All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Opening Day.....
3/25/2014 10:41 AM
3/22 was the earliest MLB game ever.  They mentioned that during the broadcast.
3/25/2014 10:41 AM
I would guess I've gotten up twice to watch them then. 

But I'm missing your point.    Is it that I'm a bad baseball fan in your opinion?    Because, as I said, I listen to sports talk radio all day M-F.   The first I heard about these games counting was Mattingly commenting on Puig grabbing something every time he swings and misses.   There just wasn't any notable coverage.    And, IMO, baseball does itself a disservice when it's fanbase doesn't know the season has started.
3/25/2014 10:52 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/25/2014 10:41:00 AM (view original):
I would guess I've gotten up twice to watch them then. 

But I'm missing your point.    Is it that I'm a bad baseball fan in your opinion?    Because, as I said, I listen to sports talk radio all day M-F.   The first I heard about these games counting was Mattingly commenting on Puig grabbing something every time he swings and misses.   There just wasn't any notable coverage.    And, IMO, baseball does itself a disservice when it's fanbase doesn't know the season has started.
Well, I guess that exchange specifically was to say that this is nothing new.

But mainly, I'm just going back to my belief that MLB wants to do these games to help expand its reach overseas, but wants to treat the day that most of the league opens as "THE" opening day.

I agree that on paper it doesn't sound like a good idea if a large percentage of baseball fans didn't know that games that counted were played over the weekend, but practically I don't know that it hurts anything, unless it somehow negatively impacts enthusiasm for Opening Day.

3/25/2014 10:54 AM
Let's put it another way.   I've said for quite some time that baseball has a small window to be relevant in the sports world.    Football, pro and college, dominate a lot of the calendar.   I don't think there's anything MLB can do in September to take the headlines.  But, the start of the season is open.   NCAA BB ends in early April(3 games in April, I think).  The NBA is in it's pre-playoff, 1st round stinkers area.   The NFL draft is a month away.   So baseball has the first month of the season to build some momentum and keep eyes on their game until football starts.     And they open the season in anonymity. 
3/25/2014 11:01 AM
2 teams opened their seasons in anonymity.  I just don't really see that as a net negative unless it somehow negatively impacts interest/attention in the official Opening Day.
3/25/2014 11:06 AM
MLB is still making a big fuss out of promoting next week as "Opening Week".  It's not like anybody is saying, "Bah, no big deal, we already opened the season a week ago".
3/25/2014 11:10 AM
If MLB wants to expand their market, maybe they should do something in America to get the interest of anyone but 40+ year old white guys.   Because no one else is paying attention to them now. 
3/25/2014 11:14 AM
Maybe they should - doesn't mean playing these games hurts anything though.
3/25/2014 11:14 AM
3/25/2014 11:19 AM
To me, the argument against these games is the disservice it is to existing fans of the teams involved (especially the team that has to count them as home games) - I think the impact on overall interest in the game in North America is pretty much neutral.
3/25/2014 11:19 AM
I guess I think opening a season when no one knows is bad.   Maybe not.   But it seems to me that you'd want people paying attention to your first game.   It's apparent that you're in the "Meh, there are 14 other first games" group.  Which is fine.  Just seems like a short-sighted view on a bigger problem.

tec, people will go to baseball games.   It's relatively inexpensive and you drink beer in the sun.  That's a good day if you ask me.   But, if you're just hanging out and drinking beer in the sun, maybe you don't need the baseball game.  The younger generation doesn't care about baseball.
3/25/2014 11:26 AM
Posted by AlCheez on 3/25/2014 11:19:00 AM (view original):
To me, the argument against these games is the disservice it is to existing fans of the teams involved (especially the team that has to count them as home games) - I think the impact on overall interest in the game in North America is pretty much neutral.
No, it's not a disservice to the fans, it's a disservice to itself.   MLB owes the fans nothing.   If they want to play the entire season in foreign countries at 3 AM EST, it certainly can.   But, if you want people to pay attention, you have to give them a reason.    They didn't get a lot of eyes on the two games that kicked off their season. 
3/25/2014 11:35 AM

Each team was home for one of the two games.  So AZ and LA only lost one potential home date.  Or, the equivalent of what used to be a scheduled doubleheader.

My guess is that the lost home revenue was at least partially offset by the merchandising of Dodger and DBack apparel.  For all we know, MLB may have kicked back some money to both teams for the inconvenience of sacrificing a home date and having to go the Australia as well.

3/25/2014 11:45 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/25/2014 11:26:00 AM (view original):
Posted by AlCheez on 3/25/2014 11:19:00 AM (view original):
To me, the argument against these games is the disservice it is to existing fans of the teams involved (especially the team that has to count them as home games) - I think the impact on overall interest in the game in North America is pretty much neutral.
No, it's not a disservice to the fans, it's a disservice to itself.   MLB owes the fans nothing.   If they want to play the entire season in foreign countries at 3 AM EST, it certainly can.   But, if you want people to pay attention, you have to give them a reason.    They didn't get a lot of eyes on the two games that kicked off their season. 
The last sentence is a given, I just think that sounds bad on paper but really doesn't amount to anything in practice.  I don't think there are going to be appreciably fewer eyes on baseball in North America next week than there would have been if the DBacks and Dodgers were opening up in LA.  So, if the trade off is getting a ton of new Australian eyes on MLB last weekend, then I see it as a worthwhile investment for MLB.

None of this is to say that they shouldn't be doing more to grow the game in the US, I just don't see the the goals as incompatible.
3/25/2014 11:48 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 3/25/2014 11:35:00 AM (view original):

Each team was home for one of the two games.  So AZ and LA only lost one potential home date.  Or, the equivalent of what used to be a scheduled doubleheader.

My guess is that the lost home revenue was at least partially offset by the merchandising of Dodger and DBack apparel.  For all we know, MLB may have kicked back some money to both teams for the inconvenience of sacrificing a home date and having to go the Australia as well.

I'm sure the teams themselves are taken care of from a revenue perspective.  My point was more about making it harder for fans of the teams to see their first games.  I guess I did also throw in there being less games for them to go to, but with 81 to start with, I'll concede that particular point was pretty weak.

I didn't check and see how it was being handled this time - at least one of the times the A's went, they were the home team in both games.  And I'm sure they actually came out ahead on that deal revenue-wise.
of 3
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Opening Day.....

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999- WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.