For the one thousandth time: NFL and MLB TV ratings are apples and oranges

39 Comments

Dejan Kovacevic writes this morning:

One argument often heard in Major League Baseball circles is that the best way to get great TV ratings for the World Series is to have two very large markets in the equation.

Oh, really?

The Steelers-Packers Super Bowl, comprised of two markets that are among the smallest in professional sports, drew the largest TV audience for any program in the history of our society, Fox announced yesterday.

He goes on to attribute this television popularity to the fact that the NFL is “fair” and Major League Baseball is not due to its financial structure. He says that unlike in baseball, market size — and Pittsburgh and Green Bay are tiny markets — don’t enter into it at all.

Without even passing on the fairness of baseball’s financial system — I realize it’s flawed; that’s another discussion — why do we continue to see NFL ratings and Major League Baseball ratings compared like this?  Yes, the NFL is more popular, full stop. I don’t dispute that. But the degree of its greater popularity should not be inferred from its television ratings.

The vast, vast majority of baseball games are consumed on a local level. Fans watch their own teams’ games and rarely watch others. Why? Because their team is on TV every day. The couple of national broadcasts a week aren’t at all significant in comparison.

Football, in contrast, is a nationally-televised sport. As in, every NFL football game is carried by a national broadcaster. Yes, there is “regional coverage,” but without looking I bet you that the majority of the nation had access to either a Packers or a Steelers game every week this past season.  Cowboys and Patriots too. The marquee teams are defacto national teams with national fan bases in the habit of watching them on national broadcasts.

That is what leads to gigantic national television ratings for football games. That and a host of other factors such as scarcity of actual games, weather and attractiveness of the sport on a flat screen that naturally makes football a better TV sport than baseball is.  I seriously doubt that the underlying economics of the game enter into your average fan’s decision to tune in the Super Bowl vs., say, the World Series.

Yasiel Puig’s house robbed for the fourth time

Getty Images
10 Comments

Yasiel Puig lives in Sherman Oaks, a Los Angeles neighborhood in the valley. It’s pretty nice for normies like you and me. His house cost nearly $2 million. But it’s not some gated community where super rich people live and, really, $1.8 million for a house in L.A. is not a ton when you’re a pro athlete or a celebrity of some kind. As we wrote back in 2015 when he bought the place, it’s kinda boring for a rich and famous person. It’s something of a McMansion that, like, a fairly successful dentist might own.

Whatever you think of the aesthetics of it, perhaps he should consider relocating to one of those gated communities, because the current place is not meeting his needs, security wise. From TMZ:

Yasiel Puig really needs to do something about his home security, ’cause he was burglarized yet again — the 4TH TIME he’s been hit … TMZ Sports has learned.

Law enforcement sources tell us cops were called to Puig’s San Fernando Valley home Tuesday night around 8 PM after one of the Dodger’s assistants got a security alert on his phone, which showed 3 men leaving Puig’s property.

Yasiel has a security camera set up that captures motion, and it automatically sends the video to a cell phone programmed to receive it. When Yasiel’s associate saw the footage, he immediately called police … but the bad guys had already fled.

TMZ notes that Puig was robbed during spring training in 2017, during last year’s World Series and again just last month.

The entire world knows when Puig is home and when he isn’t, so if he’s going to keep living on a cul-de-sac like anyone else, might I suggest that he get a couple of dogs or a house sitter or a security guard or something? Just throwing it out there!