old TV

When did national baseball broadcasts cease focusing on the game?

64 Comments

After a couple of years of getting her feet wet, my daughter slowly but surely has gotten into baseball this year. She asks about certain players. She asks the sorts of questions about the game which suggest she is thinking about it. She watches games with me. Local games, mostly, which I get via the Extra Innings package. And, importantly for our purposes here, she usually plops down to watch with me after the game has been on for a while. At, say, 8pm, when her day is winding down but she’s not ready to take a shower and go to bed. It’s usually the second or third inning by then and she just picks up from there.

This week I was in Minnesota and my daughter was on a camping trip, so we couldn’t watch the All-Star Game together. She suggested that I record it and we watch it together once we were both home. So I did and, without giving her any spoilers, we sat down to watch it earlier this afternoon.

While I was going to just fast-forward through all of the pregame festivities, I decided not to for a couple of reasons. First, I remember watching All-Star Games when I was young and my favorite part were the player introductions. I wanted my daughter to see that. I also had an ulterior motive: I wanted to see what kind of patience she had for the filler Fox and Major League Baseball typically give us before pitches are actually thrown. I mean, sure, it’s possible to determine when the first pitch will actually be thrown if you want to, but the casual fan is just going to look at the TV listing. And, because Fox and MLB make no distinction between when the broadcast starts and when the game actually starts anymore, casual fans are either subjected to it all or don’t bother with it at all. I wanted to see how it played in my house among those of us who aren’t paid to endure it.

The verdict: not too well. We watched Frank Thomas and Gabe Kapler offer a lot of analysis that neither served a ten-year-old girl because it’s not actual baseball and didn’t serve a reasonably informed 41-year-old baseball writer because, well, because it just didn’t. The player introductions were fun — my daughter did like those — but the commercials on either side of them made things drag. By the time Idina Menzel sang “Forever Young” the broadcast had gone on for over a half hour. That’s when my daughter checked out. After she left I fast-forwarded to the first pitch to see when it finally came and it was at the 49 minute mark. My daughter will watch the game itself later, I suppose, but she’ll fast forward through all of the commercials, which is exactly the opposite of what Fox and Major League Baseball want.

Why does it have to be this way? Why do the big national games like the All-Star Game, the playoffs and the World Series have to be buried under so many things that are not baseball? Sideline interviews which provide nothing but fluff and conspicuous displays of the network’s access. Sponsor service, ceremonies and presentations which could, quite easily and seamlessly, be worked into the proceedings later as opposed to delaying them. Why must there be such a focus on everything but the actual sporting event?

I assume the answer is “money” but it’s a shortsighted answer. As I noted a couple of posts back, baseball has a demographics problem. The people who are the future of baseball fandom aren’t the target audience of most of that fluff and most of those commercials, but they’re being subjected to it anyway and it’s turning them off and inspiring them to do other things. This isn’t a “think of the children” point as much as it is a “think about the future” point. Get kids and casual adult fans hooked on and sucked into the game first. Then go ahead and do what you feel you have to do to justify your production budgets. Let people watch baseball when they turn on a telecast the way most of the local broadcasts do. Focus on the actual game at hand rather than treating the baseball game as merely one aspect of some overall production.

Somewhere along the line Major League Baseball and Fox has lost their way in this regard, turning the All-Star Game, the playoffs and the World Series into multi-faceted events and forgetting that the baseball game is the part that matters.

Forty-nine minutes before a pitch is thrown? That’s just obnoxious.

Are the Cardinals about to go on a free agent binge?

John Mozeliak AP
Associated Press
2 Comments

The Cardinals have always emphasized building from within. In the 2016-17 offseason, however, they may end up being one of the bigger free agent buyers. At least according to some informed speculation.

St. Louis is already in agreement with Dexter Fowler. But Derrick Goold and Ben Frederickson of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch write today that the Cardinals “could become more aggressive than previously believed,” with Mark Trumbo and Edwin Encarnacion as “possible pursuits.” Worth noting that separate reports alleged some interest on the part of the Cards front office in free agent third baseman Justin Turner.

The Cardinals are already losing their first round pick due to the Fowler signing, so any other top free agent won’t cost them more than the money he’s owed. And as far as money goes, the Cardinals have a great deal of it, despite being a small market team. They have a billion dollar TV deal coming online and Matt Holliday and Jaime Garcia are off the payroll now. Spending big on a free agent or three would not cripple them or anything.

Encarnacion or Trumbo would be first baseman, which wold fly in the face of the Cards’ move of Matt Carpenter to first base (and, at least as far as Encarnacion goes, would fly in the face of good defense). Getting either of them would push Carpenter back to second, displacing Kolten Wong, or over to third, displacing Jhonny Peralta. If you’re going to do that, I’d say that Turner would make more sense, but what do I know?

Either way, the Cardinals may be entering a pretty interesting phase of their offseason now. And an unfamiliar one as, quite possibly, the top free agent buyer on the market.

 

Bobby Valentine on short list to be U.S. Ambassador to Japan

NEW YORK, NY - SEPTEMBER 12:  Former MLB player Bobby Valentine attends Annual Charity Day hosted by Cantor Fitzgerald, BGC and GFI at BGC Partners, INC on September 12, 2016 in New York City.  (Photo by Larry Busacca/Getty Images for Cantor Fitzgerald)
Getty Images
39 Comments

There is literally nothing you could tell me that the incoming administration is considering which would shock me anymore. As such, I saw this story when I woke up this morning, blinked once, took a sip of coffee, closed the browser window and just went on with my morning, as desensitized as a wisdom tooth about to be yanked.

Rob Bradford of WEEI.com reports that Former Red Sox, Mets and Rangers manager Bobby Valentine is on a short-list of candidates for the job of United States Ambassador to Japan:

The 66-year-old, who currently serves as Sacred Heart University’s athletics director, has engaged in preliminary discussions with President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team regarding the position.

When contacted Thursday night, Valentine refused comment.

Huh. Given his history, I’d have assumed Valentine would be a better choice for the CIA, but what do I know?

Valentine managed the Chiba Lotte Marines of Japan’s Pacific League for six seasons, leading the team to a championship in 2005. He also knows the current prime minister of Japan, Shinzo Abe, as both went to USC. Assuming championship teams meet the country’s leader in Japan like they do in the United States, Valentine has at least twice the amount of experience with top political leaders than does, say, Ned Yost, so that’s something.

The former manager, more importantly, is friends with Donald Trump’s brother, with the two of them going way back. Which, given how this transition is going, seems like a far more important set of qualifications than anything else on this list.