow don't even seem to understand how the network contracts work, the particular game you keep harping on is borderline irrelevant.

Uh, I'm pretty sure the network decides which games to televise.    FOX deemed NY/Bos more noteworthy than any of the others(or, at the very least, more likely to draw eyes to the tube).   Please tell me you understand that I didn't pick the game to televise.

As far as what I'd say, I'd still be saying "FOX put soccer on their national network channel ahead of MLB" because, you know, that's what happened.   The teams involved is irrelevant. 

BTW, that's sort of why I disagree with cheez.    FOX chose the MLB game that they thought would get the most viewers.   And still put it on their secondary channel behind soccer. 

FWIW, MLB Network and ESPN chose the Yanks/Sox games also for their Fri/Sun night telecasts.    So I'm guessing they care less about playoff scenarios in early August than they do about eyes on the tube.    Don't get all pissy because the networks think O's/A's would draw 9 viewers.