Be happy Dodgers fans, but Magic Johnson is no panacea

46 Comments

I understand that enthusiasm about Magic Johnson’s ownership group buying the Dodgers. Frank McCourt is leaving. Magic is awesome. L.A. loves him. The Dodgers are in the pits. He shall save them.  Woo-ha!

But I think it’s possible to blow this up a bit too much.

For one thing, Magic is not the controlling owner. That’s a man named Mark R. Walter and a company called Guggenheim Baseball Management. Magic is pretty rich himself and likely has a lot of his own money in the game, but let’s remember how quickly the nominal head of the Texas Rangers ownership group — Chuck Greenberg — was cast off after that team was sold.  No, I’m not saying the same thing will happen to Magic, but let’s not pretend that he is totally in control here. There are a lot of chefs, and if they don’t want to do what Magic Johnson wants to do, they’re gonna win.

For another thing, this is a huge amount of money being invested in the Dodgers. So much so that, no matter how optimistic the projections are regarding a TV deal and future revenues are, there are likely to be some financial restraints in play, aren’t there?  I mean, you can’t spend $2 billion on a team and then expect to have no limit on payroll, can you?  The current Yankees ownership group invested something like $10 million originally, they have higher revenues and even they have a budget.

I don’t want to be a Debbie Downer here. It’s great that Magic Johnson is buying the Dodgers.  He’s the perfect man to invigorate the fan base. And of course, it’s great that Frank McCourt is leaving.

But this is still a business. Thanks to McCourt, it’s still a franchise that has to do a lot to bring the people back to the stadium and fix the product on the field.  So hold off on the champagne and wait and watch what the new owners do before popping the corks.

Sinclair to explore sharply ratcheting up gambling content in their baseball broadcasts

Getty Images
17 Comments

Last week it was reported that Sinclair Broadcasting had acquired the 21 regional sports networks previously owned by Fox. As such, Sinclair will be the local baseball broadcaster for the majority of teams in the league.

Today, via Awful Announcing, we learn of an interview with the CEO of Sinclair who talks about what he plans to do with baseball broadcasts once they take control of them. The thing that sticks out the most is the massive increase in gambling content:

The acquisition will see Sinclair capitalizing on the new U.S. sports betting market.

In addition to increased fan engagement and viewership, he expects $1.5 billion to $2 billion of new ad revenue industry-wide “in short order,” from sportsbook operators and other companies marketing in the space.

Ripley also plans to eventually allow viewers to place bets right from their screens during live games, similar to how fans can wager in Europe now.

“If you’re interested in gaming, we’re going to add on extra stats, the ability to do prop bets in the game, pitch by pitch, play by play,” he said. “You can play along and wager while you watch.”

The in-game, on-screen wagers, which it is currently exploring with its Tennis Channel, would be done in partnership with sportsbook operators, but Sinclair would not want to become a bookie itself.

I wonder about the technical limitations to that — game lag, even on cable broadcasts, is a thing and it’s possible that someone might know what happens on a pitch before it airs on the screen, but I assume they’re aware of that and will try to deal with it.

I’m mostly concerned about broadcast clutter. We already have so much chatter on TV broadcasts that is about stuff other than the actual game at hand — even tangents that start with game action but linger for several pitches or even batters — and I’d really hate it if broadcasts became so tied up with this side content that the game is ignored. Again, something they’ll have to consider.

Whaddaya think?