OOTP Is it too late?

[One Post Wonder]

Regarding the future of MLB, I think it's going the way of Horse Racing and Boxing:

When I was a teenager in the 1980's, every video gaming platform had a baseball game on it. It was one of the staples. Now, the only gaming platform with a twitch-based baseball game on it that is worth a crap is the Playstation - and almost no-one cares.

One problem has been that everything driving baseball has revolved around short-term profits for at least 25 years. The deal that cemented Sony's stranglehold on the gaming baseball market is an example. Great short term income, but hurts baseball's ability to market itself to young people.

Steroids were the same thing. Everyone with a brain knew that eventually, baseball was going to be embarrassed by the steroid problem in the 90's. The sports channel I would listen to was talking about this as early as 1995. And of course, records were eventually broken by guys on the stuff, and now everyone has a differing opinion of who holds which records. Baseball is a game of stats, and the stats are now skewed. But for a few years, great profits!

Another problem is that we've had a lot of great analysts come along and dissect the game, and determine the optimal way to play. And the optimal way to play baseball, by the current rules, is boring. A batter trying to draw a walk is good strategy, but boring to watch. Bringing in a reliever to pitch to one guy is boring to watch. Conservative (at least by historical standards) baserunning is good strategy but boring to watch.

Maybe some rule changes will help the game, but it might be too little, too late. I'm 46. I'm guessing that many of you aren't too young either. And personally I don't know anyone below the age of 40 who cares a lick about baseball. People who like to watch sports prefer football. People who like to get involved and play like basketball. Yes, the NFL is losing popularity but Soccer is willing and able to fill that void.

I'm just not seeing it. Maybe baseball has a long-term future in Japan or Central America, but I don't see it holding up here. It's sad. I think the sport has been hastened towards a premature end by greedy, myopic governance.

...and they put Bud Selig, the poster boy for all of the above, in the Hall of Fame. Bloody hell.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

... pretty soon we're gonna be going to the bullpen in the 4th or 5th inning...

Pretty soon? May I introduce you to Dave Roberts, he of the World-Series-blowing pitching changes...

[mitchkenn]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

...and they put Bud Selig, the poster boy for all of the above, in the Hall of Fame. Bloody hell.

Amen to that!

well, the Hall of Fame has become a joke anyway, and it's deserving Selig the Clown is there. I'm just waiting for the new Bozo to join him. (Wonder if Judge Landis was considered this worthless in his time?????

[Eugene Church]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

Regarding the future of MLB, I think it's going the way of Horse Racing and Boxing:

When I was a teenager in the 1980's, every video gaming platform had a baseball game on it. It was one of the staples. Now, the only gaming platform with a twitch-based baseball game on it that is worth a crap is the Playstation - and almost no-one cares.

One problem has been that everything driving baseball has revolved around short-term profits for at least 25 years. The deal that cemented Sony's stranglehold on the gaming baseball market is an example. Great short term income, but hurts baseball's ability to market itself to young people.

Steroids were the same thing. Everyone with a brain knew that eventually, baseball was going to be embarrassed by the steroid problem in the 90's. The sports channel I would listen to was talking about this as early as 1995. And of course, records were eventually broken by guys on the stuff, and now everyone has a differing opinion of who holds which records. Baseball is a game of stats, and the stats are now skewed. But for a few years, great profits!

Another problem is that we've had a lot of great analysts come along and dissect the game, and determine the optimal way to play. And the optimal way to play baseball, by the current rules, is boring. A batter trying to draw a walk is good strategy, but boring to watch. Bringing in a reliever to pitch to one guy is boring to watch. Conservative (at least by historical standards) baserunning is good strategy but boring to watch.

Maybe some rule changes will help the game, but it might be too little, too late. I'm 46. I'm guessing that many of you aren't too young either. And personally I don't know anyone below the age of 40 who cares a lick about baseball. People who like to watch sports prefer football. People who like to get involved and play like basketball. Yes, the NFL is losing popularity but Soccer is willing and able to fill that void.

I'm just not seeing it. Maybe baseball has a long-term future in Japan or Central America, but I don't see it holding up here. It's sad. I think the sport has been hastened towards a premature end by greedy, myopic governance.

...and they put Bud Selig, the poster boy for all of the above, in the Hall of Fame. Bloody hell.

Great observation and comment, One Post Wonder.

Hope you aren't just a One Post Wonder.

[Eugene Church]

Originally Posted by Crowbar

Football (as in, 'soccer', but where I am born I refuse to call it anything else than Football) would like to have a word with you. We in Europe would cry ourselves to death if a football game would take 3 hours each.

I think part of the reason why football is getting more popular in the USA is because it takes far less time to watch a full match. Even with the half-time break. There is just no way to abuse ads every few minutes as would be possible in MLB and NFL.

I was born with football on tv, and I have spent time to watch both MLB and NFL matches. But my stamina wasn't just able to handle the amount of stops, and the general lack of real gameplay in comparison. Only in video games am I able to handle it, because I am the boss of the gameplay.

Excellent post and observation.

[Eugene Church]

Originally Posted by Orioles1966

If relief pitchers are all warmed up when they come into a game then why do they get 8 more warm up pitches?

Totally agree... give them 2 pitches to hone in on the plate... that's enough.

On MLB Network... 52-year-old Al Leiter was giving a demonstration in the practice studio about getting your arm in shape for the season and he had remarkable control though he did not take any warmup throws on camera.

I mean to tell you he was hitting his spots quite well... it was very impressive.

Agree with you... the reliever should be warmed up and ready to go... he shouldn't need 6 pitches.

[Le Grande Orange]

The one thing this thread hasn't discussed is how time of game data for MLB compares to other leagues. How much worse, or better, is MLB? This lack of comparison is understandable, as the data certainly isn't available in any sort of convenient form. But, as it happens, I've been tracking this data for all the main leagues for the past several seasons. Below are some results.

The data below is for the 2017 regular season (2017-18 in the case of the winter leagues). It is for all 9-inning games which lasted the normal regulation length (8½-9 innings, 51-54 outs). The figures are in minutes. The order the data is presented: mean, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, and lastly, the number of games in the sample. Leagues are ordered from longest mean time of game to shortest.

Lg     Mean   Min   Max   StDev    n=
--------------------------------------
VWL*  208.0   148   281   27.2    214
DWL*  207.4   137   290   28.1    137
CPBL  205.8   147   318   28.0    215
KBO   196.5   129   290   24.1    654
MPL*  192.7   128   258   23.1    243
***   188.1   127   266   22.5    771
CAA   187.4   117   334   27.9    257
MEX   185.4   103   278   24.2    714
MLB   185.2   125   273   20.9   2247
RCL*  182.0   139   236   24.9     22
NWL   177.4   125   238   19.9    274
ABL*  176.8   111   239   24.8     88
ALPB  175.7   127   310   21.6    436
PIO   175.4   129   258   24.2    277
PCL   173.4   121   252   20.0    954
CAL   173.2   116   278   19.4    502
AAIB  171.2   112   243   19.7    487
APP   169.8    99   239   21.2    272
NYP   169.0   122   243   19.9    406
CAR   168.9   115   254   20.1    534
MID   168.8   107   229   20.1    926
INT   167.9   118   233   18.8    794
FRON  166.4   110   298   24.2    463
TEX   165.6   112   230   17.9    479
SAL   165.4   107   233   19.8    760
SOU   165.0   117   240   18.9    547
EAS   161.8   114   283   18.9    637
FSL   157.7   109   220   18.9    635
AFL*  155.6   116   209   16.9     83

*winter league

MLB places eighth on the list. The Venezuelan Winter League tops the chart for average time of game for a 9-inning games at 208 minutes; Arizona Fall League games the quickest, taking just 155.6 minutes on average.

For those interested, below is a further breakdown of MLB and *** games.

MLB
                   Mean   Min   Max   StDev    n=
--------------------------------------------------
AL games only:    187.4   133   273   21.1    990
NL games only:    183.4   125   262   20.4    980
--------------------------------------------------
all interleague:  183.5   135   242   21.1    277
NL at AL:         184.7   135   242   21.1    138
AL at NL:         182.4   136   228   21.2    139


***
                   Mean   Min   Max   StDev    n=
--------------------------------------------------
CL games only:    186.1   134   259   21.7    330
PL games only:    190.0   130   266   22.9    344
all interleague:  187.7   127   260   23.0     97

AL-only games averaged 4 minutes longer than NL games; even in interleague contests there was a difference. Interleague games played at AL parks took 2.3 minutes longer on average than interleague games played at NL parks.

*** games exhibited a similar split in time of game results between the leagues, with PL games taking nearly four minutes longer on average than CL games.

It's interesting to note that both the AL and PL use the designated hitter whereas the NL and CL do not.

[bwburke94]

Based on the AL/NL split, can it be concluded that the DH lengthens the game by about four minutes?

And if so, how much does it lengthen the game per plate appearance?

[spartacus007]

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

This rule wouldn't change any important records that I know of.

I could actually see this rule change make old pitching records more relevant. Pitchers could last for more innings and pitch more games, like they used to.

[Eugene Church]

Originally Posted by spartacus007

I could actually see this rule change make old pitching records more relevant. Pitchers could last for more innings and pitch more games, like they used to.

Could be.

Then modern-day pitchers might have a chance to compete record-wise with the old time stars.

I don't think the 3-Ball 2-Strike Rule would drastically change any records and if it did, we have seen changes in records before.

They change in each era... every few decades... but the public and ballplayers would adjust to them... perhaps, a little begrudgingly.

I think the 3-Ball 2-Strike Rule would drastically speed up the game and make baseball a far more entertaining game and it wouldn't cause any critical changes in strategy or records.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by bwburke94

Based on the AL/NL split, can it be concluded that the DH lengthens the game by about four minutes?

Seems like it might have been the case for 2017. If I get the chance, I'll put together the MLB 2016 figures.

[joefromchicago]

Originally Posted by Crowbar

I think part of the reason why football is getting more popular in the USA is because it takes far less time to watch a full match.

Indeed. It only seems like soccer games last longer.

[fcabanski]

Time of game is about weekday games ending at 10PM. People want to get the kids home at a reasonable time.

MLB already shaved the inning break times. They can't shave more - lost revenue.

3 balls 2 strikes changes the game too much.

Here's a rule idea: A pitcher must pitch to a minimum of three batters unless he is injured or comes into the game with fewer than 3 outs remaining for the opposing team.

Here's another rule: A starting pitcher must pitch a minimum of 6 innings unless he is injured. A starting pitcher who had less than 4 days rest since his last pitching appearance must pitch a minimum of 5 innings.

[r0nster]

[QUOTE=fcabanski;4284024]Time of game is about weekday games ending at 10PM. People want to get the kids home at a reasonable time.


I agree however did you know if you show up at the start of the 7th inning of any given game you get in for free ... Not many know this but yet its true

[gskweres9]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

Regarding the future of MLB, I think it's going the way of Horse Racing and Boxing:

When I was a teenager in the 1980's, every video gaming platform had a baseball game on it. It was one of the staples. Now, the only gaming platform with a twitch-based baseball game on it that is worth a crap is the Playstation - and almost no-one cares.

One problem has been that everything driving baseball has revolved around short-term profits for at least 25 years. The deal that cemented Sony's stranglehold on the gaming baseball market is an example. Great short term income, but hurts baseball's ability to market itself to young people.

Steroids were the same thing. Everyone with a brain knew that eventually, baseball was going to be embarrassed by the steroid problem in the 90's. The sports channel I would listen to was talking about this as early as 1995. And of course, records were eventually broken by guys on the stuff, and now everyone has a differing opinion of who holds which records. Baseball is a game of stats, and the stats are now skewed. But for a few years, great profits!

Another problem is that we've had a lot of great analysts come along and dissect the game, and determine the optimal way to play. And the optimal way to play baseball, by the current rules, is boring. A batter trying to draw a walk is good strategy, but boring to watch. Bringing in a reliever to pitch to one guy is boring to watch. Conservative (at least by historical standards) baserunning is good strategy but boring to watch.

Maybe some rule changes will help the game, but it might be too little, too late. I'm 46. I'm guessing that many of you aren't too young either. And personally I don't know anyone below the age of 40 who cares a lick about baseball. People who like to watch sports prefer football. People who like to get involved and play like basketball. Yes, the NFL is losing popularity but Soccer is willing and able to fill that void.

I'm just not seeing it. Maybe baseball has a long-term future in Japan or Central America, but I don't see it holding up here. It's sad. I think the sport has been hastened towards a premature end by greedy, myopic governance.

...and they put Bud Selig, the poster boy for all of the above, in the Hall of Fame. Bloody hell.

I really couldn't disagree more with this comment. Look at the sheer number of kids that play baseball. I'm one of roughly 10,000 NCAA D1 baseball players, and there's probably more than 10,000 across D2, D3, JUCO, and NAIA. Young people are very much interested in this game.

Also, there's a reason baseball's money numbers are at an all-time high while inflation is at an all-time low. I mean just look at the difference in the AAV of contracts from 2008 to 2018. That money didn't just pop up because people are losing interest in the sport.

Also, football is losing interest quickly. The head issues truly are altering decisions of young adults and which sports they play.

The MLB also does a fantastic job with social media. MLB.TV makes streaming games easy, and they routinely share videos and highlights on platforms like twitter, instagram, and facebook. One of the reasons the NFL is losing popularity amongst people my age is because of their extreme blackout rules, not just on TV, but on social media platforms as well.

I know it was hyperbole when you said you don't know anyone younger than 40 that cares a lick about the game, but look at all the players currently in the league, all the players across collegiate and high school athletics, and the millions of fans that file in the stadiums year in and year out. No, baseball may not be America's pastime, and it may not be the most popular sport in this country, but it is far from dead and far from dying

[Jerry Helper]

Originally Posted by Eugene Church

Come on, MLB and Players Association, work together on getting more action into baseball... I have heard that there is only 5-6 minutes of action in a baseball game (ball in play)... compare that to the NFL and NBA... HANDS DOWN, THEY WHOOP MLB'S BEHIND... remember, 40 years ago BASEBALL USED TO BE AMERICA'S GREAT PASTIME.

The NFL and NBA take actions to improve the entertainment content of their sports... MLB is ridiculously slow and archaic to make changes.

Here are my recommendations... they will offend the purists ... but they will speed up the game and give the fans more action... WITHOUT AFFECTING THE BASIC GAME.

1. Pitch Clock... as Spartacus showed in his excellent link, this might cut down 30 minutes in a game.

2. Cut one 30-second spot per break... just charge more for the others to make up the revenue... this cuts about 10 minutes a game.

And now EC gets lowdown and nasty and messes with the glorious rules of baseball, which is total and absolute heresy to the purists.

3. 3-BALL, 2-STRIKE RULE

20 years ago I got a slow-pitch softball league to change it rules so that we could play more innings... we had a 1 hour and 10 minute time limit... we rarely played more than 5 innings.. we changed the rules to 3 BALLS AND 2 STRIKES... also a 2-strike foul was a THIRD STRIKE.

This 3-ball, 2-strike rule GREATLY SPEEDED UP THE GAME WITHOUT CHANGING THE BASIC GAME OF SOFTBALL AND ITS STRATEGY.

We almost always got to play 7 innings with the new rule... and sometimes could play 1 or 2 more extra innings, if needed... the purists totally opposed this move initially, but it worked so well, everybody in the league loved the change... hey, man... we got to play more softball.

The 3-Ball, 2-Strike rule would definitely create MORE ACTION as players would not be able to take so many pitches... the smart batter would have to hit the first strike he got... they would not want to get a 2-strike count for fear of fouling the ball and striking out.

It would definitely SPEED UP THE GAME... probably cut 30-45 minutes off the game time.

If MLB made these changes, it would cut AT LEAST AN HOUR OFF THE TOTAL GAME TIME... POSSIBLY MORE.

And IT WOULD CREATE MORE ACTION and less dead time.

And IT WOULDN'T DESTROY THE GAME... strategy would have to be adjusted, but the game would still be about the same.

Wouldn't it be great to have more action at a baseball games instead of the endless and useless delays and dead time they have now.

WE JUST MIGHT SEE A REJUVENATED GAME... AND THE RETURN OF THE 2-HOUR BASEBALL GAME.

I am a baseball fan, but it really got tedious to watch 4-hour games in the playoffs last year... average fans won't watch long games like that.

I can't get on board with this 3-2 count rule. This seems like the stuff hockey has done. Basically turn it into a different sport to try to reel in the "general fan" who - big surprise - isn't going to watch even with the changes. What you do end up accomplishing is pissing off the people who actually care about the sport.

[Jerry Helper]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

Regarding the future of MLB, I think it's going the way of Horse Racing and Boxing:

When I was a teenager in the 1980's, every video gaming platform had a baseball game on it. It was one of the staples. Now, the only gaming platform with a twitch-based baseball game on it that is worth a crap is the Playstation - and almost no-one cares.

One problem has been that everything driving baseball has revolved around short-term profits for at least 25 years. The deal that cemented Sony's stranglehold on the gaming baseball market is an example. Great short term income, but hurts baseball's ability to market itself to young people.

Steroids were the same thing. Everyone with a brain knew that eventually, baseball was going to be embarrassed by the steroid problem in the 90's. The sports channel I would listen to was talking about this as early as 1995. And of course, records were eventually broken by guys on the stuff, and now everyone has a differing opinion of who holds which records. Baseball is a game of stats, and the stats are now skewed. But for a few years, great profits!

Another problem is that we've had a lot of great analysts come along and dissect the game, and determine the optimal way to play. And the optimal way to play baseball, by the current rules, is boring. A batter trying to draw a walk is good strategy, but boring to watch. Bringing in a reliever to pitch to one guy is boring to watch. Conservative (at least by historical standards) baserunning is good strategy but boring to watch.

Maybe some rule changes will help the game, but it might be too little, too late. I'm 46. I'm guessing that many of you aren't too young either. And personally I don't know anyone below the age of 40 who cares a lick about baseball. People who like to watch sports prefer football. People who like to get involved and play like basketball. Yes, the NFL is losing popularity but Soccer is willing and able to fill that void.

I'm just not seeing it. Maybe baseball has a long-term future in Japan or Central America, but I don't see it holding up here. It's sad. I think the sport has been hastened towards a premature end by greedy, myopic governance.

...and they put Bud Selig, the poster boy for all of the above, in the Hall of Fame. Bloody hell.

I agree with a lot of this. The analytics era has brought a heavy relience on bullpenning, shifts, and the essentially three outcome at bat: home run, walk, or strikeout. But sometimes I wonder if I'm overreacting when I get annoyed by things like this. Baseball has gone through all kinds of different eras, who is to say those things won't fall out of favor by the mid 2020s?

As far as the horse racing and boxing, it does seem like baseball will become more of a niche sport in the future (and if that's the case, I say screw trying to change the game for the casual fan and cater to the hardcores). But the honest truth is, I think the biggest change is the explosion of different forms of entertainment in the last 20 years. The internet has created a world where literally anything you want to do is on demand. That wasn't the case for most of the last century, where watching sports was one of, i don't know, eight different ways you could entertain yourself.

I wonder if every sport is going to see a falling off of interest in the future. Baseballs average fan age is around 53, but the NFL's is 46. It's not like they're set up great for the future. Right now it seems like the NBA is the only league that is trending upward in terms of the interest of the coming generation. (Although I also wonder if the superteam era is going to have long term consequences that the league can't see, like the steroid era. It all seems fun now, but at some point people have to wake up and realize how out of wack competitive balance is in that sport.)

[Matt Arnold]

Originally Posted by gskweres9

I really couldn't disagree more with this comment. Look at the sheer number of kids that play baseball. I'm one of roughly 10,000 NCAA D1 baseball players, and there's probably more than 10,000 across D2, D3, JUCO, and NAIA. Young people are very much interested in this game.

Also, there's a reason baseball's money numbers are at an all-time high while inflation is at an all-time low. I mean just look at the difference in the AAV of contracts from 2008 to 2018. That money didn't just pop up because people are losing interest in the sport.

Also, football is losing interest quickly. The head issues truly are altering decisions of young adults and which sports they play.

The MLB also does a fantastic job with social media. MLB.TV makes streaming games easy, and they routinely share videos and highlights on platforms like twitter, instagram, and facebook. One of the reasons the NFL is losing popularity amongst people my age is because of their extreme blackout rules, not just on TV, but on social media platforms as well.

I know it was hyperbole when you said you don't know anyone younger than 40 that cares a lick about the game, but look at all the players currently in the league, all the players across collegiate and high school athletics, and the millions of fans that file in the stadiums year in and year out. No, baseball may not be America's pastime, and it may not be the most popular sport in this country, but it is far from dead and far from dying

Originally Posted by Jerry Helper

I agree with a lot of this. The analytics era has brought a heavy relience on bullpenning, shifts, and the essentially three outcome at bat: home run, walk, or strikeout. But sometimes I wonder if I'm overreacting when I get annoyed by things like this. Baseball has gone through all kinds of different eras, who is to say those things won't fall out of favor by the mid 2020s?

As far as the horse racing and boxing, it does seem like baseball will become more of a niche sport in the future (and if that's the case, I say screw trying to change the game for the casual fan and cater to the hardcores). But the honest truth is, I think the biggest change is the explosion of different forms of entertainment in the last 20 years. The internet has created a world where literally anything you want to do is on demand. That wasn't the case for most of the last century, where watching sports was one of, i don't know, eight different ways you could entertain yourself.

I wonder if every sport is going to see a falling off of interest in the future. Baseballs average fan age is around 53, but the NFL's is 46. It's not like they're set up great for the future. Right now it seems like the NBA is the only league that is trending upward in terms of the interest of the coming generation. (Although I also wonder if the superteam era is going to have long term consequences that the league can't see, like the steroid era. It all seems fun now, but at some point people have to wake up and realize how out of wack competitive balance is in that sport.)

Fascinating to see the varying perspectives. I do think there are some warning signs, but on the other hand, the sport itself is taking in an insane amount of money, especially from their online/streaming packages. MLBAM itself right now is worth more than the entire MLB was worth like 5-10 years ago. They're raking it in, which shows in salaries.

I do think they'll need some changes, because as much as they're taking in, there's always the chance it's a bubble. The games are getting longer, it's still the longest season by far of any sport, and there's no way your average fan is watching 3.5hrs X 162 games.

I do think they need to bring the averages down below 3 hours, and the lengthening ABs is one of the biggest causes of that. Players are seeing more and more pitches, which is turning the game into more of a three-outcome game, and I don't think people just want to see K/BB/HR - would rather the action actually take place on the field. Something radical like going to a 3-2 system I'd worry that that would cause even more BB/K to happen, just because players have no room for error anymore.

They probably need to experiment with actually tweaking the strike zone. Maybe there's a sweet spot in size and location where they can encourage more action to take place with actually reducing both K and BB. Or maybe the answer is a robot ump, where if pitchers know the exact zone, then you can get more matchups and less "finding the zone" during the play.

But the first step is killing dead time. If they can shave off 10-15 minutes a game of watching players scratch their balls and readjust their gloves, then that's a great start.

[drksd4848]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

Another problem is that we've had a lot of great analysts come along and dissect the game, and determine the optimal way to play. And the optimal way to play baseball, by the current rules, is boring. A batter trying to draw a walk is good strategy, but boring to watch. Bringing in a reliever to pitch to one guy is boring to watch. Conservative (at least by historical standards) baserunning is good strategy but boring to watch.

This X1000. The game has been absolutely ruined by nerds. They crunch numbers over and over ad nauseam, they break down every stat to the micro-decimal, and they invent stats that are impossible to understand.

But the nerds are absolutely incapable of factoring one major element into their reasoning. And that is.... the HUMAN element. That was the one thing that made baseball great: HUMAN BEINGS. They have ignored the fact that baseball players are living breathing (and in some cases, despicable) people, and have consequently sucked all the greatness and all the magic out of the game. Baseball use to be magic. Now, it's insufferable.

Managers are now puppets. (read: Aaron Boone/Alex Cora). The nerds upstairs run the show. Hey nerds! Thanks for making baseball suck.

Another thing that murders baseball: Pace of play; the games have become interminably long. And in baseball's golden age, it was never like that.

I did my own research with a clock. Average time between pitches in a game 30-35 years ago: 8-10 second. Average time now: 15-20. And those are games when David Price ISN'T pitching. Average time for commercial breaks 30-35 yrs ago 2:00 to 2:30. Average time now: a little over 3 minutes.

In the end, It's really hard to follow a sport that keeps punching itself in the face. If baseball ended. I could care less. If OOTP ended, I'd be bummed.

BTW, People didn't get hit in the face with foul balls 30-35 years ago because they didn't have smart phones.

...and they put Bud Selig, the poster boy for all of the above, in the Hall of Fame. Bloody hell.

I always wished the ghost of A. Bartlet Giamatti would come back to strangle Bud Selig to death. A. Bartlet Giamatti was the last REAL baseball commissioner. The beginning of the end of baseball was when Bud Selig took control.

[ChromEagle]

In my opinion, baseball is way too old. Old meaning the people who watch the game. Most of the fans are older people... and I think baseball has the oldest spectators compared to other major sports. Maybe that's one of the reasons why it isn't as popular anymore. (I still enjoy baseball, why would I be on here if I didn't)