MLB Attendance slide

[ForeverRoyalKC]

Your thoughts, opinion? Well....except for the Royals and Marlins. Those two are kind of a "gimme."

[low]

There's a slide? It's been good in Milwaukee. I haven't payed much attention anywhere else.

[The Game]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoyalKC

Your thoughts, opinion? Well....except for the Royals and Marlins. Those two are kind of a "gimme."

Extreme cold followed by extreme heat could be one factor. You'll have 2 extra fans in Kauffman September 10th vs the White Sox.

[damientheomen3]

I've alternated between being a very casual fan and not following baseball at all since David Price signed with the Red Sox (I hadn't followed the season prior to him signing at all, then predicted him signing there with no other knowledge of the situation besides him being a free agent. Maybe it's because I hate Boston sports, but I just wasn't all that interested anymore in following a league where my team is both 800 miles away from me, and is one of the 25 feeder teams for the big markets). So, my opinion could be very off and I tend to take a cynical view when it comes to real life MLB, but to me the attendance issue is that baseball is a game where it benefits a team to take their time or make a lot of small adjustments to improve their chances of winning. No one wants to see that, in my opinion, besides the team doing it, and games continue to drag on. As a game without a clock, baseball has the potential to have its games last too long in a blowout setting.

And, of course, there is the boom of basketball and the slow growth of the MLS (although someone pointed out in another thread that that's not as significant as I've heard it is from people). The era of the superteam has, for better or worse, brought in a ton of casual fans to the NBA, and I'd argue from a popularity and discussion standpoint, it's the top American sports league right now. I know they only share time for half the baseball season, but in this day and age I'm of the opinion that many people are 'sports' fans rather than fans of one individual sport. I only know two other people under 35 personally that follow baseball, whereas everyone I know in that bracket that likes sports follows basketball, usually more intently than any other sport.

[Reed]

Down in the Southeast 15-20 years ago most sports fans followed SEC football and the Atlanta Braves. For the past few years it has been SEC football and the NFL (maybe the addition of Carolina Panthers and Tennessee Titans has something to do with that). I guess some casually follow the Braves and MLB but I do not see anyone wearing a Braves hat anymore.

[rudel.dietrich]

I have said it before and been shouted down. But the demographics of baseball are awful.
Old and white. Being old and white is not awful (I will be there one day) but when your trying to build a business on it then it should come with warning flags.

The NFL is still the king but has lost a bit of market share due to concussions, short careers, injury, legal problems and a tone deaf commissioner.
The NBA has grown the most and if it has not already will move into them second spot in NA sports.
It also has a global appeal. It has significant popularity in Europe, Africa, parts of Asia and South America. That helps big time since these economies are rapidly growing.

Baseball by virtue of being old and white still has wealthy fans. Second in average income only to the NHL.
But sadly Father Time is undefeated and older people begin to pass away and there are too few to replace them.


MLB is in serious trouble unless they can find a younger audience and more minorites.

And the company I work for has done studies in NA, Europe and Asia were get focus groups to look at face shots of professional athetes.
No uniforms, and always from the front in the same lighting.

MLB and NHL always rank near the bottom of being recognized even in NA.
Mike Trout who is a generational talent has one of the lowest recognition scores among star athletes of their respective sports.

[ukhotstove]

Do you not think it’s a generation thing? My nephew and his generation (20s) don’t have the attention span of a goldfish. Over here test match (5 day games) cricket is on the decline but t20 cricket (couple of hours) is on the increase, there even bringing a shorter version of that into effect the next couple of years.

For those that don’t follow cricket, about 99.5% of OOTP members, the difference between Test Match cricket and t20 cricket is like a full 9 innings of baseball compared to 3 innings of baseball with the fences brought in about 50 feet.

[Cobra Mgr]

Everyone wants to zero on one factor. It's many factors.

The media - The majors has sold their product to ESPN, who could care less about the product. You turn on sports talk this minute and you are more likely to hear someone pontificate on the NFL & NBA offseason. Not the MLB "inseason". They also want to force feed us the Yanks & BoSox every week when they show a game. How is that for those of us who aren't fans of those 2? MLB needs to take their product & put it on a national network that looks @ the league as their priority. Not as filler between the NBA finals & the NFL preseason. But want to gather the nation's attention to the game and willing to invest time to get it. Not maximize ratings for today. But build it up for tomorrow.

The diehard fans - Baseball was once a game that could be understood simply. But diehard fans have discouraged the more casual observer from discussing it. Because of the religious devotion to sabermetrics that has created an obnoxious, know-it-all, expert that talks down to anyone who can't quote adj+OPSgWAR statistic. Nobody wants to engage in discussion if they are going to be made to feel like an idiot. The less you talk about it, the less it is on your mind. The less it is on your mind, the less the need to be involved in the game.

The game - I don't completely subscribe to the sabermetric "faith". But those in the league do. And if it is the secret formula to winning, then it has made the game virtually unwatchable. An example, this afternoon I turned on the car radio & listened to Keith Olberman retell the time Chuck Knoblauch hit his mother w/an errant throw from 2nd. This was during the Yankee/Braves game. Interesting story. In the 10 minutes it took to recall that moment, maybe 20 secs top was needed to say what was going on on the field. The fact that the game allows for that much discussion w/o any action is a problem. You can't do that in the other 3 major team sports. But the game has become BB, K or HR thanks to everyone subscribing to the "modern" philosophy. One of those takes one pitch. The others 6 throws and the batter never swings. It's just the pitcher & backstop playing catch. People want action. And in this world of smartphones/watches people don't have to wait to get it. You have an entertainment system on your wrist. They are too easily distracted to commit to the focus baseball now demands. Things need to happen to keep their attention. If the game truly dictates that getting 4 balls is valuable, then that is a problem that needs adjusting.

The league - There also needs to be a deterrent to so many teams tanking. I'm not totally against the method.( It makes no sense to me to committing to a decade of mediocrity if selling assets now will make you a serious contender in a few years.) However, there shouldn't be in excess of 5 franchises doing it simultaneously. There had to be about 10 clubs this year perfectly fine with not making the postseason this year. Fans see that. And if baseball is indeed being driven by local fans cheering for local teams, those teams' fans are going to drive attendance down. Why pay top price for a purposefully watered down product the franchise is selling?

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

MLB is in serious trouble unless they can find a younger audience and more minorites.

By this you mean blacks. Because the MLB is about 36-37% minorities, which is basically on par with US demographics. In 1981, the year of the highest percentage of blacks in the league, minorities were only 30%. So, the percentage of minorities has increased.

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

And the company I work for has done studies in NA, Europe and Asia were get get focus groups to look at face shots of professional athetes.
No uniforms, and always from the front in the same lighting.

MLB and NHL always rank near the bottom of being recognized even in NA.
Mike Trout who is a generational talent has one of the lowest recognition scores among star athletes of their respective sports.

For both of these leagues, being televised more on channels that people actually watch would help. NHL just does not get much airtime. And MLB, while it has a decent amount, shoots itself in the foot with MLB.tv and TV blackouts. If they were more accessible then they'd have greater popularity.

[The Game]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

For both of these leagues, being televised more on channels that people actually watch would help. NHL just does not get much airtime. And MLB, while it has a decent amount, shoots itself in the foot with MLB.tv and TV blackouts. If they were more accessible then they'd have greater popularity.

I have never experienced a blackout for either Chicago team.ESPN, FOX? & MLB Network all have games on as well. most cable, satellite all have MLB Network as a basic package.

[Cobra Mgr]

There is some weird ruling that blocks out the Nats here in Raleigh,NC. Because we are Baltimore & Atlanta's territory. You know how we fans in the Triangle are always being seen in Camden Yds.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by The Game

I have never experienced a blackout for either Chicago team.ESPN, FOX? & MLB Network all have games on as well. most cable, satellite all have MLB Network as a basic package.

I live in northern Indiana, so I can't get Fox sports Detroit, but I'm also blacked out through MLB.tv. I'm also blacked out for both CHI teams and Cleveland (which I'm okay with ). I don't do anything but basic cable because of this. But I can watch three straight games of NFL on Sundays. No hoops to jump through because the games are on channels that can be watched with bunny ear antennas. MLB requires lots of hoops to watch regularly.

[pilight]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

By this you mean blacks. Because the MLB is about 36-37% minorities, which is basically on par with US demographics. In 1981, the year of the highest percentage of blacks in the league, minorities were only 30%. So, the percentage of minorities has increased.

A: Blacks don't make up anywhere close to 36% of the US population

B: I think he means more minorities among the fans. MLB is getting slaughtered by the NBA and NFL in that regard.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by pilight

B: I think he means more minorities among the fans. MLB is getting slaughtered by the NBA and NFL in that regard.

Yes, this is exactly what I meant.

And black Americans have been declining among players for decades now. Many of the minorites playing MLB are foreign born.
Not that it matters where they are from. But the fans are overwhelmingly white and older. Second whitest behind hockey and by far the oldest among the 5 big including the MLS.

And again I am not saying old and white is bad. It’s just not a great business model when trying to sell a product since that demographic will continue to shrink and the wealth of that demographic will dry up.


And for everything people have said in this thread. My companies research has narrowed it down to one singular cause.
Length of games. I don’t know if this will be a magical cure all but MLB knows it’s s problem and it remains to be seen if they will take more drastic steps to solve it.
It may be too late and they may have already lost a generation but if I was advising them I would take some pretty drastic steps to try and see if you can get the games down closer to the 2 hour mark.
Over the course of six game week you can save the fan almost six hours a week and in today’s world where you have literally 100 entertainment options that means all the difference.

[ihatenames]

Originally Posted by The Game

I have never experienced a blackout for either Chicago team.ESPN, FOX? & MLB Network all have games on as well. most cable, satellite all have MLB Network as a basic package.

I live in Rockford and there is an occasional game for both teams that’s doesn’t have an affiliate network up here. Mlb.tv still blocks it out. Also if the game isn’t on CSN, Fox or ESPN I don’t get it in HD either. I could watch it in HD on mlb.tv if it wasn’t blacked out.

I rarely watch games live anymore because of this.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Everyone wants to zero on one factor. It's many factors.

You forgot the cost of going to the game. Also, witness regular seating being sacrificed for luxury boxes which generate more revenue per square foot, I'm sure. So, while attendance may be down, I would not be surprised if revenue was up.

[pilight]

Also attendance in sports is dropping across the board. It's so much easier and more convenient to watch on TV or streaming.

[TheMaus2]

yeah, one of the reasons attendace is dropping is that there are a lot more entertainment options and spending $20 or more to sit in the hot sun and watch a ballgame for 3 hours with seemingly rip off concession prices isn't an ideal thing to do.

I like what the D-Backs did last year, giving students really cheap ticket prices to come watch games.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by pilight

A: Blacks don't make up anywhere close to 36% of the US population.

Correct. But all minorities combined do.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

And for everything people have said in this thread. My companies research has narrowed it down to one singular cause.
Length of games. I don’t know if this will be a magical cure all but MLB knows it’s s problem and it remains to be seen if they will take more drastic steps to solve it.
It may be too late and they may have already lost a generation but if I was advising them I would take some pretty drastic steps to try and see if you can get the games down closer to the 2 hour mark.
Over the course of six game week you can save the fan almost six hours a week and in today’s world where you have literally 100 entertainment options that means all the difference.

People may check "game length" on the questionaire, but I don't believe that is what they really mean. I think it goes back to no action. No one complains about how long it takes for grass to grow, but they would if they had to watch it. The lack of action makes it seem longer. College football games sometimes goes into 4 hrs, but they aren't having attendance problems that I know of.